No4 Scope mount holes misaligned and drilled too deep?

Just went to try a Parker Hale BA20 on my Savage No4 which appeared to have been drilled for this type of mount. Firstly, the two holes are not in alignment, second the threads differ from those of the supplied screws and third and more worrying, the holes seem to have been drilled right through the receiver and into the top of the barrel threads.
Can anyone advise on how deep these holes should be and why they might have been drilled askew or does this just sound like a DIY gunsmithing job.

Please note that I'm a novice so perhaps all is OK and I am expecting too much more precision.

It seems to me that someone has tried to drill the holes originally and failed....., then sold the rifle on.

Can I make a suggestion? It's this. The sheer notion that you can screw a telescope front sight base to a No4 receiver ring and expect it to remain tight and soliud is the stuff of fairy tales. It ignores the basic schoolboy physics of rotational forces that you learned in your first year physics lessons at school. You know, clock and anti clockwise moments and all that stuff............... And whoever thought that small BA (or close to....) threads going into 3mm or so of mild steel revceiver ring would be sufficient to hold firm was living on another orbitory planet to the rest of the world. My suggestion is to ignore these holes, give the blocks you've just acquired away to someone you don't like as fishing weights and get a steel one piee easily mounted bracket to fit onto your rifle.

You were/are right. These blocks are an amateur DIY gunsmiths job

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Peter Laidler

It seems to me that someone has tried to drill the holes originally and failed....., then sold the rifle on.

---

Thanks for the reply.
I thought it looked a bit of a weak solution but gave it a try as it looked cheap, quick and easy.
This rifle has been reported on the Web as having 2-5 MOA accuracy so I thought a scope might help.
I will stick to the standard sights for now.

I seem to have a habit of collecting "sold on" rifles so far!.
How do novices avoid buying all the "sold on" rifles?.

Or just get one of those steel single one piece mounts from that firm based at Bisley. Those are as good as it gets.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Peter Laidler

It seems to me that someone has tried to drill the holes originally and failed....., then sold the rifle on.

Can I make a suggestion? It's this. The sheer notion that you can screw a telescope front sight base to a No4 receiver ring and expect it to remain tight and soliud is the stuff of fairy tales. It ignores the basic schoolboy physics of rotational forces that you learned in your first year physics lessons at school. You know, clock and anti clockwise moments and all that stuff............... And whoever thought that small BA (or close to....) threads going into 3mm or so of mild steel revceiver ring would be sufficient to hold firm was living on another orbitory planet to the rest of the world. My suggestion is to ignore these holes, give the blocks you've just acquired away to someone you don't like as fishing weights and get a steel one piee easily mounted bracket to fit onto your rifle.

You were/are right. These blocks are an amateur DIY gunsmiths job

---

A little harsh dont you think !
With a 'military' hat on, and knowing the rifle is going to get knocked about, mistreated and generally unloved you may well be correct, however there are many hundreds / thousands of No4 based Enfields that have succesfully used the BA20 / 21 scope mounts (including the Police Marksman Enforcer) with (apparently) no complaints.
The Enforcers I have had have been rock solid with no sign of movement of the scope mounts.

I just KNEW that you'd come back Alan and others and I know it was a bit harsh............ but......... as JSS was (virtually) starting from scratch, It'd be better to start with a V-W solution than a British Leyland solution. After I'd written it, I thought that I SHOULD have said afterwards something like '..... head down, steel helmet on......INCOMING!' I've spent a couple of days reading old trial reports and one that I havce been reading relates to the Enforcer rifle that was subject to some trials by the MoD. I'd be sued if I told you what they said about the PECAR telescope. It effectively said that it and the rifle might be alright for any non robust handling but as a snipers telescope, they'd stick with the other contender, a Tasco (I've never heard of a Tasco but I'm not aware of the commercial world). Admittedly, they didn't parachute container drop them during the trials as they did with the No4T's, L42's L1A1 rifles's S&B, Leatherman and the like.

We also seem to forget that there were many instances where the front blocks were drilled right into the barrels so far in fact, that the fired cases bulged into where the chamber was weakened by the 2x screw holes. Enfield said it wasn't them (naturally) and the civvy gunsmiths who had to deal with the loose pads afterwards said it wasn't them who'd drilled and tapped the holes deeper so as to create a more substantial screwed bond.

It's just an engineering fact that a 3mm (? I haven't got one handy here to accurately measure....if someone can do it for us. From thread root to O.D. of the receiver) is insufficient or at best, marginal thread depth. You can lock it down as much as you like. You can use HT allen bolts but it's STILL 3mm or so of what is effectively mild steel - albeit good quality mild steel.

This could be an interesting thread Al...........

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Alan de Enfield

A little harsh dont you think !
With a 'military' hat on, and knowing the rifle is going to get knocked about, mistreated and generally unloved you may well be correct, however there are many hundreds / thousands of No4 based Enfields that have succesfully used the BA20 / 21 scope mounts (including the Police Marksman Enforcer) with (apparently) no complaints.
The Enforcers I have had have been rock solid with no sign of movement of the scope mounts.

---

Yes, the mounts work perfectly well on Enfield conversions. Virtually identical PH mounts - using the same short grub screws - were used on much bigger calibre sporting rifles based on Mauser actions. I guess the strength really depends upon the weight of the scope/rings, and also the quality of the initial drilling & tapping. Many rifles have the screws loctite'd in, and they can grip very tight indeed. You do see a lot of DIY butchery with these mounts though....

---------- Post added at 07:34 PM ---------- Previous post was at 07:27 PM ----------

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Peter Laidler

I'd be sued if I told you what they said about the PECAR telescope. It effectively said that it and the rifle might be alright for any non robust handling but as a snipers telescope, they'd stick with the other contender, a Tasco

---

The strangest thing about the choice of the Pecar is that the scope length and eye relief - when fitted to an Enfield - make it almost impossible for most normal people (incoming!) to hold the rifle in a good firm shooting position. You have to hold your head right back at an un-natural angle to get the correct scope picture, or align your body in line in order to achieve the same. I've often wondered if that why they put the Harris bipod on the Enforcer - so that you can take a Bren/GPMG type of hold on the rifle instead...

It's funny that you mention the Harris Bipod because that's mentioned too! I'll have to get it all out again........................... I wish I hadn't started now!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Peter Laidler

'..... head down, steel helmet on......INCOMING!'

---

Oh dear, which forum do I get my steel helmet from?.

I still feel that the BA20 looks as if it needs at least beddng on Araldite or something, and the screws just don't look man enough, although they might just do the job with loctite.
I will try it on my No4 MkII which is correctly drilled and tapped.
Could anyone advise on suitable scope and mounts for the BA20/21 combination to give lowest line of sight in order to avoid adding a cheekpiece on a No4.
I will also try the steel "no gunsmithing" option from bisley on the savage/sterling 7.62.
Thanks again for the interest and input.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Thunderbox

The strangest thing about the choice of the Pecar is that the scope length and eye relief - when fitted to an Enfield - make it almost impossible for most normal people (incoming!) to hold the rifle in a good firm shooting position. You have to hold your head right back at an un-natural angle to get the correct scope picture, or align your body in line in order to achieve the same. I've often wondered if that why they put the Harris bipod on the Enforcer - so that you can take a Bren/GPMG type of hold on the rifle instead...

---

So True - thank God for that, I thought I was abnormal, but I must be normal as I have the same problem.