Hey chaps, if the bullets are going 6' to the right at 100 yards, that is bent barrel material for sure. Whether it's the steel tube that's bent or the fore-end that's bending the steel tube is the question that needs to be looked at now
Printable View
Hey chaps, if the bullets are going 6' to the right at 100 yards, that is bent barrel material for sure. Whether it's the steel tube that's bent or the fore-end that's bending the steel tube is the question that needs to be looked at now
It is a No 1 both sights are on the barrel so indexing should not be it. The Good Capt. hits the nail on the head, bent or deflected barrel. Rifle may have been used for step here to get up and over the obstacle training. Un-stock it and check the barrel with a straight edge or with bore rods to see if it is bent. If it is a gradual bend it can be straightened back close enough for the sights to correct error though I don’t think this fix would pass original accepted practice,,, right Capt ? :D
It is probably my old eyes but it looks to me like the right side of the bore at the muzzle has a lump in it. I agree that 6' at 100 yards is a serious problem and I would suspect the barrel. I hate to think of unwrapping it, though. That is going to be tough to take off and put back on although I have heard of people doing it.
I agree with SGTHurley. I think that may be it. But, weren't the wire bound guns for grenade only? As in no ball ammo? Should we be surprised it won't shoot? Peter? What sayest thou?
EY was a grenade rifle that could be used as a ball rifle in emergency cases. But that having been said, it still had to conform to all of the current spec EXCEPT for the lesser accuracy criteria........... but definately NOT 6' out at 100 yards. That's a bent barrel without any doubt.
Rewinding it shouldn't be difficult or time consuming. We did several hundreds(?) of them and I detailed the method in an article that's written up here somewhere if anyone can bring it back.........
I seem to remember detailing the CORRECT method of affixing the cup so that the adjustable nozzle sat correctly on the muzzle. That's so that the thrust went back onto the barrel and not the fore-end if anyone can find it...............
Was there a reasoning behind only wire wrapping the upper part of the fore arm and handguard? I have an EY that has no signs of being wire wrapped behind the rear sight. Also, does wire wrapped mean it was used for grenade firing, or were some wrapped just for added strength?Quote:
Originally Posted by Peter Laidler
Lower wrapping was to armour the peak pressure area. Although how they reach this conclusion when firing a rodded grenade is beyond me. Can any of your ballisticians out there answer that?
The upper band to armour the barrel in the area where the rod is situated.
Some were wrapped around the small of the butt too but someone told me that this was a mistake and that only the P'14 should be wrapped at the small of the butt due to the absence of the stock bolt - but I don't know
I think the binding is about protecting the handguards from barrel flexing only - nothing to do with reinforcing the barrel itself. Hence the binding are at the unsupported centre of the handguards, and not at the zone of barrel peak pressure, which is the chamber forwards. The Text Book of Small Arms lists the results of all sorts of trials with grenades, including the surprising information that rodded grenades have no particular detrimental effect on a barrel apart from occasional ringing.
Mmmmmmmmmmm, I don't think that I'd go along with that Thunderchief because while the barrels will, by definition, flex they will also split while firing rodded grenades. And by the time we were refurbishing the rifles for mobilisation/war reserve stocks in the very early 70's, the rodded grenades were long, long obsolete and only the No36 with plate were the norm. Barrel flexing......... It'd have to flex some for a rear handguard to pop off. It'd have to flex even more for the front handguard to. Just a minute...., it's clamped front and rear! We also had some sightless No4's from the RN in Portsmouth for line throwing. Not quite grenades but same meat..........
Anyone else out there have any views or a greater inside knowledge. I've only taken a casual glance at these things in the past but agree that every collection should have one.
Can someone resurrect a thread (maybe an old Jouster thread.....) where I found and published details of the correct fitting of the cup by using the adjustable internal nozzle thing (yes, it is adjustable and usually fouled solid by carbon.....) that had to seat onto the barrel and NOT the nose cap so that the load during recoil was taken by the barrel and not the fore-end. I seem to remember that cross referenced with this, somewhere was the fact that Armourers had to loosen the nozzle thing with the stockbolt screwdriver. But I'm going from memory here as I'm not familiar with the cups, only having seen a few. Maybe one of you clever Forumers could do a photo montage of one................ or is this getting into mission creep?