Performance of No. 4 Mk 1* Long Branch

Free floated at the factory................... Tell your mates - NO! Free floating at the muzzle was a wartime relaxation at Unit level only for a period to cater for a shortage of - or incorrectly made replacements. Later there was a repair policy so that fore-ends that were otherwise serviceable but low at the muzzle bearing could be repaired with an insert That's according to our EMER's/the bible but your frieldly folks might nkow different. But the NZ and UK EMER bible was the same

When you say that your sporterised rifle is mint........... It can't be mint can it? Or do you mean that the bore is mint?

A (now-deceased) friend and myself spent about 25 years finding out just HOW accurately rifles from the Great War and from WW2 could be MADE to shoot, staying within the parameters which would have been in effect while the rifles were in Service. MUCH of our work entailed tightening-up on the AMMUNITION, making it as consistent as possible.

We found that we could get just bout all of them to shoot 1.5 MOA or better.

The Number 4 definitely wants a free-floating barrel but it must have that "cushion" right at the front of the stock, just as in the EMERs.

We also found that the Enfield-rifled 5-groove barrel will always give its best accuracy with a flat-based bullet. Our "test" bullets were the Sierra 180 Pro-Hunter flatbase and the Hornady 150 Spire Point .312", with some rifles being tried also with the Hornady .312" 174 RN. With the Sierra, we had several WW1 and WW2 rifles shooting well under 1 MOA. That includes a number of sub-HALF-minute groups from a completely-unmessed-with Ross.

Hope this helps.

Took my "new" 1950 made Long Branch to the range yesterday to test it at 200 yards with my handloads. This is the result:

https://www.milsurps.com/images/impo...2c1c8d57-1.jpg

I then tested my No. 4 Mk 2 with the AJ Parker 8/53 backsight and got the following results:

https://www.milsurps.com/images/impo..._zps1c5c-1.jpg

https://www.milsurps.com/images/impo...7aa18558-1.jpg

Last, I tried another Mk 2 with battle sights and got the following result with the same load:

https://www.milsurps.com/images/impo...01e4a966-1.jpg

I was impressed enough to mount my spare PH5C to it. We'll give it a try next time out.

https://www.milsurps.com/images/impo...874020c8-1.jpg

First PF serial I've seen on a 1955 rifle.

Interesting. I've got three, all made in Jan 1955. The gun with the 8/53 sight is Faz built in Feb 1954.