reloading and the 7.62 No.4

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ireload2

Liquid penetrant or magnetic particle?

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by whiterider

As far as I am aware (and I stand corrected if a 'real' expert comes along) I recall hearing that it was a 'dye penetrant' examination of locking lug recess and shoulder...but I'm unsure if it encompased the whole action as such.

---

God I hoped not when I first read Ireload's comment. I have seen products pass the dye method only to fail horribly using magnetic particle and other more expensive methods of finding faults. :ugh: Not many mind you but enough to worry me. Still the cracking a receiver would receive I'd imagine is on the surface then into the metals core, so its not too big of a deal and dye penetrant will catch that. :thup:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by srjg3432

Its a No4 MK2 with a 26inch target barrel on it, so it looks like an enforcer, and has a scope on it.

---

The later Envoy's and Enforcers may have had a set pattern for barrel length etc as I was originally told, but I am doubting that the early ones did. Just based on the fact my E2* came from the factory as a 29" barrelled rifle. If it looks like one then its good in my books. I am not a purist with military surplus arms. :)

Dimitri

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Alfred

Well to confuse the matter further, as usual, while running down information on a posted warning at Bisley against use of bullets weighing over 144 grains in converted Enfields I found that an arbitrary retained energy ruling meant to prevent use of 338 magnum rifles at some ranges were bullets could endanger populated areas if they escaped the range had also included .308 match loads of 155 grain and higher. Whether any ban is in effect I haven't found out yet.

British target shooters seldom handloaded in earlier times, but modern day UK shooters seem to do a lot more handloading, or hire others to work up loads for them.

Heres the post that started me looking

---

Here is the complete message from the NRA regarding 155 Grn loads:

"Safety Warning

Enfield Rifle Actions Converted to 7.62 Calibre from .303 or made as 7.62mm

Enfield actions of the No4 and No5 type were originally designed to fire the British .303 service cartridges of the day.

Many of these actions have been subsequently converted from .303 to 7.62mm. Whilst a few selected actions may be stronger than others, most are not suitable for use in this calibre other than under certain conditions.

The 7.62mm Cartridge that they were inteded to use was the 144-grain NATO cartridge with a bullet diameter of .3075"

It is unsafe to fire these rifles with the 155 grain Radway Green cartridge or any other commercial cartridge using the 155 grain or heavier bullet which has a diameter of .3083" or larger

Firing these latter cartridges can ultimately lead to catastrophic failure of the bolt lugs and bolt body that could lead to serious injury. This risk is considerably increased if the chamber or cartridge gets wet or is oiled prior to firing.

The NRA will not accept responsibility for any accident or injury to persons or property caused by anyone using any 7.62/.308Win ammunition supplied by them in these converted actions.

The actions/rifles may fall under the following descriptions, but there may also be other names or descriptions used: SMLE Conversion, Enfield Conversion, No 4 Conversion, No 5 Conversion, Parker Hale T4 , Whitaker Special, Enfield Envoy and Enfield Enforcer.

You have been warned"

Very much written for Health & Safety reasons, and also to wash their hands if indeed there was a problem with any of the above.

I had to have the chamber of my .308 converted No. 5 re-reamed as cartridges had to be slightly forced before they´d fully enter the chamber. The chamber is still quite tight but is slowly getting better. I also had some trouble with the extractor. It turned out to be a really badly squashed extractor spring (is the only difference between a .308 extractor and the one for the .303 the ground off corner?). The rifle action is still a bit stiff ... but getting better all the time. It is noticeably more accurate than my other .303 No. 5. Both have practically new barrels.

I load Privi Partizan cases: Sierra 10,9 g HPBT with 39.0 grains of Vita N 140. I only neck size and use a neck trimmer and the cases seem to be everlasting. Now that I also only neck size .303 cases, they last a lot longer too and I haven´t had any of the tell-tale signs around the base that I used to get regularly. Comparing the two, the .303 action is a lot smoother and faster but the .308 is definitely more accurate.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Strangely Brown

Firing these latter cartridges can ultimately lead to catastrophic failure of the bolt lugs and bolt body that could lead to serious injury. This risk is considerably increased if the chamber or cartridge gets wet or is oiled prior to firing.

---

I wait to see the NRA produce the evidence of this - I assume they haven't simply regurgitated something they read on the internet.....

AFAIK, not one such incident of bolt lug failure has been unequivocally documented - certainly never the main lug! Indeed, the very scant number of known incidents relate to fracturing of the extractor housing part (only) of No4 boltheads, or the distortion of receivers in No1s. These seem to be sacrificial parts of the respective models in extreme circumstances.

The point about bullet diameter also seems dubious in the extreme. Are the NRA seriously implying that ALL 144gn NATO-spec ammo is .3075" or less?! The NATO spec is actually fairly flexible, with some variation in bullet weight, dimension, velocity, etc - to say nothing of the manufacturing variations in barrels as well.

"It is unsafe to fire these rifles with the 155 grain Radway Green cartridge or any other commercial cartridge using the 155 grain or heavier bullet which has a diameter of .3083" or larger"

I take it that the NRA "Safety Warning" was not a blanket denunciation of the No 4/5 .308 conversion but rather a warning against re-loading with unsuitable charges and/or bullet weights.

This would certainly apply to any other type of hand gun.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Thunderbox

I wait to see the NRA produce the evidence of this - I assume they haven't simply regurgitated something they read on the internet.....

AFAIK, not one such incident of bolt lug failure has been unequivocally documented - certainly never the main lug! Indeed, the very scant number of known incidents relate to fracturing of the extractor housing part (only) of No4 boltheads, or the distortion of receivers in No1s. These seem to be sacrificial parts of the respective models in extreme circumstances.

The point about bullet diameter also seems dubious in the extreme. Are the NRA seriously implying that ALL 144gn NATO-spec ammo is .3075" or less?! The NATO spec is actually fairly flexible, with some variation in bullet weight, dimension, velocity, etc - to say nothing of the manufacturing variations in barrels as well.

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by villiers

"It is unsafe to fire these rifles with the 155 grain Radway Green cartridge or any other commercial cartridge using the 155 grain or heavier bullet which has a diameter of .3083" or larger"

I take it that the NRA "Safety Warning" was not a blanket denunciation of the No 4/5 .308 conversion but rather a warning against re-loading with unsuitable charges and/or bullet weights.

This would certainly apply to any other type of hand gun.

---

As usual I think the NRA are shooting themselves in the foot with a warning about a senario that could happen, but hasn't yet and isnt likely to!

As TR Captain of a Lee Enfield organisation that uses Bisley Ranges I find myself in the position of having to enforce some of the rules that come out of the front office at Bisley; although since this debate has raged I have been in contact with a couple of shooters who were unaware of the differances in 7·62mm ammunition regarding bullet weights!
(protecting the ignorant?)

Perhaps this notice is something of a wake up call to some of the uniniacated.
Before this happened our organisation had actually banned the use of 155 Grn ammunition from club guns, persumably because of a lack of understanding amongest some members regarding wet whether skills and the like.

It should be noted though that 155 Grn is not actually banned from Bisley in No4 conversions, simply that the NRA (and one assumes their insurances agency) do not want to hear about future claims regarding No 4 recievers and 155 Grn Palma ammunition being used together.

For my part I am reloading with 150 Grn Sierra bullets over 40.4 Grns of VihtaVouri for all three of my 7·62mm No 4 conversions, it's too early to say how the loads will go in three differant rifles, over distances from 300 yards to 1000 yards, but its always something I can report back with at a later date.