Printable View
Ed wrote: Trying very hard to not scare the flora and the fauna “again”.
“No.4 mk1 Beech Woodwork needs staining to match, any idea's?”Quote:
Originally Posted by Badger
But I gave Neal455 my grandmother’s recipe for dying Enfield stocks with beet juice and “YOU” deleted it. :bitch:
https://www.milsurps.com/images/imported/deleted.gif
https://www.milsurps.com/images/imported/deleted.gif
:rofl:
Mmmhh! So exquisite....... i mean the eggs! The rest has an bit of poofy touch !!! Photoshop, Ed ?
Regards
Gunner
160 rounds Prvi 174 grain .... on the way from Aimsurplus:thup:
The difference in deflection, if any, would be due to dimensional variances rather than steel type or heat treat. The modulus of elasticity for most all steels is pretty much identical. Changing heat treat or alloy WILL affect failure points and life, though.Quote:
Originally Posted by JBS
You are correct, the deflection test was a poor choice to demonstrate, but was within the average shooters ability to feel the difference in steel “ character “. If the specs of D.D.8 are indeed
Carbon ... ... ... from 0.67 to 0.77 per cent.
Silicon ... ... ... " " 0.15 " 0.25 " "
Manganese ... ... " " 0.80 " 1.00 " "
Phosphorus ... ... not to exceed 0.04 " "
Sulphur ... ... ... " " " 0.04 " "
I would think the absence of Chromium - Molybdenum in the alloy above is why the LE barrels were prone to accelerated throat erosion and flame cutting. JMHO
JBS
The British started using their own smokeless powder recipe that didn’t require royalty payments to Alfred Nobel. The cost of World War One impoverished Britain on top of its massive war debt to the U.S. and therefore Britain kept making its own brand of powder as a cost saving measure.
If it had been possible and the British had invented a slower burning powder, barrel wear, throat erosion and the Enfield rifle we know today would not be the subject here today.
We would be talking about the .276 Enfield, barrel wear, throat erosion and boat tail bullets.
You could say the effects of a world wide depression after WWI and Britain’s massive debt to the U.S. along with the collapsing world wide currencies caused, barrel wear and throat erosion.
On the bright side not one of my British Enfield rifles has ever complained to me about cordite powder, marmite, vegemite or tea and crumpets……………
BUT they do sometimes spit out a boat tail bullet going sideways…………….
And that’s because the Enfield rifle was designed to shoot flat base bullets with cordite powder and a boat tail bullet will NOT upset and fill the bore on an Enfield rifle that has fired cordite ammunition.
RTFM
https://www.milsurps.com/images/impo.../Img0012-1.jpg
https://www.milsurps.com/images/impo...2/Img079-1.jpg
https://www.milsurps.com/images/impo...2/Img080-1.jpg
According to my Powleys Pocket Powder Computer that uses a DuPont-IMR powder scale for burning rates, a powder in the burning rate class of IMR-4064 should be used in the Enfield rifle today. Cordite powder burns faster than IMR-3031 and the pressure and temperature curve peak much sooner than IMR-4064.
https://www.milsurps.com/images/impo...2/powley-1.jpg
Now excuse me I have to go now, I’m forming up a new Home Guard Division and its time for tea.
Cut and paste, cut and paste it never ends………………:rolleyes:
https://www.milsurps.com/images/imported/deleted.gif
You really think that was necessaryQuote:
Originally Posted by Edward Horton
JBS
My apologies, my two dyslexic fingers have problems writing what I’m actually thinking sometimes or what is bouncing around inside my head.
Also when I’m writing I know a world wide audience will be reading these postings and my posting should have been addressed “To whom it may concern” and not to you JBS, so again please do not take what I wrote the wrong way.
You were talking about barrel metallurgy and what if, and I was talking about the barrels and bullets we actually have.
The “absence of Chromium – Molybdenum”, the Great War, the War debt and the use of a fast burning powder makes boat tail bullets fly sideways in the Enfield rifles we have today.
And Ed and JBS can’t change the bullet path no matter how much Carbon, Silicon, Manganese, Phosphorus or Sulphur were used in these old Enfield barrels.
I apologize JBS, as soon as I read your posting I realized you were wishing I was someplace very, very hot and smelled of sulpher…………………………
The RTFM was addressed to anyone who had never read the manuals I donated to this website and not to someone who eats donuts and likes the Enfield rifle. :o Your good people JBS and again I apologize, it was my two rambling dyslexic fingers fault. :surrender:
Signed
Ed Horton
"Trying very hard to not scare the flora and the fauna"
P.S. JBS, I will give you the advantage from now on in all your postings………….
You can have the Canadian snipers below with their No.4 (T) sniper rifles and hand picked ammunition. :D
https://www.milsurps.com/images/imported/deleted.gif
Glad I mis-under-estimated what you were saying. :beerchug:
Yes, I was speaking of “I Wish” they would have been able to use a higher grade of alloy that resisted the effects of high temp cordite. It would make things better at the range some times. I also wish somebody would make a REPRODUCTION MK 7 bullet in the .311 to .312 range for us to reload with ! Hope you have a good evening.
A non-Enfield barrel and bullet story
I bought a 1943 30-06 Remington 03-A3 in the mid 1970s because I needed a good “beater rain gun” for deer hunting. At 100 yards it averaged 5 to 6 inch groups with flat base bullets, if you shot boat tail bullets in the 03 you were lucky if they hit the paper sideways at 100 yards.
One day by dumb luck I decided to use some of my 30-30 bullets to see how 170 grain flat point 30-30 bullets would shoot in my 30-06. The group size went to less than 1 inch and I almost messed my pants but I didn’t argue with success.
My 03-A3 barrel slugged out at .313 in the throat, .309 in the middle and .312 at the muzzle. The Hornady 170 grain bullets miked .308 behind the crimping groove and .300 just in front of the crimping groove.
These 30-30 bullets shot so well because they were designed for the 30-30 Winchester and its lower velocities. These 30-30 bullets shot so well because the lead core in the 30-30 is softer than the lead core in the 30-06.
These 30-30 bullets shot so well because when fired and kicked in the a$$ the soft lead core of the bullet allowed the bullet to enlarge or upset and fill the larger bore of my well worn 30-06 rifle.
My Springfield 03-A3 30-06 NEVER fired cordite ammunition in its lifetime and it wasn’t made in England and it hated boat tail bullets, go figure.
Boat tail bullets won’t work in any caliber barrel if the barrel is worn and larger than the bullet diameter no matter what country it was made in.
DON’T blame the Enfield rifle, you bought a used military rifle that had been in a few wars and not a brand new Remington 700.
My first love affair………………. a 30-30 magnum :D
https://www.milsurps.com/images/imported/deleted.gif