Printable View
Was looking at an attractive 1926 Ishapore FTR with a '45-dated barrel (all serial numbers match.) Noticed that there was a bit of a gap - maybe 1mm? it was quite small - between the barrel and the receiver. Is this normal? unusual? safe? cause for concern? I don't recall seeing a gap like that on any of my other Enfields.
Not normal. Suspicious even. Without a full teardown, I'd pass. Unless you are just buying it for the receiver date, but then it's worth maybe US$30-40? Plus whatever the rest of the parts are worth- if you need them.
Oh, and welcome to the forums!
I suspect others will enjoy giving you the technicals on why the gap is "bad". So let's see who wants to contribute. (Theoretically, it MIGHT be OK to have the gap on a "range rifle" under certain circumstances, but it's not acceptable on a military build.)
Thanks for the welcome - I have lurked here a bit, done a good bit of reading, and see some familiar names - some folks will recognize me (and this question!) from other forums.
I'm wary of the rifle and likely will not buy it - my small SMLE armory is mostly Australian - but I'm hoping to at least learn something of a technical nature, perhaps about the rebarreling process and such.
Just for the record:
SMLEs breech up on the INNER breech ring; that is, the inner ring where the bolt head seats.
No.4s, however, breech on the front face of the receiver. Then there are the 7.62 NATO converted No4s that use breeching washers between the receiver and Knox form.
NOTE ALSO that Mauser 98s are also SUPPOSED to breech on their internal ring AND have 55deg Whitworth- form threads. Few, if any, commercial barrel-makers around the place seem to follow either of these practices.
A SMALL gap between the receiver and Knox form on a SMLE should be OK; on a No4, probably not. I understand that it has something to do with both the theories/observations of thread-crush and the manner of gauging used to select components.
But you wouldn't consider a 0.025"/1mm gap small would you?Quote:
Originally Posted by Bruce_in_Oz
Usually, when I see this sort of gap, there's also a small deformed area on the back edge of the reinforce that screams "previously installed barrel"!
Theodore: Do you have a set of feeler gauges you could use to get a precise measurement? 1.0mm is quite a large gap (0.039inch). I'm also curious as I have a SMLE with about a 0.010inch gap.
Ridolpho
I don't, but they may have one at the gun shop where the rifle is for sale. I'll go by there and ask.
Theodore, the first thing you must do on Monday morning is to go and invest in a good set of feeler gauges. This is the most important part of an Armourers tool kit. Not only an Armourers, but for anyone who is remotely interested in shooting.
That's the lecture over with............. To the rifle. I can confirm exactly what Bruce in Oz says and it's correct. There can be a small gap between the nocks form part of the barrel breechy and the front face of the body but it will only be marginal, say .020" or so and this is because of the +/- tolerances between the breeching up threads and distance to both stop faces.
I can't see any mention of an allowable gap during breeching up but purely from the practical point of view, if the barrel is breeched up on the inner surface of the body, then even a .100" gap would be academic. It'd be unsightly of course but still academic! Anyone agree or disagree with that? My little No2 has a little .012" gap that's just full of oily crud
I agree with it.
I poked around looking for a barreled action with a gap (Mostly Indian rifles) to photograph, but couldn't find one in the pile. Anybody have a visual aid?
Thanks for the correction! Stupid of me, but considering that I'd been up for 23 hours at that point, stupid is normal...Quote:
Originally Posted by Ridolpho