questions on no.1 mk.3 wire wrapped rifle

I fired this rifle at the 100 yard range and it hit about 6 feet to the right. the bore looked bright and shiny. The fired shell had a slight bulge across from where it fit in the chamber and where the ejector cut out whould be, (see pictures ). Is the expansion of the fired shell ok? What does the .001 cause if any? The rifle has no marks on the top of the receiver. I know it is a grenade launcher type. Do you think the wire wrap caused it to shoot the the right? Any input whould be help full. The picture of the fired shell is not to clear. Shell expansion is .455 with a slught bulge on right of shell of .456.

How many rounds did you fire?

Did they form a group, even if it was 6' to the right?

Is the crown of the barrel even and straight all around the circumference?

Have you tried a different type of ammo?

So far as its possible to tell from the photo, the rifle looks perfectly normal. Even if the bore is fairly worn, the rifle should shoot more or less straight. Many grenade launchers are in fact tack-drivers, as the wire wrap and the gunk under the wood effectively solid-binds the barrel! If you've only fired one round, then it could be a fault on that round causing it to fly off. If you've fired 5-10 rounds, then you should be able to deduce something from the group they form: if there is a group, and its of reasonable size (3 to 8" at 100yds for an old rifle), then the rifle is ok and its just some sort of sighting issue. If you get a vast dispersed group, then something might be wrong with the crown of the barrel or, indeed, the whole batch of ammo. Firing a different type of ammo can prove whether the original batch was at fault.

I had a Krag that shot that way. 3 feet to 11 o'clock if I remember correctly. After quite some time and a bit of examination, I found a slight bulge within an inch of the crown.

All I can say is that when we were refurbishing many of these No1EY rifles for War Reserve, they were all range tested for function and accuracy tested and all had to conform to a set, laid down criteria. The wire wrapping had no effect on the rifle and they were range tested withoiut a cup of course - in fact I'm not sure whether we actually had any cups! Anyway, on that basis, I'd say that there is something pretty fundamentally wrong with c141's rifle

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Peter Laidler

Anyway, on that basis, I'd say that there is something pretty fundamentally wrong with c141's rifle

---

If he has only fired one round of POF surplus ammo, then its going to be hard to deduce anything.

From what I can see, the expansion of the case ~1 cm up from the rim has no special significance.
It doesn't look different from the usual fired .303 case.
As Thunderbox says, does this rifle group? If it does, you can adjust your sights. If it doesn't, check the bore for wear - slug the bore to see the groove diameter. Then the folks on this forum will let you know what bullets to try. Also look at the crown for dings.

The chamber always is bigger than the cartridge casing that goes into it. If it were not, you would never get the cartridge into the rifle! Some expansion is pefectly normal. If you were to fire another round and mark the base of the cartridge, you would find that the expansion always is at the "noon" position: the top of the chamber.

I agree that there is something wrong with your rifle. That said, however, I think it will take more than a single round to find out exactly what is wrong, and how wrong it might be.

I would suggest getting a box of ammo that you KNOW is top grade (even if you have to load it yourself) and trying the rifle again. Flatbase bulets are best in any Lee-Enfield, of course. There are no warning signs on the single cartridge casing you have shown us, so it ought to be safe to fire a few more rounds.

I notice that your bore is a touch on the loose side, or appears to be. That might be due to a loose bore or to an undersized bullet in the cartridge you are using as a gauge. I have owned rifles which were looser and they have shot okay.

I think that most of your troubles will be right at the front sight. Get that back into the place where it is supposed to be and there is every chance that the critter will shoot to point of aim. If it doesn't, come on back and we'll all have a go at her.

Once upon a time I had a 1918 Enfield EY rifle, wrapped as yours, and it shot to beat the band. Some of them are really good and they are all chunks of history, come down to us here and now.

Nice piece. Now let's get her on target.
.

Stand your cases up side by side and take another photo so that we can compare how far forward the shoulder of the fired case has moved. In your existing photo it looks to have moved foreword a good bit but this could be an allusion. Also check the bore very well for a build up of carbon from firing Grenade launching rounds. This can cause a reduction in the bore size that has the effect of swedging the bullet down near the chamber and then having a very poor bullet fit toward the end of the bore. I have had to soak some of these grenade bores for a week or so to strip the carbon out.

I shot 4 rounds and they all hit to the right of target about the same spot. I sluged the barrel and it appears to be a .310 the bullet is a .311 , being a 5 grove barrel I rapped a thin shim around the slug minus 2x thickness of shim and got .310 on the slug. The bore is bright and shiny , took a pitchure with the slug just starting down.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by c141b

I shot 4 rounds and they all hit to the right of target about the same spot. I sluged the barrel and it appears to be a .310 the bullet is a .311 , being a 5 grove barrel I rapped a thin shim around the slug minus 2x thickness of shim and got .310 on the slug. The bore is bright and shiny , took a pitchure with the slug just starting down.

---

If the rounds are going in the same place, then there is nothing wrong with the rifle mechanically. Did they form a group? How close together were they?

Looking at the second picture, I'll take a guess that the barrel is over-tightened, and that this is causing the front sight block to lean to the left. With a left error and an incorrect sight picture, your rounds will indeed go low and to the right.

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...............

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Peter Laidler

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.........

---

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?

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?