Has anybody else got an interest in the M85 Parker Hale sniper rifle that should have won the Army contract as opposed to the L96??
Be good to hear from you
Gil;)
Printable View
Has anybody else got an interest in the M85 Parker Hale sniper rifle that should have won the Army contract as opposed to the L96??
Be good to hear from you
Gil;)
https://www.milsurps.com/images/impo...stuff033-1.jpg
It's not a bad rifle. But "unfinished". For one, it's very particular about the magzines. Many need tweaking of the feed lips so that the bolt will engage the cartridge whilst feeding. Mag release is too easily actuated as well.
At least they fixed the trigger assembly!
Nice multi coloured McMillan stock there, what scope are you using?
It's a 10x Leupold in a 1" PH mount. Would like to round up a 26mm unit one day, along with a more appropriate scope.
They are about and often up for sale here in the UK.
I load my rifle round at a time, so don't use the mag for what it was intended, however, on occasions I have let other people fill and fire, they have had feeder issues caused by the lip of the short mag.
I tend to rest my springs when not in use and lightly oil them when ever I can, which seems to overcome that problem.
Are you using 7.62x51's?
Gil
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gil9713
Not much. Mostly ammo I load myself. It likes 150gr Nosler Ballistic Tips and Sierra MKs. IMR 4064 powder.
Roger that, interesting:thup:
Mmmmmmmm! Should have won the Army contract over the AI L96?? I'm not to sure about that. The L96 shoots like a demon and is the only rifle I have ever taken out of its cover and shot a V bull at 1000 yds first round cold. This thread alone has already criticised the M85 build quality. However it is a beautiful looking gun and has its place in British sniper rifle history, I fully intend getting one.Quote:
Originally Posted by Gil9713
Chosenman,
After a great deal of research on the L96 and the M85 and speaking directly to those craftsman who worked on both rifles with blood sweat and tears, I found that it basically came down to which rifle caused the least dramas to change bits in the field or in an armourers hands, and the M85, although deemed a better rifle, lost out marginally.....sadly due to that one fact.
A real shame, as it closed one of the most respected historic manufacturers in the UK overnight Parker Hale.
Incidently both rifles produced unbelievable cold start first round results.
Again IMO it was a hairs width decision between them both.
I would be interested to hear from any ex Military SAC users like Peter Laidler who I would value his views on the M85 also. But I believe that to be a true statement.
One rifle I certainly won't be shifting in the near future.......I love it
Gil
Hi Gil,
Yep I have heard from several sources that the MOD decision rested on the engineering and design features of both finalist rifles. The M85's conventional build was essentially its downfall as it required the full back up of REME armourers to keep it front line, just the same as the L42. It would appear AI listened to the brief and built something innovative and more importantly required very little skilled attention. Virtually all parts that hung off the chassis could be attended to by the rifleman, barrel change, trigger unit, battle sights, side panels could all be removed, reattached and swapped mostly with three allen keys and only a 1 MOA depreciation over 10,000 rounds was guaranteed.
I think the MOD made the right call. They selected a weapon that was innovative, completely British and it delivered exactly what it said on the tin, furthermore its ascendants still do!
The Lt Colonel running the trial will readily confirm that the P-H was more accurate in every respect and at all stages of the trial - but only marginally so! It was the easibility of maintenance that won the day for the A! but it did have major design/metallurgy flaws that we're all now familiar with. Mind you there were steel quality/consistency issues with the P-H bodies that were apparent even on the little L81's
L96 arrels could only be changed with special tooling at big Base workshops incidentally and internal collars caterered for CHS adjustment - which was VERY tight. I'm not sure that the average crunchie was allowed to upset the trigger mech - god, you'd never know what you were going to get! It was bad enough when they removed the side plates to 'clean' the rifle. You could almost guarantee that one side or the other would catch on the frame or one of the long screws would hold and the side plate would snap.
Another good competitor was the Armalon variant of a US rifle but we/politics dictated/wanted UK or EU made. There was a straight pull 'thing' that simply wouldn't tolerate dust.
All in all, the L96 was a worthy winner
Peter,
Thanks for that. I wrote an article about this whole project but never published it on any site, so if the head shed here think it appropriate I could send it to an administrator or you to read first.
I interviewed Bill Smallwood of Parker Hale who was my inspiration (now retired), a man who spent countless years on the project only to see it disappear beneath him.
I think Malcolm Coopers Gold medals helped as well at the Olympics politically!!!;);)
It was really all about maintainability really. And they'd learned a hard lesson with the Cadet GP P-H. It was pretty well agreed AFTER it'd been accepted that they'd have been better off if they'd been given L39's of which there were always zillions in store. I think that the bodies were imported from Spain (or Portugal) and even then, they were left over from another project! One of the Armourers on the sniper project told Mike XXXXX that he was really dealing with an updated P'14 sniper. I wasn't anything at all to do with this except for heresay afterwards but I did have access/read the trials reports when I got my L96
I see the point about the gold medal connection but I'm not sure that that'd wash with the trials team and or Lt Col Mike xxxxxx who was running the trial. Maybe if you are writing this episode up, you ought to speak to him as well. I'll see what he says..........
There are a few other gripes I have about the rifle from a user's standpoint.
Firstly, I've found it all too easy to look under the rear sight when being less than deliberate.:
https://www.milsurps.com/images/impo...tuff0491-1.jpg
https://www.milsurps.com/images/impo...stuff048-1.jpg
What the user should see when throwing the rifle up for a quick close in shot...
Easily sorted, but it takes time, and that might not end well in the field.
Second, the push button QD swivel that came with the rifle decided to QD itself whilst slung against my back after a long day hiking about. The muzzle protector did it's job but was completely full of dirt! This style swivel is now very common, but they must be considered disposable items as wear is what did mine in. Not obvious until it's too late!
I think it was mentioned earlier- the magazine release is rather too easily operated. A stouter spring, or, even better, a folding latch like the SVT40's or AG42b's would be nice.
https://www.milsurps.com/images/impo...stuff061-1.jpg
From a academic standpoint, it seems the bolt stop/release design is a step backwards from the original Mauser design. Less stout and also easily detatched (then lost in the field, etc., as noted by Peter Laidler) there's just not much good about it except reduced cost. But you'd think PH could have cast the bolt release housing in place, so the savings argument likely wouldn't hold water. Bit of a mystery, really.
https://www.milsurps.com/images/impo..._zps110c-1.jpg
The scope ring/bracket attachment design I generally like! Less chance for canted attachments than is common with the 1913 rail. (Which is the fault of the attachment designs, not the 1913 rail itself...) But the recoil shoulder on the M85 is small and tends to pound a divot on the one piece bracket. Two piece ring mounts seem to fare better, though.
Receiver rigidity and barrel attachment are super!
Trigger is an improvement over some earlier PH offerings.
Stock is a little bulky, but comfortable. The bipod attachment is nice.
Front sight design works well if you're not a ham fisted lout.
https://www.milsurps.com/images/impo...stuff054-1.jpg
https://www.milsurps.com/images/impo...stuff056-1.jpg
Yes I see the dilemma you have if a snap shot is needed on iron sights, however, the 6X42 S&B sight was to be standard issue had the weapon been approved.
This is a Paragraph from my research which answers some questions in terms of Spain and the work carried out on the rifle:
Parker Hales Head Gunsmith Eddie Taff during 1982, who was formerly an RAF Armourer, set about designing the M85 with his small workforce. Eddie spent many hours designing the action for the rifle under immense pressure, to replace the L42A1 for the Army on time, so that comparison trials could be held, following the Falklands War.
I don’t wish to make it sound that the whole project was rushed, but the work that must have taken place in such a short time, was an outstanding achievement under Graham Green’s leadership as the Factory Foreman at the time. Bill Smallwood who worked for Parker Hale from 1980 until 2000 on the M85, recalls the remarkable work carried out by a few there, in bringing this new rifle ahead of schedule for the allotted trials date by the Ministry of Defence.
Investment into modifications and production of the M85 sniper rifle action, were often wrongly aligned to the Mauser 98 action by many, but this Parker Hale variant was produced to a higher specification and resilience, especially to the bolt assembly, working parts and the floating barrel.
So it was a myth, that the Mauser action was never used in the rising from the ashes of the M85 it was in fact a Santa Barba bolt designed in Spain. However, the Mauser it has to be said, showed the way to many designers in history of firearms manufacture, and remain a world beater, and no wonder it continued to be used in this rifle. Changes were however made to the bolt in Spain which really confused many into thinking a Mauser action was never used.
Gil
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gil9713
It is a Mauser clone, yes? I've called it an "ultra-Mauser" in concept. The "Santa Barba" bolt is different mostly in being shorter IIRC. Bolt shroud has no safety, etc... The feature that some might find most important which was omitted seems to be the receiver's inner collar surrounding the front end of the bolt. Not a huge issue unless there's a catastrophic case head failure, in which case the escaping gasses have much more room to flow.
Mine is in a drab green McMillan stock with all original parts including S&B 6X42 scope, a real find and shoots brilliantly from all ranges.
I gain so much pleasure from the rifle, with my old Police issue Enforcer in a close second place.
I marvel at the simplicity of both actions, as they continue to do exactly what they say on the box, 30 years + on:thup:
One of the blokes involved in this was another ex Reme Armourer, Paul Whitehead whom I know
Peter,
Thanks for that. Be good to liaise with these invaluable contacts and listen to what they have to say about the project for histories sake, without compromising their opinions at the time before it is lost forever.
Gil
From Post#18, I notice your front sight base is a bit different than mine- yours is a later rifle. Do the lock screws allow for rotational adjustment when loosened or is the base more or less keyed in place?
Yes its locked in place. I understand that was a requirement later on within the project to ensure no unnecessary movement or loss of parts.
Still waiting for the P&H M85 lists, which identify when they were produced and where they went to, which will be beneficial to all.
Gil
I stumbled across this forum discussing M85's recently, so I thought I'd show my one.
https://www.milsurps.com/images/impo..._007Copy-1.jpg
https://www.milsurps.com/images/impo..._005Copy-1.jpg
Some things I've noticed are that my one has a muzzle set flush with the foresight, whereas there appears to be a few variations other than that, as mentioned in this forum. Also, the bolt handles appear to vary, where my one appears to be swept back. Does anyone have any idea why there were variations in the production?
As far as I've been told by the previous owner, this one was purchased direct from P-H by a civilian (he was bought it off someone else who bought it off the original owner afaik). It appears that they didn't come with a scope, although I'm on the lookout for the appropriate S&B 6x42.
Also I don't have a suitable sling, curious what would be the period correct one, as I thought of getting a L8A1 sling, but they don't appear to be able to take the M85 sling swivels.
It took me a while to find one, and I'm quite happy that I have it. I know another fella who shoots at the same rifle range as I do, and he bought his in the 80's, from P-H, and it has the threaded muzzle, with a parkerised action. His is in very nice condition, with all the paper work as well (although his has a test group print out) in the box. If he was willing to sell, it would have been mine.
In answer to your queries, some of the bolts did have a very slight variation on the angle of the bolt.
If you see the enscribed number of your rifle it should be on the flat of the bolt which is what the engineers at P&H did.
The Santa Barbra bolt has round blast holes and is rounded where the p&h was elongated as a Military requisite, thats how you can tell the difference.
I should be able to get you some more information if you tell me the last 3 numbers and the letter shown on the bolt. It should be prefaced with two 00's. I know one of the original engineers and he has a log of serial numbers as and when they were developed who I tracked down when I wrote an article on the rifle comparing it to why it lost the MOD contract here against the L96 at the time.
The rifle barrel end was modified in anumber of ways he tells me for the various clients. Some wanted a threaded end to take the large moderator and others wnated their sight at the end, so there was no hard and fast rules on the production, it was a client based order from start to finish and hand built and crafted by the engineers there to you.
Hope that helps
Gil
Lastly,
I notice under the thread about Bisley Shooting Fair last weekend that one of our members has an original 6X42 scope for sale might be worth contacting him to see if its still available
Gil
Thanks for the response, but one thing about that part. I have a P-H 1200 sporter, which I'm quite sure is with a santa barbara action and bolt, and the bolt is quite different to the M85 bolt. My M85 bolt has round vent holes, but I suspected that it was UK made, since it is quite different to the santa barbara bolt.Quote:
Originally Posted by Gil9713
I've put pictures of the bolts of the three P-H rifles I have, one is the 1200 sporter, one is the M85 and the other is a M84 bolt (with the longer locking lug).
https://www.milsurps.com/images/impo...Boltstop-1.jpg
https://www.milsurps.com/images/impo...Boltsbot-1.jpg
If you look particularly at the bolt handle, where the serial number is on the M85 and that same region on the sporter bolt, you'll see that it's quite different.
On the topic of serial numbers, I block those out because here in New South Wales, Australia, we have firearm registration, and the police have managed to get the registry to leak, so I'm a bit concerned about putting rifle serial numbers on the internet.
Yes you will clearly see the round holes on the M85 bolt on the left lower pic and the elongated ones on the other two Santa Barbra bolts. I know each bolt handle produced by hand after the engineering stage, was done by hand and the actual bolt handle itself could be very slightly differently angled, which I have seen when you put two M85's side by side.
Thats the beauty of the beast, I love em.
I will eventually I suppose place my article on the site for all to "judge", but I still maintain as do a lot of UK Army experts that this rifle should have been our rifle from 1985 onwards....outstanding.
Great to see the rarity of the rifle now pushing the prices up exactly where it should be. I am waiting for a list of all those produced and will let members know when it arrives so they can check them off as to where they ended up.
Gil
Sorry for the poor pic.Attachment 46915
Three of them, nice stuff. If I could, I'd like to have one of each camo pattern, problem is there's 4 camo patterns and one nato green one. Too many to find, and I've never seen pictures of the urban camo and artic camo rifles other than the parker hale brochure.
BTW, I found the P-H M85 manual the other day, there may be a brochure in that area as well. Don't have a good way to scan them, though.Quote:
Originally Posted by sd4f
My dad had a cold barrel V-bull with his Long Branch No.4T and the No.32 REL Mk II scope. I've told this story before; he was enroute to a vintage rifle match but wasn't sure of his zero. There was another match the week before, and when he arrived they were already at 1000yds. So, out of the chest with a single swab pass to dry the bore, and choose a good looking round of DA Mk VII ammunition. Look at the tables and screw up the elevation knob. Take a good aim. Bang. The target goes down, and comes up V! No sense arguing with perfection, and he retired the rifle to the chest.Quote:
Originally Posted by chosenman
If you look at the case pic I put up, that's, as far as I know, what comes with M85's (Apart from the test group print out, which I've seen of other rifles, but I don't have). There should be an 'Operating Information' manual, 'Repair Instructions' and the colour brochure. I haven't got a scanner, the best I could do is take photos of the brochure if you want them.Quote:
Originally Posted by jmoore
Those documents look the same as my examples. The color brochure doesn't appear to be in my possession, but it seems familiar.Quote:
Originally Posted by sd4f
Here's pics of the brochure. If you want PM me your email details and I can email you higher resolution pictures. They won't be brilliant because they're being done on my phone, so photo quality isn't that good.
https://www.milsurps.com/images/impo...1108_004-1.jpg
https://www.milsurps.com/images/impo...1108_002-1.jpg
Yes great brochure which I was recently sent by an ex employee of Parker Hale when he cleared his loft out. Be worth something one day just like the rifle which is creeping up in price daily, and about time too.
Gil
On the case apparently someone in Portsmouth manufactured the aluminium cases.....anybody got anymore info than that who lives near by?
I have a Parker Hale M85 with a green McMillian stock, and parker hale bipod with a new parker hale barrel, fitted by G.E. Fulton’s and son a VERY tight barrel. It has a parker hale 26mm all in one mount, with a Kahles ZF84 6x42 telescopic sight. It also has its original battle sights front and rear.
It is a very accurate rifle and when used in conjunction with a L96A1, shooting side by side at 600 yards at Huns Heads, there is not a lot of difference between the two. The sling attached to the M85 is the Seynex Small Arms Sling 2005 production, which is a webbing sling and similar to the L8/L42 sling. I understand these are available from Brian Dick website. This sling is seen on the L96 and L118, which seems to fit the M85 perfectly, as a carrying sling and single point if required. Mine looks the same as rifle in post #18, and is in the same serial number range. As mine is S/N 00408F.
I have been looking for information on this rifle for some years, and I become hooked on them as a young man in the 1990’s, when a Gurkha showed me how to use it properly, demonstrated its reliability and accuracy. I have found that Norman Clark has some of the Drawings and some parts, for this rifle shown on his website (see attached), but I have found it almost impossible to get user manuals, or technical information on this rifle especially after 2003. I would love to know more about this rifle, and the M85’s. It is an excellent rifle, which packs a punch on the range.
I have attached links of the drawings and of other items found…
Parker Hale Repair Instructions.PDF
Attachment 47225Attachment 47226Attachment 47227Attachment 47228
Pictures of my Parker Hale M85
DanL96a1
Dan,
Just finishing an article on why I, and others believe the M85 lost the MOD contract to the L96 in 1986. Should be done soon and will be posted on the site for comments.
Needless to say, like you I am an avid user and owner of the M85
Gil9713 I look forward to reading this article, I’m a big fan of the PH M85 and have used and learnt to love the L96. I would love to see the ins and outs of the trails, and why they came to this conclusion.
Danl96a1
I have just been handed a folder of firearms manuals to dispose of. One of them is a 'Parker Hale 7.62 x 51mm sniper Rifle M. 85 REPAIR INSTRUCTIONS' it is dated Nov 1985 on the back page and is 18 pages long. Will try to put a photo up later. Any idea of value? Anyone interested?
Rob,
I would be mate, but I'm not repairing Hadrians Wall for it, what do you want for it? They produced two small A5 prints, one in October 1985 and the last one in November 1985 which one have you got. The date will be on the back cover bottom right
We'll need a close up of each page, front and back including cover to properly determine Value.Quote:
Originally Posted by Robert303
Am I correct, is this Parker Hale sling a converted Lewis gun sling? As I understand PH purchased surplus slings and converted them to target slings branding them as model 1927 pattern.
https://www.milsurps.com/images/impo...s5090931-1.jpg
It looks to be a PH sling. One of the brochures shown elsewhere show a wooden M85 with that sling.
M85's didn't come with a sling, so there isn't one which is correct. So you can pretty much do whatever you like on that front. I'd like to get a L8A1 sling, but it appears that the buckles are sewn in, so having those detachable buckles, and quick detachable button swivels, is sort of redundant and just looks odd to my eye.
Meanwhile, all the modern slings have lots of plastic, which I would prefer to avoid, mainly because it sort of dates it to now, making the rifle look a little anachronistic.
Parker Hale went with what is essentially a magazine for the M-14.
The question is:
Did they reduce the spring "force".
I ask because I have been involved in using M-14 Mags in bolt-actions and the "full-strength" spring causes all sorts of dramas in feeding.
The main issues with "full-strength" springs are:
1. A ridiculous amount of "drag" on the bolt from a full stack of cartridges.
2. A nasty tendency to "spit out" cartridges during slow feeding.
Shortening the standard spring "works", but a better solution would be to wind a "lighter" spring to the same form but using thinner wire.
Stock M-14 mags are designed to work with the incredibly fast action of that rifle's bolt, and in "adverse" conditions.
Think about the seeming "lightness" of a standard Lee Enfield or Mauser magazine spring compared with the M-14 Mag.
How "heavy" is the mag spring on the Accuracy International?
To answer that part, no they didn't. The spring is quite strong. It's a fairly easy thing to rectify, basically the free length of the spring has to be reduced. Gotta get some music wire and get around to doing that.Quote:
Originally Posted by Bruce_in_Oz
As it is though, it works flawlessly. It's just stiffer than other rifles.
The cartridges won't pop out though since it's a mauser bolt design, the cartridge engages the rim as it's being stripped from the magazine. That would be a problem with push feed actions.
I would think that the M14 magazine spring could be modified or replaced to improve the feeding. You have the opposite when using BAR M1918 magazines in M1 rifle conversions. These magazines have a "soft" magazine spring as compared to the FAL or M14 magazine spring and reliable function is not always possible. Most conversions of the M1 rifle to a box magazine use the M14 (and caliber change to 7,62mm ) There are dedicated box magazines for commercial bolt action rifles such as the Remington 700 and others too
The only drama I've noticed with M14 magazine use in the M85 is that the feed lip geometry has to be spot on moreso than in the m14. Usually it misses picking up rounds. Otherwise it's been no bother except when one releases unexpectedly. The solution to date has been to mark those mags that work well in the M85 with the secret code:rolleyes: "M85" written on the back of the body in magic marker.
I would like to know from what source P-H procured the 10 round magazines. Not USGI for sure, unless they were modded from said.
I can definitely now confirm the sling sold with (if requested) the M85 was the Parker Hale Inch and three quarters wide canvas strap, also used on the Lewis Gun. So anybody with a Lewis Gun with the strap attached should look for the PH logo on the strap metal
G'Day sd4f,
I'm 99.9% sure that this was my rifle, I was the first owner.
Cheers
Gaz
Nice rifle at the bottom:lol: