Barrel Contour Comparison - Lee Metford/"Long Tom" v. No.4 Mk.1 Enfield?

I understand that the standard Lee Metford barrel contour was heavier than the No.1 Mk.III barrel - however, was it the same or very similar to the No.4 Enfield contour? The reason for asking concerns the rebuilding of a couple Lee Speeds, both of which need new barrels. I've a mint SMLE barrel, but wonder whether the contour is too thin to be "correct" for a Lee Speed.

I've looked for dimensioned drawings of the Metford barrel, but no luck. I recall reading somewhere that the No.4 barrel was heavier than the SMLE barrel, apparent when you put the two side to side, but I'm wondering whether the outer measurements of a No.4 barrel would be very close (or close enough) to replicate a Metford barrel contour.

That being said, I do know that a No.4 barrel will not go into a LS action ... I'm looking to have a blank turned down to the right contour.

Thanks much!

No1 and No4 are far too short aren't they. A Vickers barrel is the way to go. Enough meat at the breech end to thread for a howitzer. Or so they tell me!

Is it going to be a shortened MLE?

Per what I've seen in copies of the BSA catalogues, sporters were offered with the standard barrel length - 24 1/2 inches. You could add additional length (up to 30") as a custom option, without extra cost. A charger bridge did add a bit to the price however. I'm likely to keep the standard length.

Mr. Laidler, I've never run across a Vickers barrel for sale here in the states ... I might be stuck with getting a 303 barrel blank and having my gunsmith work from that, using a No.4 barrel for dimensions. The import cost on one barrel just doesn't make economic sense, unfortunately.

Ok a lee speed sporter. Sorry.

Barrel blanks: Apparently "Criterion", the buttoned barrel branch of Krieger, are bringing out a "proper" .303 barrel.

If you ask them nicely, they might sell you a blank and you can have fun profiling it.

Both LM / LE barrels have a beefier profile than a standard SMLE. However, the Oz "H" barrels for the SMLEs used the same heavy profile as the LE.

It appears that the Lithgow factory did make full length replacement barrels for LEs into the 1930s. A "rule change" eventually meant that "SMLE length" was the only "authorised" length and lots of LEs had their noses bobbed; hence the "range pattern". The "H" barrel could be wound into a LE receiver to keep the old ones going a bit longer.

As for finding a decent original to adapt: "new" No4 barrels are rarer than rocking-horse droppings. However, if it's the heavier profile you need, you MAY find a few Lithgow heavies about.

All this assumes you want to shoot surplus ball in the beast.

IF you are rebuilding a vintage sporter and intend to use it in the field, think about getting a good gunsmith to make a barrel from a "30 cal" (.300" / .308") 1:10in twist blank / "near-enough" pre-profiled job.

That way you can choose from the vast array of .308" bullets out there. Just remember to swap the expander ball in your dies for a .30 cal one.

Alternately, the BSA (and other) Lee Enfield sporters came in quite a range of interesting calibres, including 6.5 x 54 Rimmed (Dutch/Romanian) and 7x57 rimmed.

How about .30-40 Krag?

There should be no shortage of Vickers barrels in the US so far as I'm aware. I suggest that you put yourself around the MG people.

What was the chamber spec on the Lithgow H barrels?

Another advantage to reaming your own chamber: avoid this

https://www.milsurps.com/images/impo...85pid151-1.jpg

Surpmil,

Are you indicating a bulge on each case where you're pointing or just the pressure ring after the cartridge has been fired? If the latter most chambers, military and commercial alike have this effect on brass. What am I missing?

Keith

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Surpmil

What was the chamber spec on the Lithgow H barrels?

Another advantage to reaming your own chamber: avoid this

https://www.milsurps.com/images/impo...85pid151-1.jpg

---

I suggest you check out omega weapons systems the have vickers barrels new for $50.00

Well ... email sent to Omega. For $50, it's worth pursuing.

In the "good -old-days", some creative types in Oz were using "surplus" and suitably reprofiled Vickers barrels in their target rifles.

I have NO drawings for either Vickers or Bren barrels, however, based on the reading of drawings for later 7.62 and 5.56 rifle and MG barrels, there MAY well have been differences in chamber and throating arrangements. As a comparison, does anyone have the data for the barrels from .303 Browning aircraft M.G.s?

Regarding "full-length" L.E. barrels, I have patched together the sad remains of a drawing for said barrel.

The first difference from a No4 barrel is the Knox form on a L.E. barrel; parallel (with a driving flat "bump" on top, vs, tapered with the driving flat machined off the taper for the No4 (and SMLE).

However, from the Australian drawing for the No4 barrel:
Distance from Shoulder / Diameter
3.68" (high) / 0.787" (high)

For the L.E. barrel:
Distance from Shoulder / Diameter
2.38" (Basic) / 0.791" (Basic)

Closer to the muzzle you can see the slightly greater taper in the No4 barrel:
Australian drawing for the No4 barrel:
Distance from Shoulder / Diameter
20.780" (high) / 0.640" (high)

For the L.E. barrel:
Distance from Shoulder / Diameter
22.74" (Basic) / 0.671" (Basic)


So, a No4 barrel has a very similar nominal profile to the old L.E.

Still searching for my Oz "H" barrel drawing remains to do a "3-way" comparison: in the meantime I will run the measuring stick over a real barrel.

Bruce, any chance of sharing some photos of the barrels you're measuring? I'm trying to visualize the differences, but am having "issues" LOL