no4 mk1 vs mk2 trigger

im looking at putting together a scoped no4 to participate in my gun ranges sniper events (8 classes total including military open sights and military scoped) im already using a 42 long branch south African rifle in the open sight class and have done pretty well usually taking 2nd or 3rd of the 8 or 9 that usually turn up for that class, usually end up losing to a old timer with a Garand, but still fun.

ive read all the articles about accurizing enfields, but im not sure if its worth holding out for a mk2 (or 1/2 or 1/3). none of my 5 enfields have the trigger upgrades and ive never shot one either to know how big of a difference there is, ive also considered a aftermarket trigger, but dont think i want to go that route.

since i started taking my first enfield out about 9 months ago, im the only one in any of the events we host that ive ever seen shoot 303 in the events, has realy started a love for them. usually mostly american new and surplus with some mausers and misc russian stuff thrown in.

There is absolutely no difference between a Mk1 and Mk2 in trigger characteristics. The Mk2 arrangement merely simplifies stocking-up a bit.

As I understand it the difference is in the trigger being unaffected by the swelling or shrinkage of the forend and the tightness or looseness of the trigger guard screws. A decided advantage, which is why the modification was introduced.

The mk2 is supposed to be a little more accurate, 1.75moa v 2moa from what I can read. They also tend to be less worn and better finished. I have 3, 2 accurised for range work, great fun.

regards

The PRINCIPAL reason given for the Mk1/2, 1/3 modification was to increase the speed and efficiency of the fitting-out part of the FTR programme at Fazakerley where there were always large bottlenecks in production while fitting up fore-ends and adjusting pull-offs. The fact that it remained perfect thereafter was a by product of this. But getting rid of that huge bottleneck was the principal reason. Not sure about the Mk2 being more accurate. If so, it'd also make the Mk1/2 and 1/3 more accurate too. The accuracy tests remained the same across the board

Thanks guys Sounds like the big difference is in how they respond to maintenance and aging of the stock, not necessarily better but less likely out of adjustment If i'm understanding it all correctly. For some reason locally mk1's are everywhere but only like 1 in 20 no4's i run across are a mk2 or update mk1. seems to be a vast majority of longbranchs as well.

Hi Guys,

The trigger on my No7 Mk1 was terrible, in fact the trigger pull was so heavy that the muzzle would drop due to the force required. In the end I fitted a Huber trigger which changed the gun completely and made it far more usable. (I have no connection with the manufacturer professionally or personally.)

Cheers,
George

I could have saved you the money George AND left your rifle as it is by just fitting and assembling the trigger by following the simple instructions that I wrote about a couple of years ago. After all, that's how we did our sniper rifles. and the bog standard RAF No7's were no different

Hi Peter,

I read your articles on correcting the trigger pull and very interesting and informative they were. Mine was an extremely heavy single pull that made the rifle very uncomfortable to use. I bought another standard trigger off ebay which gave the exactly same results. After reading another shooter's testimonial I decided to buy the aftermarket trigger and I have to be honest it made a dramatic difference even though I have not optimised the set-up.

Regards,
George

Wilesbd, bear in mind that all No 4 (T)s and all L42A1s are No4 Mk1 actions with Mk1 triggers. I imagine that, if the British Army had found this to be a weakness, they'd have upgraded their finest rifles. The fact that they didn't do so, indicates to me that the Mk1 trigger arrangement is accurate enough.

In terms of accuracy I wonder if its that the post-ww2 5 groove barrels in mk2s and 1/2 - 1/3s were a better quality? and hence the mk2 / FTR'd were more accurate for this main reason. The trials rifles were mostly? converted to Ts? with pre-war 5 groove barrels? Ive seen comments that the 2 groove were not much worse than the 5 groove, but really if the 5 groove were dodgy by then as well. Ditto L42s? ie a better barrel?

regards

There were zillions of student trials and tests between two groove and 5 groove barrels and there really was no difference between the accuracy of either that could be put down to the rifling. It was said that the two groove barrels stayed more accurate for longer for various proven and unproven and even mystical reasons. Some could be described as simply magical reasons judging from the way some papers were written!

It really is all about imparting gyroscopic effect to the projectile plus the foibles of .........., well everything else on the particular day in question really!

I modified my No. 5 (with No. 4 action) some time back with help from Peter L. Maintenance is definitely easier and once the trigger pull has been customised to one´s personal taste, it does remain like that, even after re-stocking. Minute changes in the trigger pull are, of course, subjective. But it does increase confidence that moisture in the wood is no longer an influence.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by GeorgeLE

Hi Peter,

I read your articles on correcting the trigger pull and very interesting and informative they were. Mine was an extremely heavy single pull that made the rifle very uncomfortable to use. I bought another standard trigger off ebay which gave the exactly same results. After reading another shooter's testimonial I decided to buy the aftermarket trigger and I have to be honest it made a dramatic difference even though I have not optimised the set-up.


Regards,
George

---

I have a AJ Parker range rifle with a modded trigger and frankly it is still too heavy. Its also getting hard to locate seers and cocking pieces without having to spend a small fortune. So Im looking for an aftermarket trigger so its adjustable. Thanks for the hint, I'll go look.

---------- Post added at 09:01 AM ---------- Previous post was at 08:56 AM ----------

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Peter Laidler

The PRINCIPAL reason 8><----

---

Thanks, Ive not seen that written anywhere....

The trigger pressure should be between 3-4 and then 2nd pressure of 5-6.5 lbs pull-off. Any less than that is dangerous in my opinion but that's just me. And there's no reason why a No4 trigger mech can't be made superb. There's only two moving parts rotating on two axis pins

Haven't seen the true reason for the change to body mounted triggers written anywhere! You have now! The whole warts an' all story was written here a few years ago as I recall. Just consider. On an Armourers bench, setting up a few triggers on Mk1's and 1/1's a day was no problem at all....., even after fitting replacement fore-ends. But think about unskilled women fitting-up thousands a day in the fitting-out bays! Now all they had to do was fit the actual fore-end without the additional palava of fore-end off and on and off and on again just to get the triggers correct!