Which rear sight for No5 clone?

The Parker Hale De Lux No4 sporter has now been converted to a No5 clone. Barrel is now 18.7" from breech to crown before the No5 flash hider and blade sight were installed

What it was...

https://www.milsurps.com/images/impo.../egHb8Oo-1.jpg


What it is...

https://www.milsurps.com/images/impo.../5q8TYjZ-1.jpg


I was looking for a No5 rear micrometer sight but it was suggested on another board that I need a Mk1 micrometer sight because it really was a No4 rifle...

Hmm, as far as I can see, the mount for the rear sight on a No4 and No5 are the same. And the same distance from center of bore. So, if the No4 had a No5 length barrel, wouldn't the Mk1 sight graduations be totally off?... I figure a No5 graduated rear sight would be what's needed. Hmm, Make sense to me, but I ain't no armorer or gunsmith.

Please confirm or deny my assertions... With reasonable explanation.

I believe the only actual difference between the #4 and #5 sight is the graduation. 800 for the #5 of course. Curtailed range because of a shorter barrel...you don't need a full 1200 or whatever the rifle was...

Yes, mechanically they are the same sight but I don't think the marks up to 800 yds on a No5 sight are in the same place a the Mk1 sight because of the lower velocity caused by the shorter barrel....

Will probably have to wait till tomorrow for our friends across the pond to be up, bright eyed and bushy tailed, to get a definitive answer...

I'd use the 800 yard sight. The changed sight graduations reflect the shorter barrel (which affects sight radius and bullet ballistics).

Most, if not all, of the of the 800 yard sights which I've seen also have a different elevation screw, which gives finer adjustment.

The 800 yard sight will also crank a lot lower below 200 yard setting than a 1300 yard one will.

Thanks Max... This is confirming what I've been thinking.

That's good to know about the finer pitch on the No5 adjusting screw.

Sorry, I forgot that our friends down under are just getting up...

Picture of the two types of sight. See how the elevation screw on the 800 yard one is different.

This means that the leaf on that sight only moves about half as far per click as a 1300 yard one does. (.00425 vs .008 ")

Doing the calculations, I believe it can be shown that for practical purposes

No 5 rifle, 800 yard sight 1 click moves POI by 2/3 inch @100 yds.
No 4 rifle, 1300 yard sight 1 click moves POI by 1 inch @ 100 yds
No 4 rifle, 800 yard sight 1 click moves POI by 1/2 inch @ 100 yds

Max is right in thread 4. The scale differs to reflect the shorter sight radius and slightly different m/v between the two barrel lengths.

The actual adjusting screw and nut thread system is pretty academic (or a waste of time) because it doesn't matter HOW you get from stop to 2 or from 2 to, say, 6 on the scale. As long as the screw and nut match. You'll find that any needy rifles that came through our huge workshops will have either the No4 or 5 screw/nut.

As for what sight to use, then the scientific answer would be to set the rifle up in an EWnfield rest and select the best sight to suit the rifle characteristics. But as you'll probably be using non military commercial ammo, it'll be at best, a good compromise either way. Just my thoughts

Thank you Peter for confirming what would be the best sight.

As for ammo, lets assume MkVII service issue. I try to set up all my milsurp rifles on the service cartridge they were designed to shoot. As posted before I have some RG MkVII '49. Also, the Greek HXP from what I can discern was made to replace MkVII and was given the L!A1 nomenclature in... what 1983?... There's more on the market of late at reasonable prices.

You're right, HXP was made to replicate Mk7. And it did too! It was also given an L- type ADAC number but it wasn't on the ammo, just the paperwork.

I wonder why someone can't ask HXP to make another million rounds. 1 million rounds of ammo will fit into the back of a Bedford lorry - so it's not a lot. Or why can't India make several million Mk7 for export I often ask

Phil Rose in the UK has unissued No 5 sights - PM me and I'll send you his email address.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Peter Laidler

Max is right in thread 4.

---

Or...Jim was right in the first place...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by RobD

Phil Rose in the UK has unissued No 5 sights - PM me and I'll send you his email address.

---

Thanks for the offer...
I do have a line on one here in the states... but if the deal falls through I'll let you know.

You're dead right BAR! Sorry about that. It's my age and lack of scholastic acvhievement in my early years reading class!

Incidentally, there are/were thousands of No5 backsights at the BSA works and later, the P-H works when it closed. P-H tried to utilise them and No4 sights for cheapness and just to get rid of them on the L81 Cadet Target rifle abomination. They only trouble was that after thay'd faffed around with them, cross treaded the axis pin hole etc etc and fitted them, they were no good as No4 or 5 rifle sights with the added bonus of being totally useless as L81 sights to boot. Alan XXXX, the desk officer involved with the acceptance trials of the L81 thing said he'd been told that both sights were a perfect match for the bullet trajectory using the long barrel and 7.62mm green spot target ammo. Mmmmmmmmmm

TCS-5, Thats a nice job you did, just shows all is not lost when seeing a cheap (I,m guessing it was cheap) sporter for sale.

Apex has the No5 rear sight. It's a wee bit pricey though.

APEX Gun Parts

Peter,
So are you saying there's no difference in the Mk1 and No5s sight except the No5 only goes up to 800 yds? But from 0-800 they are exactly the same? That is the marks are in exactly the same place up to 800 yds?

If so, how are they compensating for a shorter barrel on the No5 carbine? ....

Also seen an original No5 carbine with a No7 sight on it. What's the difference between the No5 and No7 sight?

---------- Post added at 12:32 PM ---------- Previous post was at 12:27 PM ----------

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by bigduke6

TCS-5, Thats a nice job you did, just shows all is not lost when seeing a cheap (I,m guessing it was cheap) sporter for sale.

---

Yes, $75 and from a private party in my state so there was no paper work needed... a double good deal.

Q1: What do you mean the Mk1 sight and the No5 sight? There is a No5 Mk1 sight and a No5 Mk2 sight. You've lost me
Q2: 'But from 800 they are exactly the same.........' You've lost me again. From 800 there ain't no graduations on the No5 rifle sight!!!!!
Q3: How are 'they'? 'They' don't! The specially graduated No5 sight is graduated for the trajectory and m/v of the shorter rifle characteristics and barrel harmonics
Q4: ..... phew...... No5 sight goes from 2 to 800yds (but you won't see beyond 80 or even 8 yards in the jungle believe me!) and a No7 rifle sight belongs to the .22" No7 rifle. This sight is a bog standard Mk1 No4 rifle sight BUT.... You ignore the 2 to 1300 yard markings on the face and set the sight to the 25 yard mark which is engraved on the left side during the conversion from .303 to .22"

Your rifle is a hybrid or good look-a-like compromise. So cutting to the quick, I personally suggest that you just fit a bog standard cheapo Mk1 No4 backsight and zero it in as regardless of the backsight the rifle will only ever be a good compromise at best.

Resurrected from no.5 micro sight on a no.4? topic in 2013 -

At least on these two examples (original sights), there appears to be a difference in screw diameter and pitch. Given the slightly coarser thread on the 800-yard sight, the "click value" would be some 10% greater than the 1300-yard sight if both were mounted on rifles with the same sight radius - except for the fact that the 1300-yard elevation screw is double-threaded, giving it an effective pitch approximately double that of the single-thread 800-yard screw.

On measuring the two sights shown, each click of the No.4's sight moves the slide .008" - vs. .0043" on the No.5's sight. Consequently, the 1300-yard sight gives very close to 1.0 MOA per click with the No.4 rifle's 28" sight radius while the 800-yard sight has a click value of ~0.66 MOA with the No.5's 23" sight radius and would yield ~0.55 MOA on a No.4 rifle.

https://www.milsurps.com/images/impo.../2943p13-1.jpg

double post

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Peter Laidler

Q1: What do you mean the Mk1 sight and the No5 sight? There is a No5 Mk1 sight and a No5 Mk2 sight. You've lost me

---

This is what I mean... See the Mk1 micrometer sight verses the No5 sight?

https://www.milsurps.com/images/impo...13936031-1.jpg

Quote:

---

Q2: 'But from 800 they are exactly the same.........' You've lost me again. From 800 there ain't no graduations on the No5 rifle sight!!!!!

---

You should read what I typed again. "But from 0-800 they are exactly the same?" Zero-800. It was a question not a statement.
You think you're frustrated? I haven't miss quoted you yet.

Quote:

---

Q3: How are 'they'? 'They' don't! The specially graduated No5 sight is graduated for the trajectory and m/v of the shorter rifle characteristics and barrel harmonics

---

This is exactly my point. Thanks to Parashooter for the side by side comparison to confirm that from Zero to 800 these sights are not the same.

Quote:

---

Your rifle is a hybrid ... So cutting to the quick, I personally suggest that you just fit a bog standard cheapo Mk1 No4 backsight ...

---

Peter,
Because you didn't understand "0-800" and miss quoted me, responding in a way that makes one feel like an *** or arse, I see no reason to try to answer any more of your questions.
And I know what my rifle is since I rebuilt it and I will put on the sight I see fit.

Thank you for your expert and friendly advice.

Now I'm beginning to understand why there are so many Lee Enfield discussion groups...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by TCS-5

Peter,
difference in the Mk1 and No5s sight except the No5 only goes up to 800 yds? But from 0-800 they are exactly the same? That is the marks are in exactly the same place up to 800 yds?

---

I measured the actual difference between the 200-800 yd gradations on a No. 4 & No.5 Mk1 sight. The difference is significant (it's hard to see on the photo on post # 18. Note: the difference between the two models really has nothing to do with the # of clicks on the screw.):
-- No.4 = .275"
-- No.5. = .250".
-- The distance from the hinge pin to the 200 yd gradation is the same on both models, indicating that from 0-200 yds both guns aim the same.

This means the two sights are significantly different beyond 200 yds. The designers were compensating for the different barrel lengths/different muzzle velocities, etc.

In other words, use a No. 5 sight on the carbine, not a No. 4 sight.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Seaspriter

I measured the actual difference between the 200-800 yd gradations on a No. 4 & No.5 Mk1 sight. The difference is significant.....
In other words, use a No. 5 sight on the carbine, not a No. 4 sight.

---

Finally, someone gets it! Thank you Seaspriter!

A No5 sight is on it's way.

That's what I said in post 2... Frustration... is watching people argue about the color of shyte...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by browningautorifle

That's what I said in post 2... Frustration... .

---

True, very true. Sometimes a post gets clogged with ambiplexity and complexiguity and we get lost in the quagmire.
Some people can envision metrics better than words. Together we got the message through. Thanks for your patience.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by browningautorifle

That's what I said in post 2... Frustration... is watching people argue about the color of shyte...

---

My apologies Jim!
I read it differently even though I read it over at least 3 times.
Sorry for your frustration.

I get frustrated when I come to a sight on a subject I'm not real versed in and ask questions. It was obvious I didn't get the jist of your post #2 by my reply to it in post #3. I expected a clarification but received none from you... Yet, I'm expected, as a new member, to be clear and clarify my statements... but the experts not so much...

No, I'm not arguing, especially about the color of shyte... it's the color of this site in all it's various shades.

Good day gentlemen, It's been a very interesting lesson.

Or just people not asking an understandable question.............. Or a question in an ambiguous way

Sorry 'ol chap but other people understood exactly what I was asking... Nice try on the blame shift tho. You might go back and read post #20 again. I was very clear in my question and the use of proper sight designations... You assumed other wise.

I'm not a collector, I guess that's why I don't really fit in to this group... No sense wasting any more time here.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by TCS-5

Sorry 'ol chap but other people understood exactly what I was asking... Nice try on the blame shift tho. You might go back and read post #20 again. I was very clear in my question and the use of proper sight designations... You assumed other wise.

I'm not a collector, I guess that's why I don't really fit in to this group... No sense wasting any more time here.

---

Dear TCS-5
Let me collectively apologize. You only have to be inquisitive and interested to be part of this group. Your questions were totally appropriate, and its our job to listen between the lines to understand what people are requesting. That's why more than one person follows these threads -- what may slip thorough the cracks in one post can be caught by another reading the same post with a different set of eyes and ears. Hope you stick with us.
Robert

Robert,
Thank you, you're a gentleman.
I wish I were more so, I hate responding like I have, I take no enjoyment in it.
For now I have a bad taste in my mouth.
I'm sure I won't be missed.

John

Please, please don't apologise for me Robert. If I don't understand the question or the way it's worded then I'll say so - which I did in effect. Some forumers like straight talking and actually say so. Others don't - but straight talking is what I do. Been in the small-arms technical world too long to change now I'm afraid. And when I'm wrong, which is quite often, I come straight back and apologise IN PUBLIC too! Why....., I even apologised to BAR on this very thread