Help! Misaligned Pads on No 4.

Help ! To cut a story short. I have a No 4 with misaligned pads.

Is there ANY way that this can be rectified?

I fear not but if you don't ask !

As a warning to others, I gave my No 4 (a very good one at that) to an old very experienced REME armourer who said he had seen loads of them during his time and that the necessary attachments had to be aligned with the bore of the weapon

I assumed from his comments that he was familiar with the process of mounting the pads etc (he wasn't).

As it turned out, he had SEEN loads of them but that was all.

Result: A very hard lesson learned.

Others will no doubt be able to assist you but I have been harping on this subject for a while and it is not a reflection on any one but the way it is going the people with the real experience are getting thin on the ground and that knowledge base is dwindling yes you can say that in this Mod instruction manual it says so and so but it is the hands on from years that is ebbing. What would an armourer trained on today's weapons systems think of a 1942 weapons system do they even teach wood working skills to the armourers of today or just give them a tube of green loc-tite for the plastic stuff they have today.
I mean no disrespect but for us the collectors/users of these rifles where will we go in 15/20 years people like Peter L and Brian D and others in the background are like all of us on a clock where as properly cared for these Enfields/Mausers/Garands/M-1's will outlast us as long as the spares allow them, there is always reverse engineering.
I am sorry you have had a bad experience hopefully it will be able to be corrected but it may be that the weapon may need a journey to a reputable and known fixerupperer of these things or at least they may be able to PM you with a person who can fix up the faffed effort of "I have seen heaps of them" but obviously worked on none as far as putting the pads on correctly!

Sadly,
It does really depend on how badly the pads have been misaligned to be able to give an opinion on whether they can be reinstated without causing long term issues when the scope is mounted.
Any chance of some good close up photos?

Pics would help..... but to be honest its probably scrap, I've saved one in the past but involved plugging the the rear screw hole and re drilling etc, too much work around this area for my liking so its now a .22 No4T .....

We need to know EXACTLY what went wrong. But, I can tell where YOU went wrong before we go any further if I might be so bold. You didn't give him the precise details that I set out in the 4x part article wot I writ several years ago which has been read, re-read, again and again and fully digested BEFORE starting the job. It tells you and him all you need to know about the alignment and ultimate collimation of those so important pads. The bad news is that with countersunk screws, the thing you are screwing down - the pad in this case - goes just where the centre of the screw hole goes.

There might be some hope, but I doubt it. A few photos will confirm your/our fears

Maybe you ought to pm me regarding the 'REME Armourer'. Sometimes, some people fail the acid test................

Very odd to hear a REME trained tiff get it wrong. They breath plans and drawings before lifting their fingers to anything.
Perhaps his eyesight failed him when he needed it most by the sounds of his "old very experienced age".......feel sorry for you in what you seeked to achieve. Maybe all is not lost yet, I am sure someone with the requisite skills will bring her back!!

Sorry to read of your predicament! But, if it´s any consolation, the scope pads on my No. 5 were installed by a very reputable (and expensive) Bavarian gunsmith. And it all worked perfectly for a while ... and then got steadily worse ... until my granddaughter took up shooting last week and scored an ever larger hole in the 10 at 100 metres. You can, at least try and get hold of a new No. 4 action, have it scoped professionally, and expect it to shoot precisely. But what can I do, now that I´m eighty and am saddled with the standard, geriatric eyesight?? :crying:

So to clarify, is this a set of #4 T pads you speak of or a set of Weaver type bases mounted as per civilian scope mounts on top. There's a vast difference in that part. One can be sorted and one can't...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by browningautorifle

So to clarify, is this a set of #4 T pads you speak of or a set of Weaver type bases mounted as per civilian scope mounts on top. There's a vast difference in that part. One can be sorted and one can't...

---

#4 (T) pads.

By mis-aligned, do you mean the distance between the pads is wrong, so you can't screw on the bracket - or that the pads are tilted - and if the latter, in what way.?

IF .... it´s only the collomation that is out of kilter, you could try and find a Canadian scope mount, that´s exactly the same as the original T, but with a picatinny rail on top that can be pretty radically adjusted. But if the pads don´t fit the mount ..... think it´s b*ggered!

Seems if it's the rear pad that's off, it could be redone with a blank pad machined to spec. AFTER install on the receiver body sidewall. Much like was done at H&H. Easiest way would be to have a fixturing mule (AKA as stripped down No.4 Mk.I (T)) to get in the ballpark. Then swap barreled actions. Fine tune to suit. (Assuming access to at least some sort of basic milling machine.)

Sorting the front pad? Would be rather more complicated!

To be honest, we're all pi........, er......... urinating into the wind here! Unless he comes up with a photograph we're wasting our time going any further.

But I would disagree slightly with JM (thread 12) in that the scope bracket rotates (albeit slightly) horizontally on the front pad and the front pad can also be adjusted (again, albeit slightly...) for left/right collimation, it's the VERY important REAR pad that firmly holds the bracket horizontally once the front pad is fixed. But until we see the dog, it's no use throwing the bone!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by RobD

By mis-aligned, do you mean the distance between the pads is wrong, so you can't screw on the bracket - or that the pads are tilted - and if the latter, in what way.?

---

My apologies, misaligned probably not the best term to use to describe the problem. Basically the pads have been fitted as they are without any filing/modification to bring the bracket/scope in line with the bore of the rifle. The front pad could probably still be adjusted to bring it in line for windage but the rear pad has been fitted too high.
Hope that explains things a bit better. I'll post some photos.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by jr57

My apologies, misaligned probably not the best term to use to describe the problem. Basically the pads have been fitted as they are without any filing/modification to bring the bracket/scope in line with the bore of the rifle. The front pad could probably still be adjusted to bring it in line for windage but the rear pad has been fitted too high.
Hope that explains things a bit better. I'll post some photos.

---

ok i'm trying to upload some phots here but it won't let me cos the file sizes are too big and thats with a phone ? Anybody got any ideas?

If you down load them to the desk top on your comp you can resize them using the cropping in Microsoft or make them large web then up load them there are plenty of threads on how to up load pics just use the search bar top right hand side if you cannot have any joy.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by jr57

ok i'm trying to upload some phots here but it won't let me cos the file sizes are too big and thats with a phone ? Anybody got any ideas?

---

There is a part in the stickies explaining the process of the pics.

JR,
This may not be as bad as you think. I am assuming your Tiffy had drawings he used to drill and tap the holes at the outset to the recognised exceptance locations for the scope, and got them slightly wrong?

If not, did he do this all by eye, and a measuring tape............hope not!!

http://photos.imageevent.com/badgerd...ithoutpics.gif

To learn more about about how to handle pics, please read this thread in the Q&A - Help Forums, which also appears as a "sticky" thread at the top of every forum on the site.

How do I upload pictures to my posts for storage on milsurps.com? (click here)

If your pics are larger than about 2 megabytes each in size, they'll be rejected, as they only need to be 1/3 of that to be effective and highly view-able on any web site. Pics larger than that are a waste of storage space for no appreciable viewing gain in return, so you'll need to re-size your pics to something smaller.

If you still have problems, email them to me at badger@milsurps.com and I'll resize them for you, then post them in the thread under your name

Regards,
Doug

ok heres the phots.

Put a pic of my '44 Shirley and you can see the difference in the rear pad to yours, also why the different center screw on the front pad it seems bigger than the others.
Plus the rear ones are not flushed nor are they staked I thought it may help you to visualize the rear pads position and the set up of the screws flushed and staked.

I still feel for you and whats happened as that is very nice blonde furniture on the rifle I sincerely hope this story has a good ending for you..:o

His eyes must need re seating to get the rear pad so poorly fitted and that far out, at least 5-6mm higher than it should be. Clearly no plans when he started that job then, as each pad is already milled to fit the action in a pre determined way. It is only the drilling and tapping and of course the final staking that takes a bit more time!! Oh dear.

One thing to add......................... as you say the front location may be recoverable, as it doesn't look too far out but without it in your hands hard to say. The rear pad being fitted that high may be your saving grace. If the holes have been drilled higher by at least 5-10mm, you may just have a chance that new holes can be properly inserted clear below the existing ones. Peter L might be able to tell you what the long term movement might be though in causing issues further down the line

I hope that the more optimistic amongst us are correct, & I certainly take no joy in offering a negative opinion, but I think that rear pad is so high the rifle body is practically knackered. However, this is assuming the front pad is of approximately the right dimensions & fitted in approximately the right position, & that the rear pad is approximately of the right overall dimensions. If that is the case the rear pad is far too high & the only way of retrieving the situation would be to raise the front pad in equal proportion (not recommended) or to remove the rear pad, fill in the holes, & the re-fit it correctly), again, not a worthwhile proposition, I would have thought - remember that heat treatment to the locking lug recess in this area.

I would be interested to know what Peter or any other service trained armourer thinks, though.....

Peter is thinking about this after browsing the photos and looking at the utterly dismal work of the so-called REME Armourer (of which I know more but prefer to stay silent). But while it looks a disaster area and a total waste of one of the very historic and last No4's produced, there might be an optimistic shred of hope. I will add more later. But it will take a real Armourer or gunsmith to fix it. So please, please please stay clear of enthusiastic amateurs and butchers who have absolutely no concept of the dynamics and mechanics of what you hope to achieve. Indeed, some will be offering you some, er......, what we call 'bullsh........, er....., bovine scattology.

Anyone can bolt a telescope to a rifle but not everyone can get it right. I'll come back later.........

LATER; If I was you, this is what I'd do. First, I'd accept that your rifle is now worth the sum of its parts BUT you can(?) salvage it like this. Remove the rear pad and see just how well the front pad is aligned. You do this by fitting the bracket with your telescope to the rifle. But ONLY do this after having first centred the optical axis of the tip of the graticle to the mechanical axis of the tube. A better bet would be to use/borrow a proper No32. I say this because this is the telescope that you will eventually (?) put on the rifle.

If the telescope can be brought into alignment as per the details I gave in the article I wrote, then you might be part way to seeing some optimism ahead.

Take your rifle to someone who knows what he's doing and ask him to slightly countersink the three existing BA and BSF holes and then silver solder steel threaded plugs into the existing holes into the rear screw holes. If your man can't do something this simple, go somewhere else or ask me and I will put you in contact with someone who can.

When the holes are plugged and filed flush, get the same person to start the rear pad operation again but this time, EXACTLY as detailed previously. Naturally you/he will now be drilling and tapping part into the original now securely plugged original holes put there by the blind idiot who butchered it to start with. I see you and several others teccies out there wincing at the thought........ But don't be afraid. Those motor racing 998 Mini's and MG Midgets/Modsport racers have been doing this offset plugging to extreme pressure engine blocks and cylinder heads since the 60's.

By silver soldering the threaded plugs in place they will be secure and the heat generated will be insufficient to affect the hardened locking lugs that you've got to preserve. Do not be tempted to use hard steel plugs for technical reasons. Mild steel is what you need.

When he's finished it, ask him to bead blast, phosphate and paint the body. You won't even need to un-breech the barrel.

That's all there is to it unless you need to ask any questions. Anyone of a more technical bent please, please feel free to question my idea. I appreciate that we'd just scrap the thing but needs must and all that.

** Must point out due to the fix below the rifle is now a .22, **

A few pics of a fix I did on my own No4, the rear screw hole had been drilled at an angle, and therefore the screw from a sarco mount went in at an angle, the rifle shot well but was never happy with it, as the pad fixing screws were never drilled there was hope, only problem was due to the angle the hole had to opened up then tapped to take a (IIRC) a 10mm bolt that was used as a plug, there was a bit more to it but you get the idea.

as it was,

https://www.milsurps.com/images/impo...ttu3cfpo-1.jpg

Plugged

https://www.milsurps.com/images/impo...7p9yu1rl-1.jpg

Tap used to make a slight indent on the plug ( as seen on above),

https://www.milsurps.com/images/impo...2tkxc4yc-1.jpg

Drilled and Tapped hole, the outline of the plug gives an idea how far out the original hole was, although there is a small taper on the plug, (think countersunk screw)

https://www.milsurps.com/images/impo...d2v3o5ut-1.jpg

The DRP Bracket in the white and ready for bead blasting fits like a glove,

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

Rear pad still holding out with the lock tight, and ready for the fixing screw holes to be drilled and tapped

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

Finished article, bead blasted, phosphated and ready for its Suncorite

https://www.milsurps.com/images/impo...c7c201e9-1.jpg

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Peter Laidler

So please, please please stay clear of enthusiastic amateurs and butchers who have absolutely no concept of the dynamics of what you hope to achieve.

---

After following this post, I am so relieved to have had Brian Dick do the work on my Long Branch Sniper (https://www.milsurps.com/showthread.php?t=55567 ). I had considered doing the work myself, and after reading Captain Laidler's detailed description of the job, it became quite evident I had neither the expertise nor the tools to do the job at any level that would be a world class standard. (I realized I would be characterized as one of Peter's "enthusiastic amateurs and butchers")

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by CINDERS

I mean no disrespect but for us the collectors/users of these rifles, [but] where will we go in 15/20 years people like Peter L and Brian D and others in the background are, like all of us, on a clock.

---

So very true CINDERS. We do need a new generation of Lee Enfield gunsmiths to carry the tradition. As you say:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by CINDERS

Properly cared for these Enfields/Mausers/Garands/M-1's will outlast us as long as the spares allow them.

---

Perhaps there is an aspiring young man in Edmonton who sees himself in this role?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Seaspriter

Originally Posted by CINDERS
Properly cared for these Enfields/Mausers/Garands/M-1's will outlast us as long as the spares allow them.
Perhaps there is an aspiring young man in Edmonton who sees himself in this role?

---

Soaking up everything I can, as fast as I can. I will see how far I can go!

I have a couple ideas on how I would tackle this this specific situation, however I am more keen to see how it should be done.

Cheers Peter. I feared the holes may have needed tigging, & then with the heat, the risk to the hardened area.......etc. Knowing that silver soldered mild steel plugs will do is useful & may come in handy one day.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Peter Laidler

Peter is thinking about this after browsing the photos and looking at the utterly dismal work of the so-called REME Armourer (of which I know more but prefer to stay silent). But while it looks a disaster area and a total waste of one of the very historic and last No4's produced, there might be an optimistic shred of hope. I will add more later. But it will take a real Armourer or gunsmith to fix it. So please, please please stay clear of enthusiastic amateurs and butchers who have absolutely no concept of the dynamics and mechanics of what you hope to achieve. Indeed, some will be offering you some, er......, what we call 'bullsh........, er....., bovine scattology.

Anyone can bolt a telescope to a rifle but not everyone can get it right. I'll come back later.........

LATER; If I was you, this is what I'd do. First, I'd accept that your rifle is now worth the sum of its parts BUT you can(?) salvage it like this. Remove the rear pad and see just how well the front pad is aligned. You do this by fitting the bracket with your telescope to the rifle. But ONLY do this after having first centred the optical axis of the tip of the graticle to the mechanical axis of the tube. A better bet would be to use/borrow a proper No32. I say this because this is the telescope that you will eventually (?) put on the rifle.

If the telescope can be brought into alignment as per the details I gave in the article I wrote, then you might be part way to seeing some optimism ahead.

Take your rifle to someone who knows what he's doing and ask him to slightly countersink the three existing BA and BSF holes and then silver solder steel threaded plugs into the existing holes into the rear screw holes. If your man can't do something this simple, go somewhere else or ask me and I will put you in contact with someone who can.

When the holes are plugged and filed flush, get the same person to start the rear pad operation again but this time, EXACTLY as detailed previously. Naturally you/he will now be drilling and tapping part into the original now securely plugged original holes put there by the blind idiot who butchered it to start with. I see you and several others teccies out there wincing at the thought........ But don't be afraid. Those motor racing 998 Mini's and MG Midgets/Modsport racers have been doing this offset plugging to extreme pressure engine blocks and cylinder heads since the 60's.

By silver soldering the threaded plugs in place they will be secure and the heat generated will be insufficient to affect the hardened locking lugs that you've got to preserve. Do not be tempted to use hard steel plugs for technical reasons. Mild steel is what you need.

When he's finished it, ask him to bead blast, phosphate and paint the body. You won't even need to un-breech the barrel.

That's all there is to it unless you need to ask any questions. Anyone of a more technical bent please, please feel free to question my idea. I appreciate that we'd just scrap the thing but needs must and all that.

---

Ok thanks Peter, I don't think I shall be returning to said person for the work. I'll make some enquiries and I do have some options but I may take you up on your offer.

Once again many thanks and to all for their inputs.

I may be totally out to lunch here but does the top surface of the front pad not look a wee bit higher than normal? I dug my '43 T out of the safe and, in the OP's photos it seems a bit higher. is it possible the front pad is non-standard forcing the installer to put the rear pad higher than normal. Hard to believe someone would intentionally put the rear pad up that high for no reason. To the OP- how bad is the scopes collimation relative to the bore? The scope body doesn't look too badly misaligned (and it's amazing how easy it is to see misalignment).

Ridolpho

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ridolpho

I may be totally out to lunch here but does the top surface of the front pad not look a wee bit higher than normal?

---

I agree, it does look a bit high.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ridolpho

is it possible the front pad is non-standard forcing the installer to put the rear pad higher than normal.

---

Seems there was a thread a while back involving a repro sniper with similar misalignment issues caused by an out of spec front pad.

I was thinking the same thing, Ridolpho. I thought my eyes were broken, so I ran out and dug my 43 T out of the safe too. I took two pics for of the front pad for comparative purposes. The OP's pads do look taller (thicker?) than an original set.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by jr57

ok heres the photos.

---

That there is what we call "FUGLY" over here; I'm sure it needs no explanation.

The rifle's a beaut though; don't give up on it. Any retired tool & die maker should be able to do far better than that.

Brian, when are your going to start doing these for people so they get them done properly and properly collimated, at least on this side of the water? ;)

Listen in chaps........ The front pad can be 1" higher and thicker providing that once it is correctly aligned for its l/r axis THE REAR PAD IS SEATED TO SUIT THE OPTICAL ALIGNMENT (of the tele) WITH THE MECHANICAL AXIS OF THE BORE. It really doesn't matter how wide or high the pad is - within the bounds of sensibility of course

After sleeping on it, a repair will be a doddle. Maybe not pretty but easily doable with the parts he has. Just my opinion as a time served apprentice

After looking at the OP's rifle again it looks like its not long been out the wrapper, (another mistake at some point) but thinking outside the box , I,d remove both pads and plug all the holes and finish as best I could, and return it to a No4 Mk2. It will never be a silk purse again but not far off.

Easy repair and if done correct you would hardly see any of the plugs, I wouldn't bother trying to save it as a T.....

For a T replica etc I,d start again but on an old Sporter or target rifle as the starting blocks...........

Good advice there Geoff. Then, when you get your ex sporter, get someone who knows what he's doing to set about it as per the details. There must be about 20 others on the forum that have followed them and have come up trumps.

[QUOTE=Ridolpho;356747]I may be totally out to lunch here but does the top surface of the front pad not look a wee bit higher than normal? I dug my '43 T out of the safe and, in the OP's photos it seems a bit higher. is it possible the front pad is non

Hello, The pads I handed over were Numrich ones and I can only assume that he used them.

The scope might not look too bad on the phots but believe me its miles out of collimation way over to the left and low. The ret is optically centred.

Just from the depths of what brain I have still intact from fast motor bikes and loose lady's or is that loose motor bikes and fast lady's anyway I seem to recall the screws were slotted and the action and pads heated to the point the silver solder melted into the slot whilst the screw was being done up hence when it all cooled the screws were in there locked as tight as and not moving am I correct in this I cannot remember if it was in P L's book or another one I read somewhere in time......:confused:

If you embark on another conversion I'd use a set of pads that Fultons make - they're superb. Not sure if the rear pad comes ready configured to the 'angled' receiver ledge as on your No4 Mk2, or with the radiused bottom to the pad as per most original 4T's (as produced by BSA), but if not it's get roundable.

If that´s the only probelm (`over to the left and low´) the Canadian scope mount could (maybe) solve the probelm. A sloped picatinny rail is not hard (or expensive) to get hold of. And windage can be adjusted to (almost) any extent. The mount is an exact repro of the official Can. Army model. You´d then not be limited to the original Brit. scope rings.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Roger Payne

If you embark on another conversion I'd use a set of pads that Fultons make - they're superb.

---

When Brian Dick restored my Long Branch Sniper (which was missing the front pad), I had already sent him one which I had purchased from Sarco (probably the same supplier as Numrich). Brian's response was to reject it, and went back to the UK for one that was 100% MoD quality. Evidently the US supplied pads (which are probably sourced from Wayne in Taiwan, but not sure) do not have close enough tolerances.

The pad as supplied from Sarco was crudely made, Lord only knows where. It wouldn't even come close to fitting the original body and the screw holes didn't line up. Cholly Steen should be ashamed to flog such crap but I have a feeling he isn't!!

One thing I don't quite get is why this was done to such a beautiful rifle. Was it a case of getting very bad advice?
To me it would seem more practical to fit a "no drill" scope mount if eyesight requirements mean you need a scope.
If I wanted a T replica, I would start by sourcing a T scope and all the right bits before drilling anything; and it would on a No4Mk1.
I really hope you can get this sorted properly so it remains safe and beautiful.

Hopefully, with the advice he's got from this site he'll make something from what he's got. But he ain't come back to tell us! I've said iyt once and I'l;l keep repeating myself until I'm blue in the face......... That's the difference between real Armourers that understand the in-depth mechanics and mechanicals of the stuff, the gunsmiths, who are jacks of all trades and masters of...... lets leave that there. And the enthusiastic amateurs.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by 30Three

One thing I don't quite get is why this was done to such a beautiful rifle. Was it a case of getting very bad advice?

---

Good Question. To me there are two pathways down which this problem manifests:

1. Bubba: This man is a fool, arrogant, and will blunder into anything, massacring everything to which they lay the butcher's touch -- Ouch!! these folks are detestable baboons.

2. Bignorant: This man is generally well intended and skillful in many things, but has a Big-Ignorant portion of their brain that makes assumptions based on experience in another or similar field. They just don't know what they don't know, but they really do care (this describes me when it comes to many of the nuances and intricacies of Enfields and many other guns.) This is the gunsmith that caused the problems -- he was skilled enough to screw it up, but not inquisitive enough to either say no to the job or to find out how to do it right. Probably a very nice gentleman if you met him one-on-one, and very confident he knew what he was doing -- he just didn't go to ask the Masters. This is why I sent my Sniper to Brian Dick -- he's studied with the Masters, like Captain Laidler.

It's one thing to screw up a plain vanilla run-of the-mill battle worn Enfield (a shame, but alas stuff like this happens); it's another thing to mess up a precious Sniper that was so carefully built and preserved through the wars and over the many years afterwards.

The pictures posted of that pad "installment" sent shivers down my spine.

I restored a Savage No4MkI* years ago, one that had never been fitted with a scope. This was WAYYYYY back when the gun and knife forum was going strong, and this fine forum wasn't in existence yet.

I had a little knowledge and some luck. Found the rifle for 59 bucks at a pawn shop, cutdown foreend, no handguards, fuzzy rust in the bore, missing pads,......but it was the first Enfield sniper I had ever seen.

Managed to get all birch Savage marked wood and furniture, and got that part sorted out well. Luckily at the time, Numrich had somehow acquired some original pads, front and rear, 25 bucks the set (should have bought all they had!). Front pad had a small dent in the rear lower corner where some great clod had chiseled the pad off the body.

After looking about for a great while, I finally sourced some 4BA screws! Yay! But they were from an MG repair shop in Vancouver BC and were for an MGA carburetor, both too long and hex headed, but did have a screwdriver slot across it.

I chucked up the screws in my benchtop drill press, and proceeded to take a file to the screws while the were spinning. Through eyeballing, test fitting and such, I managed to make 3 domed head and 2 flat head screws that fit the pads, only messing up 2 other screws in the process.

I then cleaned off the area on the body where the front pad was, and also the back of the pad itself. Used a good quality brush and a propane torch to get the old solder off the back of the pad. I then fluxed and tinned the back of the pad and the action body.

I then ran the screws down evenly until the pad and body were touching, and gradually heated the area up with the propane torch. You could tell when the solder melted, the pad dropped slightly. I applied a bit more heat to avoid a cold joint, and the tightened up the screws with the solder still liquid. Let it cool. Then trimmed the screws off.

Repeated the process with the rear pad. Only difference was trimming the screws to length BEFORE soldering. not enough room back there to do it after.

Ended up with nice tight pads, and when I put on one of Dr Payne's brackets with an old Weaver K2.5 had a reasonable shooter.

My amateur job was head and shoulders above the molestation that happened to this poor rifle.

Hows about some pics Hal would be nice to see

I sold the rifle on a few years ago to fund the purchase of an L42. I'll have to look through old files to see if I have any left.