The front handguard on my LE No.4 MK2 is loose and with firing works its way up to impact the front sight protector making the shots start to wander. The wood has probably shrunk some since 1954.
My current solution is to take a screwdriver and lightly pry it back into position every few rounds. What is a good permanent solution?
Thanks,
Walter
The front band should have a slight bent part at the center front and back to prevent this. Perhaps it need a bit of re-enforcement?
Jim,
Do you mean the band should be whacked down where the cut -out is in the front top wood, where the original hinged band would fit?
If so, that is exactly the way to stop the top wood moving forward.
If wood is slack at the mid band, a shim under the band might help, but the front band does the holding. accuracy suffers if top wood hits sight base.
Cheers,
R.
The front band sometimes...has a small "V" shape at top front and back to hold the whole affair together, the wood won't slide past where it should be then. The "V" sits down into the square of the hole at the top. I looked for a pic but can't presently find one. It may have been an armorer mod as needed...do it carefully and it will still look good.
Even just 'V'd down at the rear end will do the job, Jim.
Took a photo of mine but not put on comp. yet.
Thanks for the responses.
I see now how the front band is supposed to work with the front handguard. The band is staked such that it won't move in the slot created for it in the front hand guard.. However, when I put the band in the slot the handguard is too far forward and actually touches the front sight protector. If I get the handguard lined up with ample space,relative to the front sight protector, I am not in the slot any more. I can tighten it down but I think it will work loose to find the slot again under firing. I am thinking I will put a spacer in the slot to prevent forward movement of the handguard.
Walter
True, it would.Quote:
Originally Posted by Richard Hare
I'm surprise Peter hasn't come in on this. He must have dealt with bags of them...
As an example.....
Attachment 74210
That's what we mean, Spike!!
Zactly!
Isn't the front band meant to be retained by the ends of the two transverse pins that anchor the "endcap"?
These SHOULD have "flats" formed on one side at the tips. These flats face each other, i.e., front pin flats face rearwards, rear pin flats face forward.
Thus, the "flats" on the ends of the pins "locate" the band AND, the band stops the pins from "walking" out if the wood gets shabby.
Neat.
[QUOTE=Bruce_in_Oz;368693]Isn't the front band meant to be retained by the ends of the two transverse pins that anchor the "endcap"?
These SHOULD have "flats" formed on one side at the tips. These flats face each other, i.e., front pin flats face rearwards, rear pin flats face forward.
Thus, the "flats" on the ends of the pins "locate" the band AND, the band stops the pins from "walking" out if the wood gets shabby.
That's exactly correct, the transverse pins "locates" the band but won't do much preventing the forward handguard from sliding "under" the band at the top as things get worn. I imagine this was the reason for introducing the "depression" into the slot in the forward handguard.
Attachment 74216
Yes, all that's correct, but with wear to the ends of the pins too, they hardly do their job. The indent was something I saw years back, not my idea.
My five cents worth:
Bear in mind that the front band on the No4 was originally designed, in its No1 Mk6 guise, with a HINGE at the top, and looking somewhat like a "radically stretched" SMLE outer band, complete with a suitable "gap" in which could be hung a piling swivel.
Thus, the hinge element would have neatly sat in the "groove" in the top hand-guard cap and, in conjunction with the aforementioned pins, kept it all together.
See pix here.
The MUCH more commonly seen "stretchy" band was HUGELY cheaper to make and the rest is history. Ditto the "one-piece" outer bands seen on most No4 specimens.
As mentioned in post #3...Quote:
Originally Posted by Bruce_in_Oz
If you do exactly what Spike has done, that's what Armourers have done since the year dot. It works. It CANNOT fail because the upper band is positioned between 4x flats, one at each end of the pins that hold the fore-end cap in place. Have a look and you'll see them. These should face INWARDS and the upper band fits snugly between them.
You could dolly the upper handguard cap rearwards too. This has been covered in this forum as has using the same method of dollying the fore-end cap rearwards.
It is a common problem and EASILY permanently rectified in 1 minute
I thought so.Quote:
Originally Posted by Peter Laidler
In the interest of honesty, the depression in the band was not performed by me. It appears on a 1949 Longbranch that I can find little to no evidence of any use. Below, left to right, are 1944, 1945, 1949 and 1950 dated Longbranch rifles, which are all in nearly immaculate condition. I'm curious as to when the depressions in the bands were made, either something done during production because of an observed condition or later on for some reason. In any case, as Peter has stated, this modification will stop the handguard dead fast.
I'd like to also note that these are the only 2 "as issued condition" rifles I own that have this modification done.
Attachment 74265
We'd punch the band in only if the handguard slipped forwards during the test shoot after repair. If it stayed put, then all was well! Some handguards were machined from a solid bar of railway track (...just joking) and so thick that you couldn't punch it in, even if the h/g was loose. So you'd swop it for a thinner metal one and be done with it