Printable View
Hello Gents, does anyone have the machinist drawings for the no.4 mk1 receiver and barrel tucked away somewhere?
I have a project I am working on and they would sure come in handy right now. Once my project is done and tested I will post pictures and a write up.
I am surprised that nobody has either drawing. Oh well, I guess I will have to measure a selection of each to figure out tolerances and make my own drawings.
Sorry nobody has come up trumps for you Mike. I have quite a lot of stuff such as Instructions to Armourers, EMERS & so on but I don't know of anyone who has the engineering drawings for the two major rifle components themselves. I hope you manage to work them out.
That’s the way it goes sometimes. I was just surprised as this forum is astounding with the amount of knowledge that is here. It surprises me every time I login.
I’m looking at having a run of barrels made with the same external dimensions, bayonet lugs, front sight base etc for the no4 mk1 that are 5r .302” bore size, .3095” groove to run the 174SMK but needed a drawing first and was looking for the original. Measuring many samples will provide the tolerances just the same, just takes longer.
Once I get my drawing done and price it out I will report back.
Well good luck. If you can get to the stage of producing complete tight tolerance military profile barrels you'll have a ready market. This side of the pond for the cost of rebarrelling & re-proofing your No4 you can buy a complete new rifle, which is a bit of a disincentive unless your existing rifle holds sentimental value or is particularly desirable, like a No 4 T.
Please keep us posted. I, for one, am interested to know how it goes.
I had external profile drawings supplied to me one time from a popular manufacturer of vintage barrels and they provided them to me. All I had done was contact them about some fitting questions for external bands and collars and the similarity between two different product offerings. It was very helpful and I was impressed they were able to oblige the same day. Helped them sell some more barrels too.
I suspect it is a seller's market.
These drawings have been around for decades, kept and copied by "enthusiasts" who just wanted to preserve the information, or have an interesting bit of artwork to hang on their shed wall.
Tempus fugit and all that jazz; now, they are worth money to entrepreneurial types who have rightly observed the growing market.
I have copies, shabby but readable, of the full drawings for both the US/Canadian Mk2 body and the late Fazackerley Mk 3 body. HOWEVER what is "unobtanium" is the supplementary information for each drawing; all the little "notes" that detail the finer points of manufacture. Datum points for qualified threads are a good one. Some even show the shape and path of specialized cutting tools. Drawings for earlier goodies like SMLEs are MUCH worse, with the REAL good stuff lost in the "process books".
Barrel drawings? Oddly enough, harder to find. But, an afternoon with a couple of representative samples in a good metrology shop will get you a data "cloud" to feed a CAD system. Digital CMM probes have been "talking to" CAD programmes for a couple of decades now. The general exterior is pretty simple; getting the breech thread indexing to tolerances (there are TWO; one for "new" barrels, one for "replacement" barrels) is a whole other game.
The catch is that the bodies, in particular, are seriously complex shapes. Amortizing the set-up and tooling costs will require the sale of a LOT of product. Barrels, less so, but piggy-banks will get a flogging. Any competent machinist / gunsmith could make a generic No 4 barrel, complete with correctly-cut bayonet lugs, from a blank, in a day. At a hundred bucks an hour..... A GOOD CNC shop could churn them out like sausages, and probably to finer tolerances, but, unless you can cough up for a "minimum run", that will have the "set-up" / programming costs built in, they won't even think about it.
Then there is the cost of a batch of "correctly" rifled blanks. A thousand dollars will get you a button of your desired form, twist-rate and "direction", and then the fun starts. Been there, done that....OUCH!
Good luck!
Why not just buy new No.4 barrels from Criterion? They are perfect. The sample barrel I tested shot consistent groups of 1.75"-2" using the 174 SMK at 100 yards with a Mk.1 sight, AJP 8/53 backsight attachment and camera diopeter eyepiece. I have a sneaking suspicion as I've been down the same road before with these type projects that you won't be able to get them done within a reasonable price range unless you commit to producing a large quantity and the demand really isn't there as it's already been filled by CBI and Lothar Walther. I DO wish you luck with the project.
Exactly.Quote:
Originally Posted by Brian Dick
Have you slugged a new Criterion? If so what dimensions did you measure out for grooves? Was it larger than the dimensions I quoted by at least a couple thou? The one I measured plus other people I have talked with confirmed my measurements.Quote:
Originally Posted by Brian Dick
There is a reason I am trying to make the barrels I am. I don’t want a milspec barrel.
I am trying to see how accurate I can make a .303 while still retaining the stock appearance.
Who knows. Maybe I will get no where with this project, maybe I will. All I can do is try.
I had a batch made to .311 major bore diameter. It’s no drama for me to export to Canada either.
These were done by Lothar Walther and shoot fantastic.
... no1 “H” profile and no4...
I never slugged the CBI barrel. I just installed and tested it using loose parts I had lying around the shop. The rifle wasn't too pretty but shot like a house on fire. I've since spiffed it up a bit with Parkerizing and a little TLC on the woodwork. Now it shoots AND looks good.
If your not after a Milspec barrel, then I'd look at a .308/7.62mm barrel, lots of options there plus you can make it a .30/.303 and use the .303 case, think Bruce has covered this one before, As I was looking at doing one myself.Quote:
Originally Posted by Parker-Hale Mike
bayonet lugs etc can be added later use an old barrel and make a sleeve to fit over your new barrel. (I've yet to see anyone fix bayonets when I was on a firing point)
I have 7.62 enfields and they are fun, unfortunately I sold my Parker-Hale T4 in a moment of weakness which I still kick myself for.
I want to replicate the .303 barrels that our army teams used to use for the competition rifles. That is my goal. They shot better than anybody else’s. I want to experiment with one.
---------- Post added at 09:58 AM ---------- Previous post was at 09:58 AM ----------
How much are you asking?Quote:
Originally Posted by tbonesmith
There is another catch, (or two)
The rifles were built around the ammo. All those odd little collars and spring plungers, and nose-cap muzzle-holes with an odd "window, ate there to optimize performance with a specific loading in a specific cartridge case.
Just as the boffins had to fool around a bit with the bedding regime at the changeover from Mk6 to Mk 7 ammo, every time you play with your reloads that use utterly different propellants, primers and bullets from Mk7 ball, you will be chasing your tail to squeeze consistent grouping and MPI at all ranges out to 900yds AND doing so with some vague reference to the numbers on the rear-sight leaf.
Number 4s using the EXACT same Mk7 ammo have a completely different bedding regime; and then there is the L42A1.
Making a new, "modern" barrel (.303" / .312") is the easy bit. Do you stick to the chunky "Enfield" 5-groove rifling to go with 5R / six-groove, or try one of the very interesting semi-ratchet, three-groove designs?
Original barrels can easily run out to .321" nominal groove diameter and still be within "spec" AND shoot up a storm. WITH MK7. The open-based bullet WILL "bump up" at the back end to seal in a good, concentric barrel with that sort of groove diameter.
Shoving closed-base, boat-tailed Sierras or Bergers through the same barrel may give disappointing results AND result in accelerated throat wear, especially if you shoot a lot and do a lot of rapid practices. Pre-loved "issue" .303 barrels that have digested a steady and protracted diet of Mk7 WILL have throats that are "flame-cut" to greater length and diameter dimensions than "factory new".
Original barrels have left-hand twist and the sights have "compensation" for the resultant "spin-drift" built into them. The front-sight base AND the "ears" of a SMLE nose-cap are offset fifteen thou' for this reason. Interestingly, the Canadians didn't seem to get too worried when they fitted 6-groove RH twist barrels to a bunch of No4s in WW2.
Plan "B" is to build a .30-.303, a chambering /barrel combo that has been around for several decades. .300 / .308 1:10" twist, just like a .30-06 barrel, BUT with a .303 chamber, cut using a reamer with a .299" pilot for the smaller bore. This actually works with the more abundant (and cheaper) .308" bullets out there. With a little creative carpentry, you can stuff a very chubby barrel under the woodwork of a No4 or even a No1. Naturally, the usual fun and games finding the "magic" load will ensue. Unless the reamer is custom-ground for a tight neck and throat (leade) this will NOT be a "bench-rest" chambering job, but it WILL function safely with .303 ball in a pinch. If you plan to ONLY EVER shoot .308" bullets no longer than the 168 SMK, you will probably get away with the even more common 1:12" twist barrel in your choice of Moly or stainless. If you are not doing virtually all this work yourself, carefully check the hourly rates at your local gun-plumber.
My intent was a tight bore 5r 1-10 right hand twist.
Give the old girl a modern twist to an old idea.
I got a reamer custom ground for this a few years ago and built a rifle up for a guy. I ran a new heavy sporter 1:12" twist barrel and set it up in L42 style wood. I tested it with 155gn sierra SMKs and it was just magic. With the vast array of 30 cal projectiles available and the reliability of the feeding and function of the .303 round in the action I'm surprised it's not done more.Quote:
Originally Posted by Bruce_in_Oz
I thought about using a 30-30 ream and doing one so I didn't have the effort of finding brass. I wouldn't be doing long range target though, just a hunter/shooter. Like, a #4 in 30-30...or a #1Mk3...Quote:
Originally Posted by tbonesmith
Check cartridge case dimensions to ensure reliable feeding through the magazine.
.30-40 Krag will also work, being VERY similar in shape and size to .303.
After I finish my "L-41 1/2", the next little project looks like it will involve raiding the "spares" boxes to cobble together a No5 style carbine (No4 Body) in 6.5 x 53R (Dutch / Romanian rimmed version of the classic 6.5 x 54MS). Rim and general case are very similar to .303. Should be a neat little "field" rifle.
On the topic of caibre conversions, I've just completed a 45-70 and have several .44 Magnum conversions coming up.
They don't exist if not conclusively shown by lots of photos ....