I picked up a Lee-Enfield online; took off the hand guard; and found a hole with some sort of milled part on the top of the barrel. I'm thinking this is just where the rear sight base was when this rifle was a complete No.1 before Santa Fe refurbished it. So is this rifle safe to shoot? If not, what can i do to make it safe to fire?
-Thanks, Dillon
The hole is for the pin that holds the original rear sight sleeve in position - if all else is well it should be safe to shoot. It is hidden by the Santa Fe handguard so it won't affect the outward appearance of your rifle.
Agreed. Cross pins are a common enough way to hole a sight on and doesn't affect the strength of the steel.
I know that I'll be the odd man out here. I accept that I've never seen a No1 barrel burst or crack etc etc across the the cross pin but.......... It IS a weak point in that it is weaker that the remainder of the barrel. The rearsight bed reinforces that weakened point. and if it were me, I would leave the ring of steel that formed part of the old backsight bed in place. That's just the engineering physics in me telling me something. The strength of a tube is in its cylindrical form
I’m curious about your flash hider, does it look like a number 5 flash hider repurposed or is it the cast knock off with clear cast lines in it. I’ve seen both on Santa Fe rebuilds. The cast knock off did not impress me.
What an 'orrible thing to do to a 1918 BSA SMLE...... :banghead:
Yes, I'd also agree with the engineering theory here. I'd have blinded a pin off in there, cleaned it off so the hole would be gone and a screw in the other hole cut and made flush too. Cold blue and then we don't have anything to discuss...Quote:
Originally Posted by Peter Laidler
It is a flash hider from a No.5 and seems like its been re-bluedQuote:
Originally Posted by P246
---------- Post added at 12:09 PM ---------- Previous post was at 11:59 AM ----------
So im guessing that to reinforce that weak point in the barrel i should put some sort of pin in there to give it a basic standard strength as a normal No.1 barrel.
Thank you all for the help! :D
It's NOT a weak point. There's NO danger, just a technical thing. I was speaking about cosmetics and would do those things. Peter is speaking from the engineering viewpoint, not as it's a danger.Quote:
Originally Posted by DeadLock3003
That flash hider would be worth more than the whole other assembly then. Put on and FN FH and sell the JC hider...
Oh, well im glad to hear that its safe. Thank you for the help browning but I would never sell any of my vintage guns or any part of them, I even give my rifles a name.Quote:
Originally Posted by browningautorifle
Just look at all the rifles that have had have a 3/8 dovetail cut into them for front and rear sights. Not a concern whatsoever.
Exactly...if you refer to(I think it's Hatcher's notebook) about the 1903 experiments at RIA where they turned the barrels down to paper thin trying to get one to pop. Pictures are included in the chapter...very thin.Quote:
Originally Posted by mr.e moose
On the other hand........... Look at those who drill and tap into the nocks form to insert telescope mount screws. Only to find the the chamber has bulged into the remaining steel below the thread. Yes, you CAN turn the barrels to be really thin...... at the muzzle. Guess why?
Because the pressures have dropped by the time the projectile has arrived there...but the things was, they turned them down all the way back. At the very breech. Just to see how much they would take. Yes, drilling into the knoxform can cause a problem...Quote:
Originally Posted by Peter Laidler
By the way folks just so we have clarity... https://www.milsurps.com/showthread.php?t=34116
I wanted to add this set of hard searched pics, not to start a fight with Capt Laidler but to show all what I spoke of. This is from Hatcher's notebook page 202 I think... Here's a link to the notebook and two pics of a Springfield M1903 barrel with descriptive... Please examine the narrative also. https://www.tngun.com/wp-content/upl...s-Notebook.pdf