Need help Centering SMLE barrel (trigger guard issue?)

Hello all, I have dang near got my SMLE back to mil spec, but I am having issues getting the barrel to center in the forend.

I have ensured there is no wood pressing the side of the reciever, and have re done the draws to no effect.

I noticed in the mag well the trigger guard is pressing against the magazine catch. Could this be forcing the barrel out of center? What should my course of action be to remedy this.

I appreciate the time taken to read my post, have a good day

(Pictures Below are the mag well showing the contact, and the off center inner band spring)

Here is the pic of the off center barrel.

Hi, I'm sure others with more expertise than me will reply in due course, however my first question would be what's it like without the nose cap on?
Does it lie OK in the barrel channel without it and it's the cap pulling it over, or is it off centre before you put the cap on?

Jon

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by hayboy

Hi, I'm sure others with more expertise than me will reply in due course, however my first question would be what's it like without the nose cap on?
Does it lie OK in the barrel channel without it and it's the cap pulling it over, or is it off centre before you put the cap on?

Jon

---

It is off center before the cap is installed.

Where did the wood come from? It's possible that the channel is off centre, in an issue rifle, that would probably get ignored.

One has to remember that warping/warpage is not that uncommon, and it wouldn't be the first time that "seconds" or slightly defective pieces were set aside at a factory or after issue, and then found their way onto the surplus market later.

Once you're sure it's the stock and not whether the barreled action is sitting square and level in the stock, then there's various tricks for reducing warpage: "reverse over-bending" (my term AFAIK), steam boxes etc. etc .

The other thing is that all of the gizmo effects on the barrel work on a vertical plane.

The inner band and its spring pull the barre straight down.

The spring and plunger ticked away above the rear of teh nosecap push the barrel UP.

The barrel aperture in the nosecao pushes the barrel DOWN slightly..

and all of this was designed to tune the barrel (and fore-end) to the issue ammo.

If the barrel is clear of the fore-end, pretty much everywhere but at the Knox form, and the fore-end id STRAIGHT, especially where the nose-cap fits, it should all work as advertised, with Mk Vll balll.......First problem, right there.

The "flitch", (the raw, long-term seasoned chunk of wood used to make the fore-end), is SUPPOSED to be "quarter-sawn" from the log of walnut, beech, coachwood, etc. If the flitch is not so derived and appropriately "cured" before machining, all bets are off. This is the provenance problem I see with aftermarket furniture.

Even the REAL stuff can have problems as it comes out of its wrapper after seventy years.

I have a couple of "new" No4 for4e-ends that are not quite as "true" as one would expect. No idea about how they were stored during the decades before I got them Bear in mind that NOBODY expected all these rifles would be getting resuscitated by hobbyists this far down the track. One solution is decidedly non-purist. Rout out the fore-end to a relatively thin shell (except where those critical plungers and springs), fit and then laminate in resin and carbon-fibre mat. I've seen this done on conventional sporters to good effect. As per that tree in a forest: If a SMLE fore-end has fibre reinforcement and you can't see it, is it really there?

If you are entertaining such thoughts about the family heirloom Mk 1, think carefully!

Now you have two threads running on this one so stand by for lots of contradiction and so on...

Can I ask whether the wood is actually pressing on the barrel - or is it just the asymmetry you are asking about? If not actually pressing on the barrel, personally, I would ignore the assymetry shown in your photo.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by browningautorifle

Now you have two threads running on this one so stand by for lots of contradiction and so on...

---

Sorry, I am getting used to this forum, I did not receive any email notifications from this thread so I assumed I put it in the wrong section of the forum.

---------- Post added at 09:41 AM ---------- Previous post was at 09:38 AM ----------

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by RobD

Can I ask whether the wood is actually pressing on the barrel - or is it just the asymmetry you are asking about? If not actually pressing on the barrel, personally, I would ignore the assymetry shown in your photo.

---

The wood only contacts the barrel at the bottom. No side/side contact

Anyway, maybe you should shoot it and see what before any alterations?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Bruce_in_Oz

The other thing is that all of the gizmo effects on the barrel work on a vertical plane.

The inner band and its spring pull the barre straight down.


The spring and plunger ticked away above the rear of teh nosecap push the barrel UP.

The barrel aperture in the nosecao pushes the barrel DOWN slightly..

and all of this was designed to tune the barrel (and fore-end) to the issue ammo.

If the barrel is clear of the fore-end, pretty much everywhere but at the Knox form, and the fore-end id STRAIGHT, especially where the nose-cap fits, it should all work as advertised, with Mk Vll balll.......First problem, right there.

The "flitch", (the raw, long-term seasoned chunk of wood used to make the fore-end), is SUPPOSED to be "quarter-sawn" from the log of walnut, beech, coachwood, etc. If the flitch is not so derived and appropriately "cured" before machining, all bets are off. This is the provenance problem I see with aftermarket furniture.

Even the REAL stuff can have problems as it comes out of its wrapper after seventy years.

I have a couple of "new" No4 for4e-ends that are not quite as "true" as one would expect. No idea about how they were stored during the decades before I got them Bear in mind that NOBODY expected all these rifles would be getting resuscitated by hobbyists this far down the track. One solution is decidedly non-purist. Rout out the fore-end to a relatively thin shell (except where those critical plungers and springs), fit and then laminate in resin and carbon-fibre mat. I've seen this done on conventional sporters to good effect. As per that tree in a forest: If a SMLE fore-end has fibre reinforcement and you can't see it, is it really there?

If you are entertaining such thoughts about the family heirloom Mk 1, think carefully!

---

I appreciate the response oz,

My wood is original, unissued Lithgow wood, given to me by an Enfield enthusiast.

One thing in your post concerns me, you say the barrel should only touch the wood at the Knox form? I read on multiple posts in this and other forums the barrel must bear on the wood from a little behind the inner band and for the rest of the channel infront of the inner band. As the barrel had no down pressure applied this is why I went through the effort of fabricating a washer for the spring in this rifle, as of now the barrel contacts the bottom of the channel as described above.

Personally, I think these two instructional videos are all you need to know
Setting up the Enfield for accuracy, video A. - YouTube
followed by
Setting up the Enfield for accuracy - B - YouTube

Looking at your very first photo, it appears that it's the receiver that is off centre; not just the magazine catch. The gaps between the receiver and wood are not equal.
Are you sure of the fit in this area?
I am not an expert; but I did deal with a similar issue on my no1MkIII*. In my case the selling dealer had attached NOS woodwork to the rifle without correct fitting. The rifle shot a 6" spread at 50 metres.
To correct the issue I started by reading as much information from experienced sources; such as Capt' Peter Laidler. Only then did I strip-down and examine the rifle.
How did you ensure equal load on both draws? In my case there were several issues with the fore end; but the cause of the barrel being off centre in the barrel channel was corrected with proper adjustment at the draws.

Nice Mk Vl fore-end in that video.

The catch with Lee-Enfields is that they use TWO-piece furniture. (Four if you count the hand-guards). Thus a lot of the bedding methods that are commonly used on Mauser type systems simply do not apply.

Starting with the butt:

The forward end is not only a funny shape in section, it is tapered. At the factory, the butts, utterly soaked in Linseed oil, were installed on a special press that FORCED the butt to fully enter the "ferrule' at the rear of the body. There MUST be a gap between the shoulder of the butt and the rear face of the ferrule. ALL of the recoil is supposed to be transferred via the very front and the "wedge" portion of the front of the butt. IF the recoil is being transferred via the shoulder of the butt, chipping and splintering will occur.

SMLEs and earlier did not use "lock / spring" washers. Such modern technology finally arrived with the No 4. Instead, the butt screw, which has a bog-standard Whitworth form thread, was wound in with a serious screwdriver until is 'squeaked" AND, most importantly, the square section on the tip of the thread protruded THROUGH the butt ferrule and was dead-square with the body alignment. This is whee so many perfectly good fore-ends have met their ends. If you cheerfully try to remove the butt before removing the fore-end of a SMLE, you WILL damage the fore-end. The square tip on the screw neatly fits the steel plate inletted into the rear of the fore-end, Sufficient torque applied to the screwdriver will cause that plate to rotate and rupture the fore-end timber.

Putting the butt on FIRST also helps further assembly; clamping the butt in PADDED jaws of a BIG vise makes for a stable platform for the assembly of a lot of the other fiddly bits.

NONE of these tasks was EVER to be performed by "enthusiastic amateurs"; rather by well-trained fitters and armourers using all the correct tools in well-equipped facilities. There are photos from a series of major wars showing gun-plumbers doing weapons surgery under a rudimentary canvas or often, out in the open, but they had their magic tool kits and portable benches to hand. Caveat: there was ALWAYS "triage". If a weapon, be it a revolver or a Vickers MG, was deemed beyond local repair, it was sent rearwards to a more comprehensive facility. After-action "battlefield pickups" usually went straight back up the line. for treatment. The "Two-Way Shooting Range" is an interesting place, if you like that sort of thing.

There are several very good reasons why the screw in the outer band / front swivel assembly is STAKED in, as a final act. Firstly, it could NOT shake loose and thus set all of the fore-end components adrift. Secondly, it kept "adventurous" Tommies and Diggers, etc. from exploring. The catch, again in "civvie" hands, is that most folk don't get why that screw is a mongrel to remove and why their outer band seems to have a "dodgy thread" afterwards, especially in the Lithgow brass bands. (More cowbell??). The flared tip of that screw was MEANT to be carefully drilled out and DISCARDED any time the rifle was undergoing a complete inspection or repairs to the fore-end region. It's a government-supplied system; spares were supplied in a specific schedule and these screws used to be incredibly common because they were expected to be consumed at a rate of at least one per rifle per year for the estimated service life of the rifle fleet. Unsurprisingly, they also fit the rear sling swivel assembly. These days, we have weapons-grade Loctite. However, I use Loctite 290, which is applied AFTER assembly. It also does not set like concrete. a la 620, etc..

Paper packing under the trigger-guard? EEEK!!

Thanks for the reply 30Three

Since this gun was originally set up very wrong, the forend tightness came from the rear of the forend tightly fitting against the butt socket, not the draws, which were cut so they made no contact.

Before I shot the rifle I came across my first spot of knowledge which was BOTRs video about inspecting a No.1 Mk.3. I relieved the contact with the butt socket, and built the draws back up with epoxy. I have tried shimming them, to no avail, and cutting out the epoxy and re building it up to no avail. I have considered a mil-spec repair in patching the draws with some scrap walnut lying around, but frankly I am not a good worker, nor do I have a steady hand. I am going to be practicing with some scrap 2x2 over the next few days and may attempt the repair once I feel up to it.

CanadianLanBoy

To correct the barrel alignment; which in my case was due to poor contact on the draws. I removed a very small amount of material from the contact face of the draws, to even them up.
Then I made some brass shims; actually cut from a .303 case which I opened up and flattened out. This has varying thickness; so I made several shims for testing.
I fitted a shim to one side and selected the thickness that would start to feel snug when fitting the fore end, and would push the barrel slightly off straight.
I then removed it and fitted a shim to the other side until i'd found a thickness which had the same effect; snug fit and slightly pushing the barrel away.
When I fitted both, the barrel was straight down the middle and a nice snug fit at the rear end.
I also had some othe minor issues; high spot's in the barrel channel etc. New spring for the fornt pad etc. But once completed with good contact at the knox form and correct up pressure.
Final result was a huge improvement; now shooting around 2 MOA instead of 12MOA.

I realise that The shims I fitted are not exactly standard practice; but was unwilling to risk knackering the fore end with poor wood working skills at that time.
There is no epoxy in my rifle.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by 30Three

To correct the barrel alignment; which in my case was due to poor contact on the draws. I removed a very small amount of material from the contact face of the draws, to even them up.
Then I made some brass shims; actually cut from a .303 case which I opened up and flattened out. This has varying thickness; so I made several shims for testing.
I fitted a shim to one side and selected the thickness that would start to feel snug when fitting the fore end, and would push the barrel slightly off straight.
I then removed it and fitted a shim to the other side until i'd found a thickness which had the same effect; snug fit and slightly pushing the barrel away.
When I fitted both, the barrel was straight down the middle and a nice snug fit at the rear end.
I also had some othe minor issues; high spot's in the barrel channel etc. New spring for the fornt pad etc. But once completed with good contact at the knox form and correct up pressure.
Final result was a huge improvement; now shooting around 2 MOA instead of 12MOA.

I realise that The shims I fitted are not exactly standard practice; but was unwilling to risk knackering the fore end with poor wood working skills at that time.
There is no epoxy in my rifle.

---

Thanks for the reply 30Three,

I think cause I have the trashed sporter forend lying around I will give a few different methods a shot with that before I mess with the main forend.

I like this idea as I don't necessarily feel confident in my woodworking skills, I will update this thread with my practice, and hopefully the end result.

CanadianLanBoy

Important still to shoot it. It might be perfect as is.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Daan Kemp

Important still to shoot it. It might be perfect as is.

---

I did ask about that some time back without an answer...post 11.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Daan Kemp

Important still to shoot it. It might be perfect as is.

---

I understand that, but I want the gun set up by the book. I don't want any chance of the wood warping due to my fitting.

When the wood was set up horribly, the gun shot 2MOA with undeveloped handloads, quite remarkable. If I wanted the most accurate I would have left it as is, but as stated before, I want the gun set up by the book.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by CanadianLanBoy

I don't want any chance of the wood warping due to my fitting.

---

That's not what causes warping or twisting. Although Ontario's humid summers can be almost unbearable, they aren't sufficient to cause warping. Not like some of the member's here have experienced in their home areas.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by CanadianLanBoy

When the wood was set up horribly, the gun shot 2MOA with undeveloped handloads

---

Doesn't sound like it was set up so badly...