Interesting

I was going through some old files on the comp and came across this.
The engineering drawing for the Mk VII ball projectile which gives you its dimensions and construction.
You can see the reason why it had a reputation for causing nasty wounds with the aluminium filler in the front of the projectile.
Once the nose deformed the heavier rear of the projectile tended to end over the projectile as it continued through the err enemy.

Now there is somethings that I did notice well a couple actually one being that it has no cannular on the copper jacket to lock the core and the neck crimp stab.
The other one, well I'll leave you to discover that one as it caught me by surprise as I had always been told something entirely different.
Use the + to get it to 146% makes it easier to see now its up to those that know these rounds to see what I saw which I do find interesting

Cinders
That to me is not a Mk7, the weight is wrong at 160gns

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by CINDERS

The other one, well I'll leave you to discover that one as it caught me by surprise as I had always been told something entirely different.

---

Bullet weight NOT 174 grains ?

Regarding the bullet weight shown on the drawing, I'm not 100% sure but I think I've read something that there was an interim step between Mk VI and what Mk VII finally ended up at, which is what this drawing shows.
Upon testing the 160 grain didn't work and they upped it to 174 grain, but (although they would have up-issued the drawing) they didn't upgrade the mark of bullet.

By 1915 (if not earlier) the bullet was 174g

Yes your on the money its to do with the bullet weight at 160 Gn but also at the top of the drawing you can read what ever the acronym S A C Minute (Could stand for Small Arms Committee ?) 4409 VII underscore then under that we have 8-12-09.

So as stated it appears that this drawing is for the trailed 160 Gnr as hayboy suggested in due course proceeded with the 174 grainer I'm not sure the No. 4409 is the number of listed changes that have been made at that point 8-12-1909 in time with regards to the small arms in service.
So I learnt something today not only from the drawing which I think I snaffled off the web years ago and never paid any attention to the weight nor the date of the drawing also the fact that the site here contains very knowledgeable personnel who are onto it.
I did a PL thing dangled half a carrot to see what turned up, I mean this in a good way, thanks guys hope this was just a little bit of fun for you.

Added to which, once it became a 'production' item it had the '3-idents'.

Alan ages ago I posted a pic of a MKVII round I think it was a MW (Munitions Welshpool) it had a roll crimp instead of the normal stab crimp I've never seen another one and I never got an answer back from anyone regarding so did they trial roll crimping say for ease of production.
If anything it would have been an Aussie thing I'll have a scrounge and see if I can find the picture again and post it cannot vouch for quality as I only had an I-Phone IV at that point I upgraded last year to an 11 I think!

Postscript,
I found the round on my desk so took some better pics, you can see faint stab marks but the roll goes right around the neck at the same depth so maybe a machine adjustment don't know anyway something to discus.
It is a ball round not a reload I was correct it is a MW VII 44.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by CINDERS

Alan ages ago I posted a pic of a MKVII round I think it was a MW (Munitions Welshpool) it had a roll crimp instead of the normal stab crimp I've never seen another one and I never got an answer back from anyone regarding so did they trial roll crimping say for ease of production.
If anything it would have been an Aussie thing I'll have a scrounge and see if I can find the picture again and post it cannot vouch for quality as I only had an I-Phone IV at that point I upgraded last year to an 11 I think!

Postscript,
I found the round on my desk so took some better pics, you can see faint stab marks but the roll goes right around the neck at the same depth so maybe a machine adjustment don't know anyway something to discus.
It is a ball round not a reload I was correct it is a MW VII 44.

---

Interesting indeed - If I have ever seen one, it has not registered, so, for me, another 'weird' bit of Enfield history.

Bit more to that round. Should seems a bit different? Somebody playing around?

I have another oddity on my bench.
There is no glazed card. The cordite is in a bag with a string tied top.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by CINDERS

Alan ages ago I posted a pic of a MKVII round I think it was a MW (Munitions Welshpool) it had a roll crimp instead of the normal stab crimp I've never seen another one and I never got an answer back from anyone regarding so did they trial roll crimping say for ease of production.
If anything it would have been an Aussie thing I'll have a scrounge and see if I can find the picture again and post it cannot vouch for quality as I only had an I-Phone IV at that point I upgraded last year to an 11 I think!

Postscript,
I found the round on my desk so took some better pics, you can see faint stab marks but the roll goes right around the neck at the same depth so maybe a machine adjustment don't know anyway something to discus.
It is a ball round not a reload I was correct it is a MW VII 44.

---

Blown up a bit it looks like there are three crimps, if the points indicated by the blue arrows are indeed each the start/end of a crimp.

The profile as indicated by the yellow arrow is noticeably deeper and more "V" shaped that the other photo where it appears the position of the case in the photo is such that we are looking at the area between two crimps?

Badly worn dies or improperly adjusted machine?

I reckon Surpmil your right, perhaps the stabs wore worn and it colletid the neck instead of the indent stabs being performed, it stands to reason with the millions of rounds being churned out that these anomalies would occur.
How many got through I wonder as Q/A inspection may have ditched them as not being as designed so may alter the way the round performed (It would not really) but someone's life depended on how it did work so it they would have been binned it.

Bindi2 be good to see a pic of that one!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by CINDERS

I reckon Surpmil your right, perhaps the stabs wore worn and it colletid the neck instead of the indent stabs being performed, it stands to reason with the millions of rounds being churned out that these anomalies would occur.
How many got through I wonder as Q/A inspection may have ditched them as not being as designed so may alter the way the round performed (It would not really) but someone's life depended on how it did work so it they would have been binned it.

Bindi2 be good to see a pic of that one!

---

In the UK every single round was inspected by MK1 eyeball and individually weighed, but I don't know it they'd have picked up your 'ring'.

6-8 'lines' per shed, how many sheds per manufacturer ?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Alan de Enfield

In the UK every single round was inspected by MK1 eyeball and individually weighed, but I don't know it they'd have picked up your 'ring'.

6-8 'lines' per shed, how many sheds per manufacturer ?

---

Notice the overhead belt drive for all the machinery.

That's how the industrial revolution was powered.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Lee Enfield

Notice the overhead belt drive for all the machinery.

That's how the industrial revolution was powered.

---

We have a small engineering company in our local village - I was hunting around the back of some of the buildings and came across one of the original buildings from the 1600's.

I was talking with the owner who was explaining that the site and buildings was the original 300+ year old blacksmiths forge.
There was a big steel shaft going thu the roof one one building, out and thru the next building.
In one building was the original forge and a 'power hammer' that was driven by a belt driven from a pully-wheel on this shaft.

It is interesting to see 100s of years old technology - not in use but still installed and which could be made to work.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Alan de Enfield

We have a small engineering company in our local village - I was hunting around the back of some of the buildings and came across one of the original buildings from the 1600's.

I was talking with the owner who was explaining that the site and buildings was the original 300+ year old blacksmiths forge.
There was a big steel shaft going thu the roof one one building, out and thru the next building.
In one building was the original forge and a 'power hammer' that was driven by a belt driven from a pully-wheel on this shaft.

It is interesting to see 100s of years old technology - not in use but still installed and which could be made to work.

---

A friend of mine (who recently passed at 89) spoke about setting up belts for machinery - he showed me old catalogues (I'm sure I ended up with some) and IIRC old copies of Machinery's Handbook showed the proper setup of belt drives.

https://www.smokstak.com/forum/threa...e-shop.215434/
Industrial Antiquity - Line Shaft Pulleys and Belting

In the late 60's on school holidays, I used to roustabout for my Uncle who was a shearer the o/head gear was run by belts driven from an electric motor in turn driven by my Uncles single cyl Lister engine he towed in a trailer behind his Landy.
There were also 2 vertical grinding discs driven by belt from the lister engine in the trailer one coarse one fine the coarse side for your combs and the fine one for the cutters.

Sounds like your uncle had a Lister "Start-O-Matic" generator Cinders, or something like it. Lister clones are made in India these days, but AFAIK they've never made the full rig with generator-starter and panel attached.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Lee Enfield

A friend of mine (who recently passed at 89) spoke about setting up belts for machinery - he showed me old catalogues (I'm sure I ended up with some) and IIRC old copies of Machinery's Handbook showed the proper setup of belt drives.

https://www.smokstak.com/forum/threa...e-shop.215434/
Industrial Antiquity - Line Shaft Pulleys and Belting

---

I just dug out my copy of Machinery’s Handbook 21st edition, revised, 1981 print.
There is an extensive section on pulleys starting with flat belt drive and applications and design of leather belts through to all the V belt types and uses. Pulley manufacture, uses and ratings for wood, cast and machined pulleys.
It doesn’t go into design for long shaft power transmission systems.

Back to OP
The original .303" MkVII bt weighed 160 gr and was approved in Mar 1910 and had no cannelure. Production lots of this ammo failed accuracy proof and the bt was redesigned.
The new bt retained the exterior dimensions of the above but the aluminum core tip was shortened and the lead lengthened. The new bt weighed 174 gr and was approved LOC 15629 Oct 1910.
".303Inch" Labett and Meade

Yeah Green the Drawing from the SAC is dated 1909 wonder what the short comings were in the accuracy the Brit's were big on long range beaten zones weren't they hence the volley sights is there any literature you may have about the tests Green!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by CINDERS

Yeah Green the Drawing from the SAC is dated 1909 wonder what the short comings were in the accuracy the Brit's were big on long range beaten zones weren't they hence the volley sights is there any literature you may have about the tests Green!

---

Here are the comparisons of the 'new' Short Rifle (SMLE) with some of the competitors - showing what Figure of merit each could achieve.
Dated 1904 source "Rifle Mk1 Short" Report written by the Director Of Artillery

Note the aluminium inner "cap", in both the "experimenta"l bullet and in ALL Mk 7 bullets.

Somewhere along the line, it was decided to make the overall bullet length similar to the Mk 6.

It was also a mechanical requirement to have an overall cartridge length VERY similar (and no longer than) Mk 6, otherwise a LOT of small arms, particularly machine guns and most importantly maxim and Vickers Belt-fed types, would r4equire re-engineering of their feed system components.

By designing a "spitzer" bullet, a lot of weight went away, nut not quite enough, Hence the internal lightweight "cap". The boffins had settle on the concept of a high-velocity bullet and a spitzer shape was a good start. Shaving a bit more weight of would get the muzzle velocity and hence trajectory they also wanted.Because the Mk 7 retained the length, the RIFLING twist of 1:10 inches was, conveniently "a good thing".

That the bullet was "base-heavy" and thus destabilized on transition from air to more "wet" targets, the "body-counters" were probably overjoyed that terminal results were suitably gruesome even though the bullet met all the conditions of the Hague Convention. While forward "velocity is shed rapidly in flight, the ROTATIONAL rate of a bullet barely changes after leaving the muzzle., so, being struck by a Mk 7 bullet, at extreme MG ranges, and thus subsonic, will DEFINITELY 'leave a mark".

Interestingly, Mk 8 bullets do NOT have that lightweight inner cap, but they have a reasonable "boat-tail" Hence a weight of 180 gn, and the boat-tail contributed to less dispersion at trans-sonic and subsonic speeds. . Derived from pre-WW2r experiments with bullets for long-range target shooting.

So Bruce the Mk8 Z'eds were exclusively for the mg's to give a good beaten zone at extreme range so they went up 6 grains are the 8'd loaded any hotter than say the MkVII ball ammo.
I have read what you speak of in relation to the wound characteristics of the MkVII ball round it definitely had an impact whether by design or fluke how its dynamics worked when deforming and tumbling inside.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by CINDERS

So Bruce the Mk8 Z'eds were exclusively for the mg's to give a good beaten zone at extreme range so they went up 6 grains are the 8'd loaded any hotter than say the MkVII ball ammo.
I have read what you speak of in relation to the wound characteristics of the MkVII ball round it definitely had an impact whether by design or fluke how its dynamics worked when deforming and tumbling inside.

---

MK8s were 'primarily' used for MGs but their use was also 'allowed' in rifles 'Stens' etc whilst doing night patrols (due to the reduced flash of the NC)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Alan de Enfield

also 'allowed' in rifles 'Stens' etc whilst doing night patrols

---

You meant Brens?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by browningautorifle

You meant Brens?

---

OOOOPs !
Yes

Should have quoted the regs instead of relying on my memory.



Attachment 130225

I was under the impression that Mk 7 Z started out in the aerial gunnery biz, Cordite has a well-earned reputation of muzzle flash, granulated Nitro-cellulose, less so. A tail-gunner in a 4-gun Lancaster turret would be dazzled by his own muzzle-flash if "standard" Cordite ammo were used. I also suspect that the "Z" used in Mk 8 Z was a bit slower-burning than Cordite; better for use with marginally heavier bullets in longer MG barrels.

In the First Great Unpleasantness, US factories NEVER used "Cordite to fill .303 ammo for Britain,instead, they used the same type of stuff they used in their "sporting' ammo in that cartridge.. The Canadians made BOTH styles of ammo; Mercuric-primed, Cordite-fueled stuff at the "government" facilities and Boxer-primed, NC powder-fueled at "commercial" plants.

US factories also churned out vast amounts of 7.62 x 54R and 8mm "Lebel" in WW1. As long as it was reliable and had similar ballistic behaviour, it was acceptable. The subtleties of variations possibly affecting performance or whatever, were irrelevant.

Some of that WW1-vintage, US made 7.62 x 54R ammo made it to Oz in the late 1970s. Good stuff, especially in Tokarevs. which, in the "good old days' were more common here than Mosin Nagants.

Having shot thousands of military 303 through several No 1 and No 4 rifles, I have never seen a muzzle flash. Granted, my shooting has never been in the dark, only low light every now and then. Or my eyes are deceiving me, which is entirely possible.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Daan Kemp

Having shot thousands of military 303 through several No 1 and No 4 rifles, I have never seen a muzzle flash. Granted, my shooting has never been in the dark, only low light every now and then. Or my eyes are deceiving me, which is entirely possible.

---

Try it with a No5 at dusk it is impressive.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Bruce_in_Oz

In the First Great Unpleasantness, US factories NEVER used "Cordite to fill .303 ammo for Britain,instead, they used the same type of stuff they used in their "sporting' ammo in that cartridge.. The Canadians made BOTH styles of ammo; Mercuric-primed, Cordite-fueled stuff at the "government" facilities and Boxer-primed, NC powder-fueled at "commercial" plants.

---

Indeed and it is recognised in the Armourers manuals of the time :

'Regulations For Army Ordnance Services', Vol.3, Pam.11A :-

APPENDIX 15



Instructions regarding Cordite and the corrosive and errosive effects - a note at the end of the sections states :

7. Belt packed S.A.A. for M.G.s is packed in boxes which are clearly marked with labels or stenciling indicating its proper use. It will never be de-belted and used for practice purposes in L.M.G.s or rifles.

8. It must be noted that the above restrictions apply only to ammunition fired from British weapons. All American ammunition is N.C. loaded and their weapons are designed to fire it satisfactorily.


The problem was (in WW1) that by mid 1916 the US was about 400,000,000 rounds in arrears to their contracted delivery quantities, and, about 50% of what was supplied by the US Cartridge company was 'reject' and only suitable for 'practice use'.The situation was discussed in parliament and the contracts cancelled soon after.

In WW2, there were similar problems with Winchester supplied 303 which was banned from use in aircraft due to dimensional quality control being poor and the guns jamming - not a big problem with your LE on the ground, but not the most convenient thing to happen in the air. Some of the ammunition was so poor it was rejected even for 'ground use' and was again relegated to 'practice use'.

Attachment 130243Attachment 130244Attachment 130245Attachment 130246

Is this why some WRA rounds had staked primer pockets in WWII to negate the primers backing out so they could be used in aircraft.
See pic.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by CINDERS

Is this why some WRA rounds had staked primer pockets in WWII to negate the primers backing out so they could be used in aircraft.

---

That is exactly it. There was some literature about them getting backed out and causing stoppages...proof as it were.

The 1909 graphic, posted by Cinders at the start of his thread has a descriptive sub-heading: "exterior similar to American".

Any insights? (Was the bullet jacket profile similar to that of U.S. .30-06 bullet)?

Interesting pick up butlersrangers missed that bit guess they may have looked at maybe the 30/40 Krag or 30/06 projectiles.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Alan de Enfield

Try it with a No5 at dusk it is impressive.

---

Been there, done that! ;)
Try comparing it with a shortened No4 sporter.

The No5 makes a lovely ball of flame from its muzzle device, the No4 made a really long jet of flame straight out, very impressive.