Worn out No4 Mk1 bitsa - magazine platform adjustment

Probably, almost certainly a stupid question but here goes. Please make allowances for my inexperience.

I have once again(can't get rid of it) become the proud owner of a rifle that has apparently been made up from bits. No collector interest whatsoever apart from it's faults!. It has at some time aquired a Savage magazine which causes the bolt head to be lifted slightly (the platform is higher than the original mag). As the action is very worn, this causes the cocking piece (newly fitted and not bent) to drag along the bottom of the channel at the wrist end of the action which is a bit rough due to machining marks, making for a somewhat graunchy "action".
With the magazine out it is still fairly smooth even though the cocking piece still contacts the action slightly.

Firstly, is this action finsihed?.
If not, what is the correct way to reduce the level of the Magazine platform so that the bolt head will not experience upward force?.
Is the spec for No4 Mk1 magazines always the same and should magazines be interchangeable?.
I think the rifle is still functional but want to reduce waer to the cocking piece as much as possible.

This is not my area of expertise, but from a layman's perspective the magazine follower will be depressed when you have the magazine full. If the rifle feeds the round into the chamber with no problems, I would probaly be satisfied with that.

If I was you, it wouldn't be the magazine that I was concerned with, but the apparent dire state of the body! If the cocking piece is touching the bottom of its groove in the body, that indicates severe body wear at the rear to me, backed up by the fact that the front of the mag platform lifts the bolt........ Even if the cocking piece touches the sides of the body, then that indicates wear on the top left and right shoulders.

I don't want to beat about the bush, so I'll tell you straight and in my humble experience - although I could be wrong

Take the magazine out, let go of the trigger, press the bolt down from the top and slide it in and out, If the left hand locking lug (the dumpy square shaped one that is underneath as the bolt is being drawn in or out.......) touches the sear (the bit that holds the cocking piece to the rear when the rifle is cocked) then your body is what we'd call in Armourers technical parlance, 'well and truly shagged'

If it's not this, then the other answer is that, come a bit closer because others will disagree...... All of the magazines might all sort of fit - after a fashion - in much the same way a sausage fits down the high street, BUT, it's got to fit CORRECTLY and tight. That's why, in their wisdon, they were all numbered to the rifle!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Peter Laidler

Take the magazine out, let go of the trigger, press the bolt down from the top and slide it in and out, If the left hand locking lug (the dumpy square shaped one that is underneath as the bolt is being drawn in or out.......) touches the sear (the bit that holds the cocking piece to the rear when the rifle is cocked) then your body is what we'd call in Armourers technical parlance, 'well and truly shagged'

---

Thanks Peter.
I have tried the above with my specs on. What a difference!. It turns out that the cocking piece is not parallel with the bolt body, thus the contact with the bottom of the channel. The lug, which has been stoned slightly on the leading edge only, does clear the sear by a couple of thou. Having said that, the body and the bolt are well worn in equal part, as when I tried my MkII bolt, it's cocking piece clears the channel and the sear and there is far less "sloppines" generally.
I assume that either the cocking piece is not seated correctly or the firing pin is bent as described in a recent thread I think. I will try and get hold of a bolt stripping tool and straighten the pin.
Do the EMERs give maximum permissible angles of "sloppiness", lug to sear/channel clearances etc. or is it just a matter of experience and common sense?.
I have been concerned about the wear in this rifle since aquiring it. Several Enfield experts have already very kindly checked it over for me and I think the general consensus is that it is almost but not quite 'well and truly sh....d'. It's also the one with a slight ring in the chamber!.

Thanks again for your help and patience.
jss

You can check the straightness of the striker by rolling it on a surface plate or sheet of glass. We'd roll them on the alignment sheet (a sheet of glass used to align the barrel and body). You can straighten them but only in a lathe chuck. It's only the cocking piece end that gets bent.

There's no allowable angles of sloppiness or any sloppiness for the bolt. The striker MUST be straight or it causes all sorts of problems and it MUST be tight on the cocking piece. If it is loose in the cocking piece you can distort the threads to tighten it up but this is a but of a bodge in my opinion. Mind you, so is my idea that was well used among other Armourers. That of cleaning the threads out and dipping the thread into some melted solder. But it did the job effectively. I wrote a piece about the mechanics of just setting up a bolt once. Just that is fairly complicated because everything in the bolt affects or is related to something else. Maybe someone can bring it up and when you're bored rigid, you can become even MORE bored rigid by reading it!

On the bright side, it would appear that your rifle would be a good example of where we'd use the Gauge, inspectors, dummy bolt that thunderbox showed in a recent thread

Here is Peter's article.
http://photos.imageevent.com/badgerd...0boltheads.pdf

Been very helpful to me lately. Very nice to have the right information in such detail, and in such a directly instructional form. Cheers.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Peter Laidler

Just that is fairly complicated because everything in the bolt affects or is related to something else. Maybe someone can bring it up and when you're bored rigid, you can become even MORE bored rigid by reading it!

---

Thanks Peter and tbone, and my apologies for not checking the archives first. It looks as though my queries have been covered in full detail by your excellent articles Peter. Thanks. Collectivley they would make a very nice printed publication. Yes, very complicated but fascinating and not boring. Taking up far too much of my time though!.
Now I just need a big workshop, a lot of special tools and about 20 years.

jss

Peter/Tom

Peter Laidler's articles regarding the fitments of bolts are a great reference.

Confusing on the first read. but after several reads the the inter-related issues become clearer.

Thank you

Paul