Enfield Enforcer - Update

[Alan de Enfield]

At only 767 manufactured and around 50% destroyed by the Police to avoid them getting into civilian hands it must be getting on for one of the rarest Enfields.

I now have Number 134 which was originally issued to South Wales Police, and the new one which is number 483 issued to the Northern Ireland Police.

Had a quick try-out last night (just as it was getting dark) and was getting under 1" 5 shot groups at 75 yards. It will improve.

Woodwork is dirty but it will clean up nicely.

Both have the correct Pecar 4-10 scopes, PH slings and Parker Hale bipods and the PH5E/4 micrometer sights.
No134 has 3 (numbered) magazines and a spare (numbered) forend.

A picture of the 'twins' and then of number 483

Information

Warning: This is a relatively older thread This discussion is older than 360 days. Some information contained in it may no longer be current.

[PrinzEugen]

Thanks for that Al - nice one - they're hard to find these days> I think two's just being greedy!

[Alan de Enfield]

Thanks for that Al - nice one - they're hard to find these days> I think two's just being greedy!

If I remember correctly you turned down 483 as the reticule was upside down etc.
I looked at the reticlue on 134 and saw it just needed turning around (internally) and bobs-your-uncle. The cross hair on 483 had become detached from the reticule in shipping but the seller had a spare reticule (the same type 2) which he sent me FOC cannot say fairer than that !!!
Added a PH5E/4 (that I happened to have lying about) and its complete.
Had it out again tonight and shot sub 1" groups so subject to weather its off to the range on Saturday.

For the price - a bargain.
A bit of turps substitute and 0000 wire wool, to get the greasy marks off, loads of BLO and it'll be as good as new.

The 'Enforcer clone' I built is now up for sale (less the PH5E/4). I may strip it down as the various bits (bipod, magazine, PH mounts, PH rings, scope, butt, forend and handguard etc will undoubtably fetch more on flea-bay than the complete rifle would sell for to a dealer.

[PrinzEugen]

If I remember correctly you turned down 483 as the reticule was upside down etc.
I looked at the reticlue on 134 and saw it just needed turning around (internally) and bobs-your-uncle. The cross hair on 483 had become detached from the reticule in shipping but the seller had a spare reticule (the same type 2) which he sent me FOC cannot say fairer than that !!!
Added a PH5E/4 (that I happened to have lying about) and its complete.
Had it out again tonight and shot sub 1" groups so subject to weather its off to the range on Saturday.

All's well that end's well then Alan - glad you're pleased with it.

[gunner]

Hi Alan,

you made a good catch ! Fine rifles.

Regards

Gunner

[neal455]

Hi Alan!
My Enforcer is nearly finished all "correct" parts now found, i will mail you some pictures when i refinish the woodwork.

Neal

[Peter Laidler]

I have a problem with the engineering of the sight mountings of these rifles or indeed, ANY rifle where the front sight base is screwed into a 4mm thickness of breeching up ring. I keep thinking of my engineering physics lessons - you remember them, the total clock and anti-clockwise rotational moments and all that. I wonder just how substantial the front mounting pad grip on the body can possibly be, being retained in place with 4 or 6BA screws threaded into a base of 4mm or so.

The recoil forces and rearwards rotating forces on the telescope must be substantial. (In fact, I could work them out mathematically if I had the weight of the telescope...) I remember that even with the old No32 on the No4 and L42 could and would rotate under torque and shear off the locating spigot on the front rifle pad. In fact we had a repair policy formulated for them.

These are my views. Any comments asto the mechanical sustainability of these front pads.

As for their strength when used in the sniping role, being battered and bruised during a long stalk across Salisbury Plain..............

[Alan de Enfield]

I have a problem with the engineering of the sight mountings of these rifles or indeed, ANY rifle where the front sight base is screwed into a 4mm thickness of breeching up ring. I keep thinking of my engineering physics lessons - you remember them, the total clock and anti-clockwise rotational moments and all that. I wonder just how substantial the front mounting pad grip on the body can possibly be, being retained in place with 4 or 6BA screws threaded into a base of 4mm or so.

The recoil forces and rearwards rotating forces on the telescope must be substantial. (In fact, I could work them out mathematically if I had the weight of the telescope...) I remember that even with the old No32 on the No4 and L42 could and would rotate under torque and shear off the locating spigot on the front rifle pad. In fact we had a repair policy formulated for them.

These are my views. Any comments asto the mechanical sustainability of these front pads.

As for their strength when used in the sniping role, being battered and bruised during a long stalk across Salisbury Plain..............

Whilst I hav'nt fired off thousands of rounds thru' a rifle with the PH mounts used on the Enforcer I have fired in excess of 100 in one day and several 100s over a few weeks.
This was with the Enforcer clone I built.

I cannot argue with the theory / mathematics / metalurgy but in practice they have NOT shifted or screws loosened 'one-iota' (an 'iota' is a non-armourers term meaning an immeasurably small amount)

I'm not stalking across Salisbury Plain which may help.

Brian - they were used at the Iranian Embassy siege in London but I dont know if they were actually fired. If only we knew the serial numbers of those ones, what a story.
(NB - the Metropolitan Police had 45 Enforcers, the highest number held by any force, closely followed by Glasgow with 44)

[jmoore]

You can't imagine how much better I feel right now! I'd surely rather the authority confirm my engineering reservations.

They're still an important bit of Enfield history, just...

[Peter Laidler]

Hey, hope that I haven't upset anyone! Just my comments about the strength of the sight mounts and not the rarity or strength of the weaponry.