Accuracy Specification for the Lee Enfield

[303Guy]

I read about the poor performance of the MLE's against the Boers with their 7x57 Mausers and that the accuracy specification for the MLE was rather loose.

What is the truth?

I know the Boers were in their element and that their environment developed their eyesight and their shooting skills, not to mention their guerilla warfare skills and tactics.

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.

[5thBatt]

Only a small percentage of new production arms were tested for accuracy in those days plus the introduction of Enfield rifling left troops with rifles that were woefully inaccurate due to the lack of sighting-in.

[Maxwell Smart]

And also were not the MLM's and MLE's basically regarded as single loaders in the doctrine of the time, with the magazine kept in reserve?

A rifle might not need to be a tack-driver if its method of employment is by firing of controlled volleys against a massed target of standing, charging attackers. Different story when your enemy sensibly takes cover behind trees and rocks to shoot back at you with his own (charger-loading) rifle.

[Bruce_in_Oz]

Don't have the specs on the early L-E rifles to hand, but I do have the SMLE stuff.

In the 1938 Acceptance Specs, para 42 says:

....Every rifle will be fired at a paper target.......at a range of 100 FEET, (not yards), from a mechanical rest.


Blah, blah, adjustment, blah etc.

Then five rounds will be fired from the magazine; if the rifle fails to put four shots out of the five into a rectangle 1 inch broad and 1 1/2 inch high, or if the blade, foresight requires to be set more than .03 inch to one side of its normal position, the rifle will be returned to the manufacturer.

(Mk Vll ball is the standard in 1938).

Back in July 1903, with Mk6 ammo, the spec reads:

Every rifle will be fired ......at a range of 100 feet, from a mechanical rest. on the paper target will be a rectangle 1 1/2 inches broad and 2 inches high, bottom of rectangle to be 1 inch immediately above the point aimed at.

Some adjustments later..................

.......................If the rifle fails to put four shots out of the five into the rectangle, or if the foresight requires to be set more than .03 inch to one side of its normal position, the rifle will be returned to the manufacturer.

Basically we are looking at group requirement of 3MOA wide and 4.5MOA high.

Good enough for government work.

Interestingly, both specs call for the ammo used in testing to be itself specially selected for a good "figure of merit" (small groups, no fliers).

A marginal rifle with sub-standard (or NON-standard) ammo is likely to be a real dog.

[Bindi2]

The experience with the Boers and 7mm brought on the P13 in .276. The 7mm is still kicking *ss and i love my 303s and 308s. Might have to put a 7mm together for the range only when i get tired of getting my *ss kicked by a certain shooter wont happen for awhile yet. Wish i could source .276 brass. I have a No1 Mk3 chambered for .276 dont know if it is Pederson or Enfield.

[bigduke6]

The experience with the Boers and 7mm brought on the P13 in .276. The 7mm is still kicking *ss and i love my 303s and 308s. Might have to put a 7mm together for the range only when i get tired of getting my *ss kicked by a certain shooter wont happen for awhile yet. Wish i could source .276 brass. I have a No1 Mk3 chambered for .276 dont know if it is Pederson or Enfield.

see link below an interesting thread regarding a P13 .276


Building a P-13 Enfield in .276 Enfield

[Ridolpho]

From my reading it seems the problem with the MLE was zeroing not "accuracy". Rifles were sent out that would print a foot off target and no easy way to remedy- no windage adjustment on rear sight like the one added to CLLE 1* later. Also, it seems the British target fraternity were upset about the replacement of the MLE by the SMLE which suggests they found the MLE a useful target rifle? On the other hand, in the middle of the Pegler book on WW1 sniping and he makes the statement that all G98's were expected to shoot MOA and rifles that exceeded this standard!!! were selected as sniper rifles. There are some definite innacuracies regarding the firearms in this book so I don't know how accurate that MOA comment is.

Ridolpho

[5thBatt]

From my reading it seems the problem with the MLE was zeroing not "accuracy". Rifles were sent out that would print a foot off target and no easy way to remedy- no windage adjustment on rear sight like the one added to CLLE 1*
Ridolpho

Just what i was trying to say but being a complete plonker i used wrong wording.

[Bruce_in_Oz]

A No1. chambered for 276?

Had my sticky paws on one of those back in the early eighties; had to hand it back to the owner.

The .276 in question was .276 Pederson. The rifle was a near-mint BSA. The magazine was a bog-standard .303 type; so, single-shot only.

Not sure why this rifle was built in this calibre; possible 2nd line use, balllistic testing? Remember that the Pederson rifle was a hot contender in the late 1920s. The cartridge was considered sufficiently worthwhile that the prototype Garands were built around it. Note that the Pederson used a double-stack, 10 round en-bloc clip that preceded the Garand. Vickers tooled up to make a test batch, at least one of which made it to Australia.

That BSA SMLE was definitely 276 Pederson; my one example of that cartridge neatly dropped into the chamber of the rifle. The .276 "Enfield" is a somewhat bigger critter, almost as big as the 8 x 68 sporting cartridge.

See: Google Image Result for http://photos.imageevent.com/badgerdog/cgnmilsurpknowledgebase/britishpedersensemiauto/cartridges.jpg
for a comparison pic.

[Peter Laidler]

I often wonder when I read all these stories about the Boers being crackshots at 5 miles etc etc. I wonder if they are the same stories that our fathers used to read about the hill tribes in Pakistan. And more recently about the shooting abilities of the Afghanistan hill tribes who could bring down a Soviet helicopter at 5 miles with a Lee Enfield. I don't know about them being crack shots, but their kit and shooting is so poor that they are best known as crap shots! Squirt and pray merchants.........

As for some/most of the ammo that is siezed...........