No4 mk2 target rifle

[ssj]

303 no 4 mk 2 | Trade Me

I rather like collecting these things.

I assume the serial number is something Fulton's did? as its not a service number?

Picture 7 of 12 shows a crack that concerns me?

To fix that (or stop it becoming worse) drill some 4mm / 5/32in holes down vertically and tap in some dowels?

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.

[Seaspriter]

Looks like a gem with a very repairable crack. Your approach will work, but the structural integrity may be damaged. In wooden boat repair we might incise a 1"x1" fiberglass and epoxy patch on the receiver side. It's not what in included in the armour's spec, but it might be the best means of long-term structural preservation.

If you are interested, a version of this gun (MKI) with a PH-4 sight sold on Gunbroker a couple of weeks ago: WWII BRITISH NO. 4 MK 1 Enfield Rifle : Curios & Relics at GunBroker.com

[303tom]

May need to take a look at the recoil lugs, may need repaired !............

[ssj]

Thanks, I guess it depends on what I find when I open it up. I think that crack will be more than a surface thing as it passes through the dowel hole. I also suspect it could need other work inside on yes the draws and/or main screw.

I have a PH and an AJP so a Fulton would complete a 3 way collection on the last of the no4 mk2s converted to target rifles.

Interesting that dowel, neither of my guns which are earlier (I think) have this, yet this later Fulton does, but an earlier Fulton a friend has doesnt. Earlier PH's than my one do ie I cant determine if its a date related "fashion" or a good reason. Does anyone know if there is a method/reason to determine if it was needed or not? Could it be to do with a particular class of shooting?

[Seaspriter]

Interesting that dowel, neither of my guns which are earlier (I think) have this, yet this later Fulton does, but an earlier Fulton a friend has doesnt. Earlier PH's than my one do ie I cant determine if its a date related "fashion" or a good reason. Does anyone know if there is a method/reason to determine if it was needed or not?

This is just a guess: Instead of simply gluing a crack, I've seen woodworkers insert a dowel at the end of a crack to stop a crack from spreading any further. This might be the reason for its location on this particular gun. As 303t says, check for recoil sloppiness in the drawers.

[Peter Laidler]

If it was me, with my old Armourers hat on, I'd look for the reason WHY it cracked/split in the first place. Eliminate that first (and it might mean getting rid of the shoddy transverse dowel.....). Open up the crack and squeeze aero spec wood glue into it and then cramp closed. Then dowel downwards with two good fit,hard oak dowels. Then make good.

After all, the only loading that a patch in that position is going to experience is a side swipe from the outside. I would suspect that the drawers patch and crap looking transverse, oversize dowel caused the crack in the first place. Just my 2c's worth and pretty much what SSJ said in the start.....

[ssj]

The dowel isnt for the crack, or at least it isnt normally. Normally when I have seen the dowel inserted on target rifles in this position its an "advanced" accurising "trick" for No4s. There will or should be 1 per side in that position and the ends will be touching the receiver both sides. I assume its dampening resonance and improving accuracy. Cracks like that suggest to me something is badly wrong inside causing excessive load / movement where it isnt normally, so yes Draws or bob the bodger.

Attachment 61000

[Peter Laidler]

Ah....... Not being a target shooting man* I just accepted that the dowels were the dowels used to strengthen the drawers patch.

HOWEVER, armed with nothing more than a skeletonised No4 (an ex T rifle incidentally.....) and an old cut-away demonstration fore-end scaled up to pinpoint the exact position of the offending dowel as shown above, it's difficult to my enquiring engineers mind as to HOW the dowel could be an advanced accurising trick - or anything except in the fertile imagination of P-H. Simply because in that position, the dowel is below the level of the bodyside so would run straight through and......., er......... lock the sear!

Maybe some target shooters wanted a sear lock! Or am I missing something with my scaled-up sketch, old fore-end or SKN action? On the other hand, it does align exactly with a drawers patch!

*believing that if a standard correct fore-end fitting/setting was proven in trials to be the best configuration for accuracy AND for the No4T sniper rifle, then it was good enough for me. But maybe that's just me.........

[ssj]

Ah.......

8><----

*believing that if a standard correct fore-end fitting/setting was proven in trials to be the best configuration for accuracy AND for the No4T sniper rifle, then it was good enough for me. But maybe that's just me.........

I have taken your comments to heart by the way. On the Parker Hale gun target gun I got my hands on a no4 mk2 unfitted lower fore end and I have set it up as as-issued. So now I will try the PHale setup v the as issued setup and see how they do, the only difference is the fore end though it maybe a winter job before I get time.

[Ridolpho]

Roger Wadham (RJW) shows various locations of screws and dowels used to "anchor the receiver" and specifically suggests PH placed dowels against the sides of the sear lugs. That would place them close to the dowels on this rifle but looking at a spare forend I suspect Peter L. is correct and that they are part of a draws repair.

Ridolpho