-
Advisory Panel

Originally Posted by
Son
....The vast majority of the rifles were converted from WW1 manufactured rifles. The reason was that they "flexed better due to superior metalurgy". Also the machining tolerences in the actions were tighter originally making them easier to work into an individually fitted and finished unit for accuracy.....
This is rather surprising to say the least. Were Lithgow
actions built in peacetime not in all respects superior to anything made during WWI? That defies logic.
Last edited by Surpmil; 09-04-2015 at 09:12 PM.
“There are invisible rulers who control the destinies of millions. It is not generally realized to what extent the words and actions of our most influential public men are dictated by shrewd persons operating behind the scenes.”
Edward Bernays, 1928
Much changes, much remains the same. 
-
-
09-04-2015 12:22 AM
# ADS
Friends and Sponsors
-
Contributing Member

Originally Posted by
Surpmil
This is rather surprising to say the least. Were
Lithgow
actions built in peacetime not in all respect superior to anything made during WWI? That defies logic.
The early actions were very well made, basically lovingly made.........in order to show their Brit. masters that they were able to build a good firearm.
In the 1915 campaigns in the desert, the tight tolerences of these rifles was causing a few problems with sticky bolts due to ingress of sand(and later mud in the european battlefields) so the body channel was relieved slightly and the chamber modified to relieve the problems.
This became standard from late 1916, early '17, hence most of the HT's being '15 and '16 actions.
Post war rifles were finished very well, rifles selected for rifle club use post 1934(H pattern) were very tight chambered and incredibly accurate as expected with a heavy barrel and tighter tolerances.
-
The Following 5 Members Say Thank You to muffett.2008 For This Useful Post:
-
-
Legacy Member
muffett, were all of the Lithgow
H barrels made to this tighter chamber spec or was it only the inter-war H barrels?
edit, do you know if the tolerance loosening in late '16 applied to the other manufactures?
thanks.
Last edited by henry r; 09-04-2015 at 10:16 PM.
-
-
Contributing Member
All H barrels were to the tighter specs, can't comment on the other manufacturers, though their chambers were already a bit loose........BSA were the pick of them, but had to conform to the requirements dictated to them, whereas India and Australia
had adjusted their manufacturing process to better suit the machinery they had.
-
Thank You to muffett.2008 For This Useful Post:
-
Legacy Member
given that, would you go for a new old stock Lithgow
H barrel or a new Lothar Walther H profile barrel for a bitsa build? with the aim of usable accuracy rather than 100% perfect matching numbers collectible.
not that i'm working on a build, just gathering info incase the right rifle doesn't come along.
-
-
Advisory Panel

Originally Posted by
muffett.2008
All H barrels were to the tighter specs, can't comment on the other manufacturers, though their chambers were already a bit loose........BSA were the pick of them, but had to conform to the requirements dictated to them, whereas India and Australia had adjusted their manufacturing process to better suit the machinery they had.
And wasn't the Australian
SMLE built on mostly US machinery with a reduced amount of hand work compared to the UK
production?
“There are invisible rulers who control the destinies of millions. It is not generally realized to what extent the words and actions of our most influential public men are dictated by shrewd persons operating behind the scenes.”
Edward Bernays, 1928
Much changes, much remains the same. 
-
-
-
Thank You to Son For This Useful Post: