More Bad Press For The Enfield

[Surpmil]

Whose tune are we dancing to?

While as a layman I can't argue metallurgy with engineers, and the theories certainly sound convincing, where is the actual evidence in the form of failures?

It's now over 50 years since the last No4s were built (excepting Pakistan) and most of those in circulation are of WWII vintage, some have fired tens of thousands of rounds of 7.62mm since then. Have any blown up? Has anyone lost their sight or fingers from a No4 (or No1) blowing up due to metal fatigue from this theorized prolonged over-stressing?

Again, where is the evidence, or are we to believe that someday a No4 will fracture from protracted metal fatigue?

I'm inclined to think that "someday" would have arrived by now, if it is ever going to.

Of course we all know, or should know, how delighted certain groups would be, if they could condemn as unsafe the most common rifles in the British Commonwealth (yes, it does still exist! )

I really wonder if we should be playing into their hands?

Let them do their own testing and gather the "evidence" I say.

If this "metal fatigue" concept had any validity in this case, I think we can be sure it would have been dragged out by the NRA, instead of the highly tenous, contentious and contradictory stuff they've managed to assemble so far.

There's always email for the "theoretical discussions"

"Loose lips sink ships."