In reference to Mr. Fox’s email and other letters of complaint regarding my article “Wet weather drill” in the March edition of Sporting Rifle, the main thrust of my article was directed at keeping water out of the action to prevent destroying the rifle’s grouping capacity. Since I happened to have the photograph of one of my No.4's actions to hand, and since No.4 safety is a hot topic, I thought I was being responsible in informing the readership. Given the storm of protest this has unleashed I wonder why I bothered.
Mr. Fox and others seem to think I am down on Lee actions. Not a bit of it. I happen to own 27 of them, all of which I shoot. I love my Lees as much as I love my Triumph Vitesse, but the former will be shot in a drizzle and never a downpour. They are too precious, and so am I.
Of course, Lee actions are not weaker than all other actions, but they are less desirable than the other two commonly encountered in this country. It is the very fact that some have seen hard service in the past and, since we simply do not know what stresses these (or any other old rifle) has been subject to, that (sic) we need to be careful.
The reason a No4 is weaker than a P14 is related to its rear lock-up as opposed to the latter’s front-locking bolt. Total surface area of the locking lugs on the No.4 is about 0.12 sq.in., whereas the P14's is about 0.137 sq.in. The No.4 barrel tenon is .687inx.997in. compared to the P14's .720in.x1.125in.
Have I had any potential safety problems with any of mine? Yes, My SMLE MkV, which was rebarreled by a reputable gunsmith 25 years ago, has despite my caution, got stretched headspace. No, Mr. Fox, it hasn’t blown up yet, but I don’t intend to put it to the test!
Those of us with long memories, going back to the days when the No.4 was the approved cadet rifle, will know that the MOD placed an embargo on cadets shooting No.4s (and those were .303s) which came close (sic) to the NRA banning the use of No.4s at Bisley. The NRA issued the following:
Safety warning:
Enfield Rifle
actions converted to 7.62 calibre from .303 or made as 7.62mm.
Enfield actions of the No.4 and No.5 type were originally designed to fire the British .303 service cartridge of the day.
Many of these actions have been subsequently converted from .303 to 7.62mm. While a few selected actions may be stronger than others, [obvious nonsense: all No4 Mk2s are stronger than MkIs] most are not suitable for use in this calibre with a bullet diameter of .3075 inches.
It is unsafe to fire these rifles with the 155 grain Radway Green cartridge or any other commercial cartridges using the 155 grain or heavier bullet which has a diameter of .3083 inches or larger.
Firing these latter cartridges can ultimately lead to catastrophic failure of the bolt lugs and bolt body that could lead to serious injury. This risk is considerably increased if the chamber or cartridge gets wet or is oiled prior to firing.
The NRA will not accept responsibility for any accident or injury to persons or property caused by anyone using 7.62mm/.308Win ammunition supplied by them in these converted actions.
The actions/rifles involved may fall under the following descriptions, but there may also be other names or descriptions, but there may also be other names or descriptions used: SMLE Conversion, Enfield Conversion, No.4 Conversion, Parker Hale 14, Whitaker Special, Enfield Envoy and Enfield Enforcer.
“You have been warned.”
Please note - RSAF Enfield and Parker Hale are specifically included.
By calling my article ludicrous Mr. Fox merely insults me. I do not want to be laid next to the guy who fills the air with bits off a shattered Lee Enfield bolt. Equally, I do not want to see anyone hurt or indeed Lee Enfields or civilian shooters banned from MOD ranges.
Regards,
Chris White.
PM
