L39 & L42 Barrels - An open offer to forum members

[Longshaor]

After checking to make sure this is OK, I have an offer to make to the board.

By profession I'm a draughtsman. I've been trying to build up an L42 clone myself for quite a while, and I have a vested interest in the availability of high quality barrel drawings for the L42 that any one of us can send off to our barrel maker of choice, the more so for those of us who live here in the States as importing these barrels has been illegal since 2005. So here’s my offer:

I have a barrel drawing started based on the few hard numbers I have been able to secure from members of this board and other L42 owners. I will provide blank versions of this drawing to anyone who would be willing to visit Fultons and manually copy the (probably copious) notes on their original barrel drawing and return it to me. After receiving the marked up drawing I will transcribe the notes into AutoCAD and post the completed drawing on the forum for the use of the membership in both PDF and DWG formats.

Grant580 has graciously agreed to vouch for my drafting ability and anyone with questions in that vein should contact him.

Cheers!

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.

[XL39E1]

Have you not tried asked the National Firearms Centre in Leeds, UK, for a copy of the Drawing? The Library section should be able to help!

[Longshaor]

I wasn't aware of them, actually (the down side to doing this from the wrong side of the pond). Thanks for the lead!

[Peter Laidler]

You could ask, but don't hold your breath. The drawings remain the property of BAe and the NFC at Leeds are now a large money making concern following several years of being a money losing concern. I don't want to put you off but just make sure you have deep pockets.

Bearing in mind that I'm not a Draughtsman but just a mechanical engineer who's had to read many, then looking at this project from the cheap and the simple engineering side, the base for this is a simple tube, slightly tapered from one end to the other and should be simple to put into drawn form. The knocks form/breech end/extractor way is identical to the No4 and likewise, should be a simple back engineering/drawing job to calculate and index against the breeching up thread. The rifling is a known - depending upon which form you specify.

The only real info required is the depth of the shoulder in the chamber from which the CHS is measured in relation to the breech end in relation to the breeching up surface. That should be easy to calculate mathematically knowing a) where the breeching up surface is - at the end of the knocks form and b) that the max CHS measurement is 1.635 plus .001" (that way you get a 0 bolthead.....). The end of the CHS gauge to the breeching up surface deduct the 1.635 and that's the depth of the shoulder!

Yep............... I think you could do without the original drawings because you aren't going to replicate the hammer forged finish in any case.

Those are just my thoughts while idling my time stuck in a traffic jam in Devizes

[Longshaor]

The drawings are BAe property??? Well, that explains a lot. I never got a clear answer, but was led to believe that it was Nottingham SAF who held the copyrights so, by extension, H&K.

Really, what I'm looking to find on the original drawings are the machining tolerances, as well as some of the minor details like the muzzle crowning. I've got measured dimensions on both ends of the taper, as well as at the diameter of the parallel section the frontsight block is fitted on, so let me ask, your view is that should be enough?

[newcastle]

SO to clarify - the long term goal here is to have a manufacturer of these barrels in the USA? that would be bloody great. I'm constantly amazed by what clever folks we have around here. I'd be in for a spare for when my barrel gives up the ghost in about another 5000 rounds

---------- Post added at 03:32 PM ---------- Previous post was at 03:25 PM ----------

To clarify - I would buy one NOW to keep for when my barrel gives up, and I'd probably buy another for a project for fun.

[Longshaor]

Hi newcastle,

Yep, since none of us here Stateside can import the barrels, that's the plan.

Cheers!

[Surpmil]

I know we've talked about this Longshaor, but for the interest of others, what would make such a barrel illegal to import to the USA?

[Alan de Enfield]

I know we've talked about this Longshaor, but for the interest of others, what would make such a barrel illegal to import to the USA?

It maybe because now that 7.62 is classified as a 'military calibre' and the UN have 'banned' sales / exports of military calibres except to Government Agencies.

Here is a copy of a post I made a couple of years ago :

"Target Shooter Magazine – December 2009

Target Shooter December

5.56 and 7.62mm ‘Outlawed’
A perennial question is about the difference if any between 7.62X51mm and .308 Winchester (or 5.45X45mm and .223 Remington). And while there are small differences primarily in the chamber and barrel throat forms, they are so nearly indistinguishable that the UK national police firearms licensing computer uses both terminologies together either side of an oblique to avoid problems if an FAC variation is for one, but the firearm is marked and proof-tested for the other. This applies particularly to British and Commonwealth TR (‘Target Rifle’) rifles that were classed as 7.62mm until recently, although current builds or recently rebarrelled examples now bear the .308 Winchester descriptions.

None of this would be of any great import if it weren’t for the United Nations having started a crusade against international movements of military small arms and ammunition except on a government-to-government basis. The problem is that 5.56 and 7.62mm are classified as ‘military’ period, no matter that it’s a single-shot target rifle and your pride and joy. This is a particular problem for anybody traveling across international boundaries as an early result has been airlines, through their international regulator IATA, accepting these rules and refusing to carry anything so marked or documented, even if on a dual basis as in ‘7.62mm / .308 Winchester’. The next worry is that as countries sign up to the various UN accords on this issue, we’ll suddenly discover that somebody has done this for the UK and unwittingly made ownership of every .308 Win rifle in the country illegal as our FACs invariable use the dual title in listing the weapons held. In any event ICFRA, the international target shooting body which regulates full bore rifle including our ‘Target Rifle’ and F-Class, has deleted all reference to the metric versions of the two cartridges in its rules and documentation, and I imagine that applies to our NRA too.

Firearms law researcher and writer Colin Greenwood has been investigating this UN process and his findings must be deeply unsettling for all sporting and recreational firearms users. The sub-committees tasked with producing reports and recommendations that are often accepted by the UN with little or no debate are secretive, refusing to disclose their membership or the remits they are working to. They will not divulge the basis of ‘facts’ contained in their reports, how research was carried out and where, who
was interviewed and so on. One fact that is clear are that they will NOT make any distinction between civilian sporting arms, (even shotguns), and military weapons, and that they believe that arms ownership is a bad thing per se. Greenwood is convinced that this is a movement towards international civilian arms control via the back door under the cloak of keeping AKs and RPGs out of the hands of African child soldiers or guerrillas.

Things may get ‘worse’ too in that the proposed conventions seek to ban the manufacture of arms and ammunition of ANY type and ANY calibre, except by government licensed concerns which must be closely regulated. Quite right too you might think, but remember that your gunsmith is an ‘arms constructor’, and you are an ‘ammunition' manufacturer’ if you hand load. Until now, the US government has been a bastion against this sort of undemocratic backdoor control by routinely telling the UN to naff off! Not so now under Barak Obama, the State Department allegedly signaling a change of policy here, its first move being to announce that export licenses will not be issued for any barrel chambered for 5.56 or 7.62 NATO destined for a commercial end-user".

Brian Dick may care to comment - he did post some time ago about the 'new' restrictions and paperwork involved in exporting an L42 even tho' it was C&R.

[Longshaor]

Alan,

Thanks for posting this and clarifying the issues involved with shipping such items internationally.

As far as how much the UN regs will affect the US internally, frankly, the UN's repuation is little better than that of a 'scarlet woman', and is close to universally dispised here inthe States. Any politician seen as being their stooge, except for certain fringe left-wing areas of the country, can pretty much kiss their political career good-bye.