New Replacement Barrels for .303's

[bigduke6]

As a rule of thumb, this is what I'd be doing re new made barrels on used bodies. Examine body in minute detail. If you cannot CHS existing body/barrel on a No2 bolthead using the inspectors calibrated bolt then it indicates a worn body. And a new barrel ain't going to correct or cure a worn body so go no further. Would welcome further criticism - constructive or otherwise - as I'm just thinking on my feet here

Understand the Calibrated bolt Peter, but I was assuming the body was just that ..... a body and no barrel, hence the easier option of a gauge.

[Brian Dick]

I agree with Peter's stated method wholeheartedly. The problem with the new No.4 barrels in the USA is that they are all short chambered, have a higher shoulder and are intended to be finished on a lathe to any existing receiver/body. This eliminates the military, (MoD), method as described by Peter in thread #10 since any receiver/body will be able to get proper indexing and headspace on a #0 bolt head after trimming the shoulder and finish reaming. Personally, at least when it comes to the Lee Enfield, I much prefer the original method of the finished chamber and headspacing using a selection of bolt heads. Worn bodies really weren't addressed with the new civilian method of fitting the barrels leaving the problem intact as addressed here starting with Son.

[Peter Laidler]

If I was starting with a new body as Geoffs thread 11, then I would assume that it is just that, new with intact locking shoulders. But if I was starting with a well used - or ANY other body I'd start by putting a suitable stub-end of an unserviceable barrel in seeing how that CHS'd. If it went well with a 0,1 or 2 then carry on with the new made barrel. But when you're getting to a No3 bolt head, the REME inspectorate knew a thing or two about end-of-life expectancy when they decreed that a No3 bolt head could not be used as a standard at Base workshops.

These are only my views of course and look forwards to a long discussion on the subject..........

[Brian Dick]

Excellent idea Peter.

[Son]

I was having the same thoughts WRT the No1 receiver. Bit easier because the barrel locks up on the inside face and not the front shoulder of the receiver like the No4. Could you have a barrel stub that screwed in to lock on the rear face of the barrel and then go ahead testing the locking lugs with headspace gauges and a bolt body and bolt head set up to the same spec as the master bolt gauge? It could even be new made from one piece to take the screw join out of the equation. As long as the length of the gauge bolt from the rear of the bolt locking lugs to the front face was correct.... perhaps even just start with a new bolt body and add bar stock to the front and machine back to the spec?

[bigduke6]

If I was starting with a new body as Geoffs thread 11, then I would assume that it is just that, new with intact locking shoulders. But if I was starting with a well used - or ANY other body I'd start by putting a suitable stub-end of an unserviceable barrel in seeing how that CHS'd. If it went well with a 0,1 or 2 then carry on with the new made barrel. But when you're getting to a No3 bolt head, the REME inspectorate knew a thing or two about end-of-life expectancy when they decreed that a No3 bolt head could not be used as a standard at Base workshops.

These are only my views of course and look forwards to a long discussion on the subject..........

Thanks Peter, "Arte et Marte" ......was thinking outside the box instead of KISS , plenty of stub ends to use also a few No1's also...... I mention bodies as I,ve accumulated a few over the years, some where OK when barrel removed but have a few that were part or bits of an auction lot........

[henry r]

peter, if you were going to design a new set of tooling to check an action, what would it be?

the design perimeters being: acceptably priced, simple to use, minimal parts and aimed at the small time re-builder with a limited supply of bolt heads etc.

thanks.

[CINDERS]

Peter may know of drawings or someone around the UK that may have squirreled the items here in Aus the only ones I can think of that may have what is required is the Lithgow museum, Brian Labudda or Skennerton himself what sticks out for the gunsmith like Tbone and others is the costs involved in the manufacturing of these spec tools and the amount of barrels fitted. It may be a flood gate will open up and I am sure there will be some owners who will be told their receivers are knackered and its not worth a re barrel also a not advisable to shoot it any more (Duty of Care).

And goodness knows how many people in the backyard world have stuffed a No.3 bolt head on to bring it up to a tolerable CHS to carry on shooting so there's the impasse cost to the gunsmith of getting a gauge made and then possibly having to inform an owner that his weapons receiver is flogged out and he really should not be shooting it.
I mean I would wear it if the receivers flogged and not viable to rebarrel then I guess take a chance on buying another younger FTR'ed No.4 rifle I am no millionaire but I value my head and that ain't no good if a receiver lets go and I wear the bolt it is extreme I know but in my emergency fire and rescue training always have the worst case scenario in your head and go from there. That's just my take on it so a bit gloomy but heck some of these rifles are pushing 100 years with a chequered history of which we at times have scant knowledge of.

[ireload2]

If you have been using the rifle putting another barrel on it will not damage it.
You have already made the decision to trash the old barrel. Few people are going to throw away a receiver just to observe a 70 year old process that was dumbed down so the armorers would not have to use a lathe to rebarrel a rifle. If the case hardening is ok on the locking surfaces just rebarrel it like you would a hunting rifle. If not you can always use the official method which is to scrap your receiver and do without.

So far as I recall, the body gauges were for the factory. When we rebarrelled at Field or Base workshop, then a No3 bolt head was NOT permitted. We also had a rack of new and gauged used but as-new barrels to select from for initial over/underturn. A No3 bolthead was not nor never an option at Field or Base workshop when rebarrelling. Only a No2 bolt head and if there was any doubt, then it was used with the Gauge Inspectors Bolt - a calibrated bolt kept by Robbie Robertson or Mr Saw (the Chinese Out-Inspector) in his oily gauge box. No CHS on a No2 head and the rifle was scrapped. Much more to it than that of course.

As a rule of thumb, this is what I'd be doing re new made barrels on used bodies. Examine body in minute detail. If you cannot CHS existing body/barrel on a No2 bolthead using the inspectors calibrated bolt then it indicates a worn body. And a new barrel ain't going to correct or cure a worn body so go no further. Would welcome further criticism - constructive or otherwise - as I'm just thinking on my feet here

[Peter Laidler]

Mmmmmmmm........! A bit like curing your oily smoky and rattly worn out engine with a new set of rings. You experts certainly know how to make it sound so simple. I never really understood why it took 3 years plus another 2 to train us