EY Enfield No 1 mk III only slight resistance on field gauge

[Peter Laidler]

You are pretty well on the nail with that Seaspriter. In UK service when the last EY rifles were inspected, repaired and rebuilt for War Reserve, the only mechanical difference between an EY rifle and the standard rifle was a relaxation in some trivial criteria and the fact that the barrel viewing and bore gauge criteria were slightly reduced. CHS remained the same

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.

[Ben Cartwright]

You are pretty well on the nail with that Seaspriter. In UK service when the last EY rifles were inspected, repaired and rebuilt for War Reserve, the only mechanical difference between an EY rifle and the standard rifle was a relaxation in some trivial criteria and the fact that the barrel viewing and bore gauge criteria were slightly reduced. CHS remained the same

Peter
So it won't close on a .074 gauge then it is safe to shoot?

[Son]

Yes, according to the headspace check it it is safe to shoot in that regard.

Back to your point about getting interested in .22 trainers... if you did buy an aftermarket sub caliber kit and installed it on your rifle, all you would have is an ex functional .303 with an aftermarket sub caliber kit. I would suggest it's true value would drop well below the sum of the two items.
As a collector and shooter I can understand the attraction to the trainers, but it is the genuine military .22 models, not bodged up old clunkers. I know of plenty who have gone down the road of spending lots of money (albeit a little at a time) trying to make silk purses out of sow's ears when they could have bought the real thing for less than their total expenditure if they had been patient.
...just my 2c...