Sterling Mk4 L2A3

[browningautorifle]

push the spent case further to the left to friction against the ever shallowing bodyside and then eject fully

So, it's actually just drag that causes the casing to eject? Both for .303 and .308?

[Peter Laidler]

In effect Jim, yes! I added the proviso at the end regarding the view held by the real experts as this point is often disputed, But it is a fact. If you look at a .303 in slow motion, the case is being tipped out to the right slowly due to the friction imparted onto the case rim by the ever shallowing side wall of the body caused by the extractor levering the case over. And if the case hasn't tipped out by the time it gets to the rear of the body and in any case JUST BEFORE IT REACHES the rim of the top round in the magazine, then the ejector screw acts as a sort of 'safety fulcrum' to help it on its way. That's the reason why the ejector screw is just forward of the top round in the mag.

As for the 7.62 L8's and 42's, the same principle applies and the need for the deeper claw. Alas, in this case, the ejector was sometimes necessary, all due to the smaller base rim diameter and the need to lift the cartridges in the mag higher into the breech so that the bolt face would contact it on the feed stroke. There was quite a bit of geometry involved of course and initially not all the early L42's were modified with the circular magazine clearances in the mag well. But you couldn't rely on them so they went back to be corrected and standardised (along with another standardisation aspect at the same time.......)

[browningautorifle]

Perhaps that answers why both the savagely mishandled #5 carbines I had gifted to me recently were missing the ejector screws. These "People" out here are far wiser than most and have simply done away with a redundant, superfluous, mostly useless extra...also it would save weight over all. Well done them...

[can14&]

I am using the 7.62x51 extractors. There used to be lots of them here. 10 years ago you found DCRA guns at
most gun shows,along with parts and sights. I was wondering if there are any incomplete sights out there.
I have the complete mount with out the sight for I think it is a 5a parker

[browningautorifle]

. I was wondering if there are any incomplete sights out there.

You could place a WTB here and see what comes...

[tankhunter]

If you think about this topic. You are dealing with Two COMPLETELY different cartridges!

Rimed, & Rimless. As Peter has explained, you NEED a LONGER extractor claw for RELIABLE extraction & Ejection on the RIMLESS 7.62 x 51mm Carts.
it DOES make a difference! We had it drummed into us at Armourer Training School, abut the strength & pressures involved. With Primary extraction, & also the reproofing of the bolt heads for the higher pressure 7.62mm Rounds.

Peter has covered the reason on Ejection, involving friction Etc. So I wont go over old ground!

There are TWO distinctly DIFFERENT 7.62mm Magazines. The Military Version has the NATO stock number engraved on it. & an ejection 'fillet' plate mounted on the left of the magazine. The Old ejection screw was left in, & in effect. simply a 'Filler' in the receiver to keep debris/ muck out.

The Civilian version has the word STERLING engraved on the base in a requtangle, & NO Ejection plate fitted. NO NATO stock number either. These were originally part of a 'Kit' for converting .303" No:4 Rifles to 7.62mm. The kit consisted of: A 7.62mm Barrel with the same external profile of the .303" Barrel (Including Bayonet lugs) The new magazine, a Breeching washer, a longer claw extractor, a new sight with correct range markings for the new round, & a slightly longer ejection screw for the receiver.

The MILITARY Barrels in 7.62mm for the L42 sniper rifle, converted from the old No:4 (T). Had COMPLETELY different barrel external profile barrels with NO bayonet lugs. & were manufactured VERY differently to the Sterling conversion kit barrels!

[can14&]

I found some longer ejection screws with the 7.62x51 extractors. They were in my bag of extractors. Good to go

[Peter Laidler]

Longer ejection screws are not associated with 7.62 extractors necessarily because by default, the screw can only be so long and it'll interfere with the free running of the bolt. And in any case, the ejector screw plays no part in the ejection process of the 7.62mm based No4 rifles as we know it

Moderators...... Maybe this latter 'rifle' portion of this thread within the SMG forum could be transferred to the Lee Enfield thread as it really belongs there

[Vincent]

That’s interesting information, Peter. The case rims of .45 ACP and 7.62 are very close in size. I have often wondered why the De Lisle needs the spring type ejector. I think you just explained the reason.

Am I right in thinking the De Lisle needs its spring type ejector because the modified bolt head holds the case rim and it is not pushed against the body by the extractor? Or does the No1 rifle differ from the No4 in this?

[tankhunter]

Longer ejection screws are not associated with 7.62 extractors necessarily because by default, the screw can only be so long and it'll interfere with the free running of the bolt. And in any case, the ejector screw plays no part in the ejection process of the 7.62mm based No4 rifles as we know it

Moderators...... Maybe this latter 'rifle' portion of this thread within the SMG forum could be transferred to the Lee Enfield thread as it really belongs there

Pete, You covered it when you stated that Friction is the main criteria involved upon ejecting the case.

Do you recall in Training, that they Reinforced the reason why the screw was left in the receiver for it's main purpose? 'Even though ejection of the spent case was performed by frictioning against the receiver side wall. The screw provided POSITIVE ejection of the case, IF needed'....

That would ONLY work with the magazine out though! As you are aware, it was the fillet plate on the side of the magazine that really would have provided 'Positive ejection' (If needed).....

Even at Bordon some things got over looked!