Curious if anyone's ever installed a Special Interest Arms scope mount on their #4

[SDWriter]

My #4 is sporting an ATI clamp-on scope mount currently. It's... okay. But this scope mount caught my eye at some point. I like that it's low and far enough forward that the nice vernier sight can be retained. It definitely does require "gunsmithing" unlike most modern non-"T" scope mounts. It's the best I've seen, just judging by this pic.

I've conversed with the owner of this company. He says just two holes are needed, at the forward end; for 6-48 screws. The aft end of the mount uses some kind of clamping mechanism at the charger bridge.

Full disclosure, I have not purchased one yet, but I asked two gunsmiths about doing the job. Neither seemed keen to do it. Said one of them, "Surfaced hardened receivers mean carbide bits and broken taps".

Since SIA is/was known for doing a lot of LE #4 conversions of one type or another, I figured I'd ask Richard, the owner, about the difficulty in working with the receiver. He said he doesn't find the #4's steel to be particularly hard: "I've never seen a "hard" Enfield action. That is a common Mauser issue."

Thoughts?

Special Interest Arms - Enfield Accessories

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.

[tbonesmith]

I’ve fitted them,it’s no drama. The receiver ring is soft and drills very easily.
It’s a very solid mount, as low a possible and the rear locking wedge is very strong and solid. On one that I fitted I had to shim the wedge, but that was easy and just .010 shim stock.
Like you, it’s the best I’ve seen. The length of the pic rail is ideal and the strength and solidity of the unit is exactly what it should be.

[SDWriter]

Thanks for the confirmation Tbone. I'm amazed these mounts have not gotten more notice. Do you remember if it's steel or aluminum? I'd think aluminum due to the bulk.

Richard emailed me the installation instructions earlier in the week, just to answer a few questions I had. Only the text, no illustrations unfortunately. It describes this wedge and mentions that some actions may require shimming, others possibly require careful removing of metal from rear edge of the wedge---with a caution not to alter the wedge's 5° angle if metal removal is required.

[SDWriter]

May as well voice my peeves about the ATI scope mount. BTW, you can see that the rifle's currently sporting a nice, simple little Weaver scope, 1-3x.

Other than having to pull off the nice rear site this mount isn't too bad. It's certainly usable. But it would have been nice if they're made it one 'rung' longer at the front. Mainly though I don't like how the designer didn't centerline the rail with the bore. Rather, he centered it with regard to the rear sight mount, which is offset to the right. So it is a little biased toward the right side. Left-hand shooters probably appreciate this, but I resent having to lean over more for no good reason.

[Bindi2]

that scope will only ever be correct at one range unless it is set to be off the same at all distances.

[tbonesmith]

Armalon in the UK do a very nice no drill mount for no4. Head and shoulders above the ATI. Maybe have a look at that if you want to avoid drilling and tapping a nice rifle.

[Brian Dick]

I have the Fultons steel Picatinny bases available that require no drilling and tapping. They are the best I've found.

[SDWriter]

that scope will only ever be correct at one range unless it is set to be off the same at all distances.

Haven't actually used this one yet. But true. It's a simple, low power deal. Nice glass though. And very light. I put it on there knowing that even a little scope like this a much better than just using the irons. Especially with my eyes. My plan was to zero it at 200 yds and call it good. But if I had a better mount I'd get more ambitious about glass. I would not mind a scope that can be used for hold overs. Something with a few MOA hash marks would hit the spot (so to speak). If I get a better scope for the #4 then this Weaver will probably end up on my lever gun.

I actually don't have a problem with a yes-gunsmithing mount. My rifle's just a '49 Fazakerly. Nothing all that special or remarkable. Very bright bore though. And I have Huber trigger in it that's adjusted to a crisp 3.75 lb break. It's not a bad trigger to use, so long as you don't mind the switch to a single-stage trigger. Personally I prefer two-stage triggers, but this Huber is much better for precision than the original 7.5 lb trigger.

Getting back on track, I have no problem with a couple of small holes being drilled in the receiver, so long as they're done right. The Armalon and Fulton both look interesting though, and would be improvements over my ATI, from what I can tell. Can't run a rear sight with them, but that's probably true of most 'bolt on' mounts. Are they at least centered over the bore?

For the sake of argument, can the Armalon be purchased in the USA? And Brian, what is your web address?

[SDWriter]

And Brian, what is your web address?

Never mind. I found it through your user info.

[Brian Dick]

bdlltd@bellsouth.net