No4(T) Less Scope?

[Simon]

Gents,

I was looking at the pictures of the two rifles in the other thread and they set me thinking about something.

Now conventional wisdom tells us that during the conversion process Holland and Holland would install the pads onto the rifle first and then, and only then, would the final machining of the front spigot and rear V notch be carried out in order to perfectly align both bracket and pads with the bore of the rifle.

My question is this? If the process is carried out as above then why are the pads machined on the scopeless (T) as they're clearly not calibrated to a bracket?

Answers on a Postcard please.

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.

[Lee Enfield]

Gents,

I was looking at the pictures of the two rifles in the other thread and they set me thinking about something.

Now conventional wisdom tells us that during the conversion process Holland and Holland would install the pads onto the rifle first and then, and only then, would the final machining of the front spigot and rear V notch be carried out in order to perfectly align both bracket and pads with the bore of the rifle.

My question is this? If the process is carried out as above then why are the pads machined on the scopeless (T) as they're clearly not calibrated to a bracket?

Answers on a Postcard please.

I think there has been a fundamental misunderstanding about how the guns were "converted" to snipers.

Pretty clearly, the bracket cannot be installed while the pads are machined.

In fact it would be impossible for the bracket to have any role to play within the H&H rifle conversion process.

To over simplify the H&H process:

The pads are attached, and machined in place on the receiver, then a bracket (also pre-machined) is FITTED (to the completely machined base pads) for windage (front) and elevation (rear).

This fitting is designed to put the centre bore of the telescope rings, directly in line with the bore of the barrel.

I would note that Long Branch's procedure was demonstrably different as examination of (non 90L block) snipers demonstrate that the rear pad was installed by using the bracket to locate the rear pad. The rear pad adjusts elevation of the bracket.

This indicates that the Long Branch conversion process revolved around completely pre machined pads being fitted in conjunction with a scope bracket.

Again, this fitting is designed to put the centre bore of the telescope rings, directly in line with the bore of the barrel.

[Peter Laidler]

I have detailed out the WHOLE process before, taken from my notes that I made while I actually SAW the equipment used and SPOKE to the last remaining man who was involved in the process as we looked and chatted. I don't really know what more I can do except suggest that someone who is a tad more computer literate than I am trawls back, locates it and puts it up again. I think that the term used is 'bumps the thread'. Then all will be revealed. So mote it be as they say.

If nobody can find it, then I'll write it all again.................. But there's absolutely no misunderstanding Lee Enfield. Certainly so far as I am concerned there's not

[DanL96a1]

I think the information is contained within the link below

https://www.milsurps.com/showthread.php?t=16948&p=90622