Quote Originally Posted by ToineS View Post
Thanks for that!
Yes, it will not be exactly the same, but a 9” difference at 100 yards seems excessive?

According to the calculations, I would need a -0.060 sight blade!
I don’t think these are available, are they?

No a -0.060 were not available.

The poor quality manufacture of Fazakerley rifles meant that in some batches the sighting in / zeroing was almost impossible and they applied for a derogation to allow Sten sights to be used (in that case the POI was 'high'), a short extract from a very long 'training lecture' on No4 Front sights, given by Peter Laidlericon (some years ago)

But back to No4 rifles and the BLOCK band, foresight. Are you in for the long haul? Soon after the large late 40’s FTR programmes, it was established at Fazakerley that a large percentage of fully refurbished rifles were impossible to zero due to them shooting too high. Fazakerley sought to obtain a relaxation in order to use the +.090” and +.105” STEN gun foresight blades but already there were problems relating to the final inspection standards that I won’t go into. But the same problems were apparent outside the factories and Base Workshops, in service too so while the factories, FTR programme contractors and the large REME Base workshops were NOT permitted to use the higher Sten foresight blades, a relaxation was sought that they could be used at unit level (both high sizes) and Field workshop level (just the .090 size). But this was palliative and not a cure by any means. The answer was that where a rifle was perfect in every other way, then a Mk2 BLOCK Band foresight was available.

Have a look at your 'Block Band Foresight' and see if it is a Mk2. (A Mk2 will be marked 1H or 2H) If it is that gives an increase in POI of two (2) front sight blades, if it is a Mk2 and you replace it with a Mk1 that effectively reduces your POI by two (2) sight blades so you can easily achieve the required 9" drop using the available sight blades.
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.