No. 4 Rifle; Zeroing Instructions Data Inconsistency?

[Rick]

All the bets are off using the MKVII data simply because of A) Powder burn rates and more importantly the higher BC projectiles I've faffed around with this no end using MKVII data and trying to emulate the trajectory mid flight of SMK's (Velocity Rates V's Trajectory)to get the hit at the desired range.

But I started this topic focused on military pams containing information on zeroing with military ball ammunition, whether WWII era or through the 2000's with the Canadian Rangers using Canadian .303 British military ball up until their Lee Enfields were replaced with a new rifle a few years ago.

I think you're straying afield into the realm of addressing any reloaders out there hoping they can somehow or other find a magical reload recipe of components that replicate the Mk VII/MkVIIz ballistics. Like many here, I've also already been there done that many years ago, hoping I would discover something that others who had also tried had somehow or other missed. Like them, I also failed to find a replication, and then just ran with the best of what I developed while doing so - so the effort wasn't futile.

The question still is why the 1945 Canadian pam from WWII has a 2.5 MOA difference in zeroing instructions from what British and Australian pams from both that time period and afterwards provide for zeroing instructions?

Same rifles, same conditions for zeroing at 300 yards with 300 yard aperture with bayonet affixed. And exact same military ball ammunition. But two very different zeroing instructions.

NOT reloads - a completely separate issue (and I doubt anyone reloading for matches does load development with a bayonet affixed either).

Development of reloads that a competitor is happy to take to a match and compete with is always a great topic on its own. Actually, for me at least, ANY reloading topic for the .303 British is interesting.

So I'm still searching for Canadian pams that may be out there from the interval between that 1945 pam and the 1991 and 2002 pams (which, curiously, do not include zeroing instructions).

That 1945 Canadian military pam, BTW, was written by a very successful international competitor who would presumably have spotted any errors in zeroing data in the official pam he authored for the Canadian military. From the forward to that pam:

The Johnson Method of Coaching was developed by Lt. Col. Stephen Johnson over a period of 20 years' experience in the art of shooting. During that time, Lt. Col. Johnson has earned an enviable reputation as one of Canada's outstanding rifle shots, winning several championships and being five times a member of Canada's Bisley team.

During the war he put his ideas into practice in the training of the Canadian Army with excellent results, and his methods have been put together in this handbook for the guidance of future instructors in musketry.

[Strangely Brown]

I think you're straying afield into the realm of addressing any reloaders out there hoping they can somehow or other find a magical reload recipe of components that replicate the Mk VII/MkVIIz ballistics. Like many here, I've also already been there done that many years ago, hoping I would discover something that others who had also tried had somehow or other missed. Like them, I also failed to find a replication, and then just ran with the best of what I developed while doing so - so the effort wasn't futile.

41.8grs N140 under a 174gr SMK or PPU is supposed to replicate the MkVII round.

On a personal note I use 41.5gr N140 and find it works out to 900 yards with target sights...barrels may vary!

[Rick]

Some members here have jumped on that Greek HXP I found currently being offered for sale on the Web:

https://www.milsurps.com/showthread.php?t=81181

If any of them are curious enough to see if that Greek HXP Mk VIIz ball sights in correctly for a 300 yard zero when using the 1945 Canadian military pam's instructions, all they have to do is affix a bayonet and give it a try.

(How could anyone NOT have a proper bayonet for their No. 4 rifle? How else could you zero!)

I bought a bayonet when I bought those case lots of 1950 Long Branch No. 4 rifles originally 30+ years ago for two reasons:

1. Curiosity to see whether the rifle grouped better or worse with the bayonet attached.
2. Curiosity at how much the POA=POI at 300 yards differed after removing the bayonet after zeroing with Mk VII ball

So I already had the bayonet when I tried zeroing with military ball again, using the instructions in the 1945 pam.

The results, on paper, across the range after zeroing following those instructions, showed me the zeroing instructions in the 1945 Canadian pam do not match their zeroing instructions. Not even close.

But... I could still be missing something!

[Alan de Enfield]

(How could anyone NOT have a proper bayonet for their No. 4 rifle? How else could you zero!)

Reading thru the "Techincal Training School REME" Document "Zeroing of Rifles" I note that the use of the bayonet for zeroing is limited the the No4 rifle with the Mk2 rear sight.

No mention of bayonet use for the other Mks of rear sight.