AIA #4 clone proofing

[tiriaq]

Perhaps the "Brisbane" refers to the location of the company.

[Dimitri]

Perhaps the "Brisbane" refers to the location of the company.

I would agree but all 3 countries (Australia, Canada and the United States) require the country or place of manufacture to be marked on the firearm for many years, just as the majority of Europe also requires the same. Hence why I am going to say if AIA would claim what you are now, its just more misdirection and misleading the purchaser of where the rifle (and in specific the receiver) was made.

Dimitri

[ireload2]

I think some of the marking statements in this thread do not represent the facts in the US. It is common practice to sub-contract both barrels and stocks out to other companies. In the case of many US manufactured rifles the markings are the location of the company and are placed on the barrel even though the barrel may have been manufactured elsewhere.
The well known Browning BPCR rifles are marked with the company's name and location on the barrel plus the statement "Made in Japan". The subcontractor and city in Japan is not marked on the rifles. If any manufacturing of the rifle is performed by the Browning Company I am not aware of it. It is a known fact the barrel blanks for these rifles are made in the US. I suspect the stock wood is imported by Japan too.
In the case of CZ USA rifles the company name and US city location is marked on the receiver but the entire rifle is made in the Czech Republic and the city is not mentioned.

[Dimitri]

In the case of CZ USA rifles the company name and US city location is marked on the receiver but the entire rifle is made in the Czech Republic and the city is not mentioned.

Browning's guns are marked "Made in Japan" to satisfy the origin marking requirement, the US address is the importers information, a separate American law and requirement for import marking of firearms.

As for CZ USA. Er no, they are handled as new manufactured parts kit guns and are considered made (better word assembled) inside of the USA. Same reason they also comply with the 5 US Made part rule that any part kit gun needs to comply with.

Dimitri

[ireload2]

>>>As for CZ USA. Er no, they are handled as new manufactured parts kit guns and are considered made (better word assembled) inside of the USA. Same reason they also comply with the 5 US Made part rule that any part kit gun needs to comply with.<<<
I do not think they are kit guns.
They say made in Czech Republic.
Nowhere do they said made in USA.

[Dimitri]

That is because technically they are not made in the USA. Instead they are only assembled in the USA as part kit guns with 5 "domestically" made parts, to meet the requirements for part kit guns.

To comply with 18 U.S.C. § 922(r) the following parts are used by CZ USA, the same way Americans need to do it for a parts kit gun, except this way its the factory doing it not the end-user. Magazine follower, Magazine base, Trigger, Sear, and Disconnector.

With the maximum of 10 foreign parts per 18 U.S.C. § 922(r): Receiver, Barrel, Barrel extension, Bolt, Bolt carrier, Gas piston, Buttstock, Pistol grip, Handguard and finally the Magazine body.

Dimitri

[ireload2]

That is because technically they are not made in the USA. Instead they are only assembled in the USA as part kit guns with 5 "domestically" made parts, to meet the requirements for part kit guns.

To comply with 18 U.S.C. § 922(r) the following parts are used by CZ USA, the same way Americans need to do it for a parts kit gun, except this way its the factory doing it not the end-user. Magazine follower, Magazine base, Trigger, Sear, and Disconnector.

With the maximum of 10 foreign parts per 18 U.S.C. § 922(r): Receiver, Barrel, Barrel extension, Bolt, Bolt carrier, Gas piston, Buttstock, Pistol grip, Handguard and finally the Magazine body.

Dimitri

Do you have real knowledge of this or are you just regurgitating something you have read?
Are you telling me that CZ has someone assembling double barrel shotguns in the US?
The CZ documentation I am looking at says it was targeted in Europe north North America.

[Son]

Personal opinion- I take offence to these obominations being called either Lee Enfields or Australian as they are neither!

The only reason the receiver design was "improved" was to ensure it was less complicated to make, therefore could be produced by less skilled and less costly labour in a country where wages, conditions and quite likely quality control are minimum.
Untill someone can produce an address and pictures of a facility here in Aus that actually manufactures any parts for these rifles, I would suggest that the "manufacturers" statement that went something like components are made in several asian countries for assembly in Australia (currently trying to find the quote again) means they are contracted out to the lowest bidding supplier (which will not be in a developed nation, let alone here!)

[villiers]

Enfields were always made all over the place. Even in Australia!

[ireload2]

The only changes I have made were to protect the privacy of the sender and myself. Other than that the email is posted exactly as I received it.

DEAR XXXX,
THANKS FOR YOUR ENQUIRY. FIRST, YOU REFER TO THE NO4 MK10. THIS WAS THE NOMENCLATURE GIVEN THE INTIAL 50 TOOLROOM PROTOTYPES MADE IN 2001 BY AIA. THIS WAS CHANGED TO M10 WHEN WE ACTUALLY COMMENCED COMMERCIAL MANUFACTURE. EXCEPT FOR OUR "CLONE" OF THE NO4 WHICH IS NAMED THE NO4 MK4. AS THE PROTOTYPES WERE ALL IN 7.62 X 39 M43, I ASSUME THAT IT IS THE NO4 MK4 AND OTHER 7.62 NATO MODELS THAT ARE THE SUBJECT OF YOUR ENQUIRY. TAKE A LOOK AT OUR WEBSITE australianinternationalarms.com.au FOR A LOOK AT THE FULL RANGE OF OUR STANDARD AND LIMITED PRODUCTION MODELS. FOR YOUR INFORMATION, THE LETTER "A" OR "B" IN THE MODEL TYPES AND SERIAL NUMBERS DESIGNATES CALIBRE: E.G. M10-A1 IS IN 7.62 X 39 M43 CALIBRE, M10-B2 IS IN 7.62 X 51 M80 NATO CALIBRE. THE EXCEPTIONS TO THIS ARE THE NO4 MK4 MODEL AND IT'S DERIVATIVES (NO4 MK4 T AND NO4 MK4 SL), OUR FORTHCOMING LIMITED EDITIONS (JOHN PARIS LEE COMMEMORATIVE, L42, J5550 CANADIAN LIGHT RIFLE ARE THE FIRST THREE OF THE FOUR LIMITED EDITIONS), AND VARIOUS PROTOTYPES (L42 MK2, NO4 MK5). ALL OF THESE EXCEPTIONS ARE ALSO IN 7.62 X 51 M80 NATO CALIBRE.

NOW TO YOUR QUESTION: PROOFING PROOCEDURE FOR ALL OUR M10B PRODUCTS IS AS FOLLOWS:

(A) ONE 1.50 TIMES STANDARD PRESSURE "PURPLE PILL" IN 7.62 X 51 NATO TO PROOF THE BARREL IN A SPECIAL BARREL PROOF FIXTURE. THERE ARE DUAL REASONS FOR THIS BARREL PROOF: FIRST, TO PROOF THE BARREL; SECOND, TO CHECK THE INTEGRITY OF OUR HARD-CHROMING OF THE CHAMBER AND BORE. EVERY BARREL IS MAGNAFLUXED AND CRACK-TESTED AFTER THIS PROOF.

(B) TWO 1.33 TIMES STANDARD PRESSURE "BLUE PILLS" IN 7.62 X 51 NATO TO PROOF AN ASSEMBLED ACTION AND BOLT. THE FIRST OF THESE IS TO FINAL SETBACK THE BOLT LUGS INTO THEIR LOCKING RECESSES AND THE SECOND IS THE ACTUAL PROOF ROUND. THIS PROCEDURE FOLLOWS THAT OF THE ORIGINAL NO1 AND NO4 AND I AM SURE EXCEEDS THAT OF NEARLY ALL CONTEMPORARY COMMERCIAL MANUFACTURERS. AFTER PASSING POST-PROOF INSPECTION ETC., A P-IN-A-CIRCLE IS MARKED ON THE RHS OF THE FRONT OF THE RECEIVER.

(C) FOLLOWING THE ABOVE, EVERY ASSEMBLY IS THEN SHOT FOR FUNCTION AND ACCURACY FROM A SPECIAL FIXTURE USING A MINIMUM OF TEN 7.62 X 51 M80 NATO BALL ROUNDS. WE DO NOT BELIEVE IN THREE-ROUND GROUPS AS A REAL MEASURE OF ASSEMBLY ACCURACY --- ALL A THREE-ROUND GROUP CAN TELL YOU IS THAT YOU HAVE A GOOD BARREL, NOT NECESSARILLY A GOOD GUN!

NOW, AS YOU ARE I SURE YOU ARE AWARE, THERE IS A DIFFERENCE BETWEEN .308 WINCHESTER AND 7.62 X 51 M80 NATO. THE CASE FOR M80 IS MADE WITH GREATER THICKNESS AT THE BASE AMONG OTHER SLIGHT DIFFERENCES SO IT IS STRONGER. HENCE, LESS PROPELLANT VOLUME. HENCE, SLIGHTLY LESS PEAK PRESSURE THAN .308 WIN. IF MEMORY SERVES ME CORRECT, 55,000 PSI FOR M80 VERSUS 62,500 FOR SAAMI SPEC 150GN .308 WIN. I LEAVE IT TO YOU TO CALCULATE WHERE OUR PROOF PRESSURES (INCLUDING THE 1.50 TIMES "PURPLE PILL") FIT INTO THE PEAK PRESSURE RANGES YOU NOTED.

THE UNITS WE HAVE EXPORTED TO EUROPE HAVE ALL BEEN SUBJECT TO FURTHER PROOFING ACCORDING TO THEIR INDIVIDUAL PROOF LAWS. I UNDERSTAND ALL OF THIS IMPORT-INWARDS PROOFING WAS WITH 1.33 TIMES .308 WINCHESTER "BLUE PILLS". ONLY TWO UNITS EVER HAD PROBLEMS DUE TO THE MINIMUM HEADSPACE WE SET: THE "BLUE PILLS" USED WOULD NOT CHAMBER. USING THE BREWER BARREL LOCKING COLLAR (SAME AS SAVAGE), HEADSPACE WAS THEN ADJUSTED AND NO PROBLEM.

NOW TO USE OF .308 WINCHESTER IN THE M10B. WHILE OUR CHAMBER AND BARREL ARE MADE TO DEFINITIVE 7.62 X 51 M80 NATO DRAWINGS AND TOLERANCES (TO ALLOW HARD-CHROMING AMONG OTHER REASONS), WE WELL REALIZE MOST CIVILIAN SHOOTERS WOULD BE USING .308 WIN OR THEIR HANDLOADS IN OUR RIFLES. CONSEQUENTLY, FINAL ASSEMBLY HEADSPACING USES INCREMENTAL .308 WINCHESTER GAUGES WITH 1.630 TO 1.631 BEING ALLOWED. AGAIN, EASY TO ACHIEVE BECAUSE OF THE INFINITELY VARIABLE BREWER LOCKING COLLAR. WE HEADSPACE TIGHT FOR ACCURACY.

WHEN WE REDESIGNED THE LEE-ENFIELD NO4 ACTION, WE "WENT OVERBOARD" MAKING IT STRONGER THAN THE ORIGINAL. INSTEAD OF THE CASE-HARDENED MILD STEEL OF THE ORIGINAL, WE USE A FULL MILSPEC ALLOY STEEL TO MAKE OUR FORGINGS. YES, WE STILL DROP FORGE THE RECEIVER AND BOLT. THEY ARE NOT MADE BY JUST CNC-MILLING FROM BAR STOCK. THE FORGING PROCESS PROPERLY LINES UP THE CRYSTAL STRUCTURE IN THE METAL FOR GREATER STRENGTH.

THE RECEIVER IS 50% HEAVIER THAN THE ORIGINAL NO4 RECEIVER. FIRST, IT IS A RECTANGULAR RECEIVER COMPARED WITH THE "WAISTED" ORIGINAL. WE PUT BACK ALL THAT METAL CUT AWAY TO MAKE THE NO4 "WAISTED" AND LIGHTER. AFTER FULL STRUCTURAL STRESS PATH ANALYSIS, WE ALSO ADDED CONSIDERABLE METAL BEHIND THE LOCKING LUG RECESSES BY ELIMINATING THE LIGHTENING CUTS. WALL THICKNESS OVERALL IS GREATER THAN THE ORIGINAL. AND REMEMBER THIS IS IN PROPERLY HEAT-TREATED ORDNANCE STEEL NOT THE OROGINAL CASE-HARDENED MILD STEEL.

OUR MOST RECENT ADDITION TO FURTHER STRENGTH OF OUR M10 ACTION IS MACHINING THE RECEIVER BRIDGE INTEGRAL WITH THE RECEIVER. PREVIOUSLY, WE HAD WELDED IN THE BRIDGE (ORIGINAL NO1 HAD THIS PINNED, ORIGINAL NO4 HAD EITHER PINNED OR WELDED). OUR BRIDGE WAS ALREADY MORE SUBSTANTIAL AS WE ELIMINATED CHARGER CLIP GUIDE CUTS IN LIEU OF USING THE BRIDGE FOR OUR STEEL PICATINNY RAIL. MACHINING THE BRIDGE INTEGRAL WITH THE RECEIVER (SOMETHING THE ORIGINAL MAKERS COULD NOT DO) HAS MADE IT EVEN STRONGER.

FINALLY, WE HAVE PERFORMED A RANGE OF "TORTUE TESTS" ON OUR ACTION FROM INTENTIONALLY DEFECTIVE ROUNDS, LOOSE PRIMERS, ETC. ETC. ---- PASSED ALL WITH "FLYING COLOURS" INCLUDING THE EXTREME OF SPECIALLY PREPARED OVERLOADS (CALCULATED PEAK PRESSURE 110,000 PSI). THE TWO ACTIONS USED IN LAST TEST BLEW OUT THEIR EXTRACTORS AND HAD A MOLTEN BLOB OF BRASS ON THE BOLT HEAD FACE. AFTER CLEANING, WE FOUND THAT HEADSPACE HAD MOVED AN INCREMENT AND FULL CRACK TESTING AND GAUGING SHOWED THE BARRELS, BOLTS, AND RECEIVERS AS COMPLETELY OKAY!

I HOPE THE ABOVE ANSWERS YOUR ENQUIRY.

KEEP SHOOTING WITH BEST REGARDS,

KH