Enfield in .223

[newcastle]

Bringing this back from the dead.

With this stupid quarantine stuff going on I'm working from home, with working from home , I'm working in my workshop, and with that I started pulling out all the projects I failed to finish 1, 2 or 3 years ago. Top of the list was the No.4 in .223 because all I had to do (all? HA!) was to get a magazine fitted so that I could add eject and feed to the pointing and shooting bit of the project.

Shout out to Craig Whitsey in the UK who pointed me at a 4 round 223 magazine from an old hunting rifle that fits inside the 303 magazine shell nicely and I now have a .223 No.4 that fires , extracts, ejects and feeds. I will post a quick video and more information when I get it out to shoot again. Having said that - the next time Peter Laidler says that something is a pain in the proverbial behind, I will listen to him.

In the meantime - any scope recommendations that look a bit Like a No. 32 that have adjustable magnification?

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.

[Thunderbox]

Peter Saroney at Armalon is, of course, still cutting up new No4 Mk2s to make his .223/5.56mm carbine thingys. You might be able to get a barrel from him.

Nearly every .223 conversion I've come across (mostly the above-mentioned Armalons), the owners have complained about all sorts of feeding and functioning problems. Maybe the geometry of the No4 feed-ramp to chamber is simply not optimum for a thin round?

[Peter Laidler]

I tried to modify my receiver body by incorporating into it the magazine well of a scrap SA80. That way I'd have ready made available magazines but the magazine housing and magazines being parallel wouldn't sit in the mag well of the No4 body

Interesting thread

[bigduke6]

Another one from surplus rifle is the .45ACP conversion have built a few of these, on scrapped/ sporterized No4 actions, good fun and cheap to run, the first one I did was from a kit from Rhineland, the rest I built, I had to go to another supplier(rhineland are back making these now) for mag adapters, and produced my own barrels from blanks.

Wish I had of bought a lot more kits from Rhineland when I built the first one, I cant even buy a barrel blank for the price I paid for the full kit.

It was after this I was looking at building an exact copy of the De-Lisle carbine, but shelved the idea, as I wanted to keep it to the original spec, and in doing this it would of been a section 5.

http://www.surplusrifle.com/reviews2...ield/index.asp

[newcastle]

just checked out the Armalon website. They have a rifle (AL42) whihc is in .223 and looks rather splendid. However given exchange rates to import it to teh USA plus import costs woudl be ridiculous, which is a shame because they look real nice. Wonder if he'd convert a rifle I sent to him?
then it woukdn't be importing, just "returning from repair".

[crusty]

If you want a reduced recoil, the little Russian round is great, you can shorten up & re-chamber the 303 barrel. A mini-30 5 round mag fits flush & feeds like dream. Some work is needed to the trigger guard & forend to make it fit.

[Bruce_in_Oz]

Been there, done that.

Well actually a bit more.

I'm the silly bugger who designed the AIA M-10 series. These were initially slated for 7.62 x 39, 7.62 Nato and 5.56 NATO. Only the first two calibres made it to production, The 5.56 was killed off by office politics.

For those not familiar with the M-10 design, there are three significant changes to the Lee Enfield system:

1. The receiver is widened and made more slab-sided so that modular adapters for different mag systems can be fitted tio a common receiver.

2. The barrel is breeched up using a Brewer collar as per a Savage 110.

3. The bolt head has a collar surrounding the face and a spring and plunger ejector.

I have not been involved in the AIA operation for some years and have no idea what they are doing currently.

However, running 5.56 on a No4 / No5 action is not rocket science. The tiny diameter of the cartridge effectively demands a collared bolt face.. I have seen quite a few that have had a a ring simply soldered on with low-temperature solder: not exactly good engineering but it prevents the degradation of the heat-treatment of the bolt head proper. More adventurous folk machine the face back slightly and solder on a "cup". This method also has the advantage of allowing a smaller diameter striker hole. This latter is important as the diameter and protrusion of the standard setup is a recipe for instant ruptured primers. Duplicate the specs for M-16 and you can't go far wrong.

Enthusiasts should be able to fabricate a functional extractor from suitable steel. Tacking a bit onto an original and carefully filing it down to achieve function will give some idea and it might actually work for a while in service, but making a new one from suitable steel is not that tricky once you have derived the dimensions.

As for an ejector, a bit of basic geometry will give you the angles and depth for the plunger hole. Plungers are a piece of cake, springs can, at a pinch, be derived from M-16 types and just use a suitably small roll-pin for retention (a la M-16). One of my dramas was getting the 7.62 NATO version ejecting consistently. A single similar plunger is marginal on the larger case. It is structural and metallurgical madness to attempt to install a stuffer spring: there isn't room. However, the simple addition of a second plunger about 90 degrees away, will solve the problem using the same dinky spring and plunger as the 5.56 version. One could opt for a Mauser-type ejector and cut slots in the bolt head and receiver sides, but I was not too thrilled about that idea.

Magazines: The best "off the shelf" mag is that for the Ruger Mini-14. M-16 / STANAG types will work but, because they are wider at the front, cannot be placed as close to the breech as the Ruger type.

HOWEVER! Do not expect either type to work reliably with their original spring tension. Go and push down the follower on a No4 or a K-98; soft, isn't it? The spring load needed to launch a stack of cartridges up the mag body in a semi-auto is vastly excessive in a bolt action. You will get round leaping in all directions and wildly excessive upwards thrust in the bottom of the bolt body; not good things. The hard-core will get new springs wound to the same form but in a lighter gauge wire, the rest will simply chop bits off the original until it works OK.

Those of you that own M-10s in 7.62 NATO may have occasional issues with feed, especially at low feed speeds. This is because the supplied mags have essentially the same spring as 10rd mags for an M-14; not exactly as I had envisaged.

Fitting of your chosen 5.56 mag is problem. Some folk cheerfully line up their Mini-14 mags (5 round capacity) in a .303mag housing and then pump silicon rubber sealant in to hold it permanently in place: crude but effective. Metalworking enthusiasts can devise their own interface without too much anguish.

Barrels will need a counterbore of dimension suitable to clear bolthead collar and the extractor as it clicks over the rim. Doing this also maintains maximum breech thread length.

Cheers

[K7USC]

[QUOTE=Bruce_in_Oz;185750]Been there, done that.

Question Sir,
Dear Sir,

I am building a 7.62x39mm lee-enflield and I have need of advice in the direction of the bolt head modification:
1. take stock bolt, counter bore .100 deep and .010 of an inch over rim size and cut a groove in the bolt for an spring-loaded ejector, shorten firing pin (striker)?
2. Silver solder a .125 ring on, bore true and clean bolt face, drill for a spring and plunger, hold with roll pin through side of bolt? What type of spring and plunger assembly?

Cheer,
D.B.

[newcastle]

Hi all many years on and I am still looking at the 223 No.4 project every now and then. Current situation is that I have a rebarrelled No.4 Mk2 in 223. The rifle was in great condition - hadn't seen much use at all BUT the barrel was toast because it had apparently not been cleaned after putting some nasty ammo through it, so no healthy Enfields were hurt in the manufacture.

We used a Douglas Barrels No.4 profile chambered blank and it was cut and threaded etc to original profile. A new front sight base had to be affixed and the rifle is now dressed back in full military furniture, it fires accurately and extracts and ejects perfectly.

Per Peter Laidlers prediction the feeding is the main issue. Initially we tried a magazine block which fitted inside the well and accepted a Ruger mini 14 10 round magazine. This is as used in the UK by Craig Whitsey, the smith who sold me the bolthead.

After many shenanigans I have dispensed with that as that mag is a double stack and both sides never fed evenly. I have got it to feed for 2 or 3 rounds with a CZ single stack 5 round magazine held by set screws inside a No.4 magazine body. The CZ mag moves after a couple of rounds so it will need to be epoxied in place for the long term. Last one I tried it moved and I epoxied it in the WRONG place - bugger!!!! At $30 per mag this will get pricey. Also if anyone has some No.4 magazine bodies they will never use I will take them off your hands.

[MARKDL]

I guy in Australia named rob spittles does a great job of these