S&B on the L42A1

[Peter Laidler]

I'm bound to ask just how far back can your eye be XL? It's got to be 2" or so from the ocular lens to get the full optical picture so based on the rifle above, that's putting your eye level with the rear of the bolt. That seems to be so unergonomic (is that a word?) on the head and neck while shooting as to be unreal.

The early alloy ocular focussing ring had a replaceable rubber insert that seemed to be made of a sort of plastercine! The later one on the tele shown on thread 1 was better.......but....... The housing it was on couldn't be fitted into the earlier telescopes!

I don't think the knurled thumbscrews v. allen bolts were an identifying feature per se. Just a matter of being ill informed if you were unwise enough to use allen bolts. That's because the mild steel thumb screws shafts were designed so that you only tighten to thumb/finger tightness otherwise they'd shear and not just strip the front thread. And if you give a crunchie the tools and wherewithall to overtighten something, then guess what he WILL do?

I was a paratrooper and for the life of me cannot see what allen bolt/1" diameter thumbwheel will do to affect parachuting techniques!

I can see where this is going but as a bloke from the bleedin' obvious school of life I feel that there might be a degree of urban myth creeping in here. AQnyone remember the horse manure surrounding the special black SAS and Marine lens caps......... Just a minute while I phone up Steve XXX one of the RM Armourers.............

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.

[Peter Laidler]

Just had a long and interesting conversation with one of my old, long serving, now retired RM Armourer colleagues. L42's were his bread and butter since they came on stream and it was he who went on to teach REME/RM the then new L96 at Lympstone/Plymouth and Bordon. Sent him the pictures of the mounts and guess what? Nope, never seen them in RM service and has no record or mention of them in his records. In fact, as soon as he saw the pictures his comments about eye relief were exactly the same as mine. However, he did accept that there were trials during the time - NOT concerning the RM - of another but more complicated US made telescope (which he called the Leatherman!)

Has anyone out there got documented or substantiated proof of an RM connection using this bracket?

[BrianLara400*]

The repro L42/S&B project that I've been working on is progressing well,
(see: https://www.milsurps.com/showthread.php?t=51921)
there's still a handfull of little things left to do before I'd call it finished, but its well usable in its current state.



first 5 round group, after fitting scope and visually bore sighting it.


on evidence of some groups etc am pretty happy with the bedding/fettling so will start to stain/refinish the cheek piece & handguard to suit the rest (think the repro cheekpiece is oak, hence why its so starkly white in the photos - the camera's sensitivity was turned right up as it was just only a few minutes of being completely dark, makes some of the colours look odd)

Sourced one of those newly available repro extended brackets from the devizes gunsmith in the UK, and was very impressed with its quality. The handguard was probably at the fattest end of savage wartime factory tolerances and wouldn't clear the S&B's larger objective bell, so I judiciously spokeshaved the height down (evenly) and then blended it with a sheet sander.

Of the photos I've seen of this combination mounted on the L42 i.e in some of Skennerton's publications etc some of those 6x42s look to be mounted impossibly low too, so I imagine that depending upon which individual handguard/top wood was fitted this would often have been encountered.

As for the eye relief question I can confirm it's quite adequate as pictured, have taken shots standing, sitting/kneeling, prone unsupported & off a rest - all without issue or injury (it does just look disconcerting initially).

Don't suppose anyones seen/got literature for the L96a1 or L13a1 that might indicate the BDC was set for the same ammo as the L42? I'm guessing correct ammo is the L2a4 Ball? which its stated velocity is a 144gr @ 2850 ft/s - is this correct?
Also does anyone know what the angular subtend is for that fine dot in the centre of the reticle?

[bigduke6]

Cant say I know much about them but, I understand that they were produced for testing of scopes on the L42 and not produced specifically for the S&B scope, with this in mind and on an engineering point of view surely they would of been all manufactured the same and not in different profiles etc.

Understand any manufacturing process may make alterations to suit production or cut costs, but not a different bracket for individual units. On the subject of manufacture does anyone know were they originated from ?

[Peter Laidler]

I agree Big duke. Yes, they were manufactured by a co in Sussex (?) somewhere who used to make several bits of quality bracketry and the like. I don't think it right to mention them.

I agree about the standardisation. Would you make a different GPMG bracket or a butt for the Marines?. The trials teams try to cover all the bases

[Brian B]

Thanks all for the comments and additional information. I have yet to shoot the rig as set up and may be a while before I can with the heat here in Southern California. Close to 100 degrees most days. Does that make me a fair weather shooter?

[Brian Dick]

Add 100% humidity and that's what it's been like here in SC all Summer! At least your glasses don't fog up!!

[DanL96a1]

Peter I have shot XL39E1’s L42 with “RM mount”, on a number of occasions and the eye relief has never been a problem. I have recently had a shoot with the “SAS mount” set-up as shown in the photos, and as you correctly have said the eye relief is too far back, requiring the head to be almost at the rear of the check piece or a longer rifle butt. I have moved the scope to accommodate a prone shooting position, and my neck is more than thankful for this change!

---------- Post added at 08:17 PM ---------- Previous post was at 08:12 PM ----------

Don't suppose anyones seen/got literature for the L96a1 or L13a1 that might indicate the BDC was set for the same ammo as the L42? I'm guessing correct ammo is the L2a4 Ball? which its stated velocity is a 144gr @ 2850 ft/s - is this correct?
Also does anyone know what the angular subtend is for that fine dot in the centre of the reticle?[/QUOTE]

you might find some of the information on this link
AI PM 6 x 42 Scopes from L96A1 Rifles Sporting Services

[Peter Laidler]

All of our training (except for the first few familiarisation shoots) and right up until the last 19 were withdrawn from the sniper trg wing in 2012 on the L96 was done using Army issue 7.62 RG Green Spot*. As was the L42. So on that basis, yes, the ammo was the same. Neither the range drum or the range graduations, (what you call the bullet drop compensator) were changed to cater for any other ammunition.

During some trials there was an L13 S&B mounted onto an accurised LSW (and a VERY accurate one at that too......). Not enough recoil to give a black eye but the eye relief was insufficient. So an extended bracket was manufactured specifically so that the head/eye would remain in the same comfortable and relative position as it would when using the SUSAT. I cannot imagine that sniper instructors or the trials team would make an exception to this relative head and eye position for the L42/L13 sight. And don't forget that for 90+% of the time the sniper pair are simply making notes and observing. And....., guess what they're using....... telescopes and binos - comfortably!

When the 96's were withdrawn we used up a huge load of this green spot in L4 guns because it didn't have to be de-linked from belts - which wasn't allowed anyway! And plenty of it went down my L42/L96 too

[blurrededge]

I also have an example of the SAS bracket with L13 scope, I've had no problems shooting it on my L42, in any position over the years. I know I have a "normal" length butt on the L42 and the scope is not fully forward in the bracket either. I'm wondering now if I've a short neck! ☺️