Plate for Machining No.4 Bodies

[Longshaor]

Brian,

Just my 2d here, but we're seeing that anyway with all the nimrods who sporterize perfectly good No 4s. I just got a 1957 Faz No 4 Mk 2 off GB a few months ago that has a 7.62mm rearsight, but still has a .303 barrel & mag! Like to meet the bubba who did this one...

For those of us who want something with the accuracy of the T without the pricetag (or the guilt complex every time we head out to the range with it), the ideal solution was being provided by AIA, who's rifles never made it State-side in any quantity and now appear to be defunct, so we've kind of come back to the beginning with 'what do we do?' If someone is making a quality ersatz T marked in such a way that there's no mistaking it's NOT an original, I don't have an issue with that.

[trooper554877]

Strictly my opinion Ned. Maybe worth half the 2 cents if that. My opinion on this subject has never changed. I've seen too many perfectly good No.4's buggered forever and I'm a bit of a purist. I can't afford perfect No.4 T rifles either at todays stupid auction prices but I can tell you that a patient man will find one for much less eventually. I just finished servicing a matching 1943 specimen complete with scope for one gentleman and I'm finishing one of DRP's brackets for another really nice one "as we speak". They were both purchased at very reasonable prices IMHO. Brian

yeah alls good Brian,
I would never say no one is entitled to his opinion.
Just thought that the integrity of the original poster was being questioned and I know him personally, thats all
cheers
Ned

[jmoore]

Strictly my opinion Ned. Maybe worth half the 2 cents if that. My opinion on this subject has never changed. I've seen too many perfectly good No.4's buggered forever and I'm a bit of a purist. I can't afford perfect No.4 T rifles either at todays stupid auction prices but I can tell you that a patient man will find one for much less eventually. I just finished servicing a matching 1943 specimen complete with scope for one gentleman and I'm finishing one of DRP's brackets for another really nice one "as we speak". They were both purchased at very reasonable prices IMHO. Brian

Understand your position, but it may not be realistic. (my opinion, obviously!) There's rather less than 25,000 real No.4 Mk.I (T)s out there, and probably ten times that many who would like one or equivalent for range use. I agree it's a bit mad to ruin an (dare I say it) "original" complete rifle (esp. a WWII British example) for such purposes, there's a huge pool of "mixmasters" with replacement barrels that ought to do as well or better, having been rebuilt at least once. As far as the butchery goes, folk are going to attempt it anyway, might as well help them avoid the dramas. Otherwise I recommend removing Peter Laidler's sticky on doing these build ups!

Personally, my annoyance is the utilization of old scope and brackets on new builds. Milsurps "Angel's" Matchmaker Forum attempting to reunite separated scopes and rifles seems far more laudable. If only there were more folk participating, it might do for a grand "circular" swap meet one day...

[Brian Dick]

There was certainly no question of anyone's integrity so I apologize if my post was taken that way. I understand all of the arguments involved and if Peter's instructions are followed to the "T", (pardon the pun), I'm sure a proper conversion can be done. Time and money, well..... I reckon I'm a bit of a hard head. Here's something to ponder. I just test fired one of my last Greek issue 1943 Long Branch No.4Mk.1* rifles going to a gentleman in Mississippi and it shot one ragged hole at 25 yards with Portuguese FNM Mk.7z ball. It's a post WWII CAL FTR and stocked with a mixture of Savage and Long Branch birch. It's every bit as accurate as any of my No.4T rifles because it's all serviced, has a nice barrel, matching bolt and the forend fits correctly. Of course, the 2 groove barrel must be substandard eh? Sorry, couldn't resist that one! If someone wants a scoped No.4, just buy a rifle like this, carefully remove the rear sight, install a Fulton's steel Picatinny rail, the scope of your choice and "Bob's your Uncle". Put a cheekpiece on it too if you like. Just remove the original butt, put it aside and replace it. Butts are still fairly cheap. It might not look exactly like an original but I guarantee it'll do the job just the same. 'Nuff said from this hard head!!

[newcastle]

I saw those mounts on your website brian. How do they fix too the rifle such that they do,kt lose zero? I see they ue therear sight axis pin but couldn't figure out what else sticks em on

[Peter Laidler]

I do hope noone thought I was questioning anyones integrity and as I said, I did expect some incoming flak. But for the average pretty-well mechanical bloke converting a single No4 to T spec then there is no real need to manufacture a steel holding plate. I showed it because it was a) available and b) a picture of a clamped body in position is better and easier described. The reason I/we had a body clamp is that the same clamp was used to do many things in our workshops - from milling the rifles being converted to DP to engraving the bodysides to drilling out and bushing oversize sear axis pin holes, stripped threads - you know what I mean..........

So, let me put it another way........ If you need to lift the engine out of your car, you'd make a scaffold gantry and hire a block and tackle hoist and get on with the job. If you were going to take a load of engines out for you and your mates, then you'd invest in a proper lift frame and electric whatsit and...... and........

Same as making up a repro T. If you are doing one for yourself then it might take an hour or so, but you could set a body up on a compound milling table, clamp it down, use a DTI to check your squares, horizontals, verticals and levels, re-check and adjust, clamp-up and set about it. On the other hand, if you were going to do it for you and your mates, then................ anyway - you get my drift..............?

It's not a case of questioning anyones integrity. Indeed, the more that get stuck into a good T repro, the better. As you might imagine, there have been a few PM's floating around regarding the comments questioning the need, raised initially by Brian.

[Brian Dick]

Charlie, They are fixed by a jam nut into the charger bridge and screws through the rear sight axis pin holes. Solid as a rock. Because the charger bridge was never intended to be a fixing point for collimation and they do vary, I always recommend a good set of steel, windage adjustable rings like Millett. It makes it a snap to collimate the telescope to the rifle bore with the full run of left and right deflection..

[jmoore]

I always recommend a good set of steel, windage adjustable rings like Millett. It makes it a snap to collimate the telescope to the rifle bore with the full run of left and right deflection..

Does Burris still make the rings with the spherical offset inserts in varying increments? I've used those for several applications to optically center scopes in both elevation and windage. I've heard some folk dislike 'em, but they have done an excellent job for me. Liked the system well enough to put it on some expensive and extremely accurate gear, like the below. ( Winchester Ultimate Classic Stainless Model 70 LH. Note that in this instance I selected 30mm dual dovetail rings. No other way to mechanically zero the scope than by selecting and rotating the inserts! Rock solid for quite a few years now.):

[Brian Dick]

Nice rifle there JM. I shoot a 1990 M70 Featherweight in 7x57 and it's a favorite. I think Burris still makes the rings. I'd have to check. Everything they make is very high quality.

[paulseamus]

Gents

Gosh .... it's a couple of days since I have logged on and wow it seems that my integrity has been both questioned and defended- (thanks Ned).

Perhaps I should explain why I posted my request.

I have a had a No.4 ruined by having the pads fitted incorrectly. Not by me but by a "professional" gunsmith who specialises in building accurate sniper rifles.

So I am now a bit poorer and a bit wiser.

My request for the dimensions of the plate, is so that i can get one machined up to ensure that the next gunsmith that I use has the correct tool to ensure that the pads are correctly mounted.

I am a firm believer that you do need the right tools for the job coupled with an skilled set of hands to use the tools. Ironically Peter, i am in the business of pulling engines out of cars, fixing them and putting them back, so I understand your analogy.

Whilst I would like to experience having a go myself, I don't have the skills and our local laws prohibit private gunsmithing.

The desire to cast and machine a set of pads, is to keep the process as true as possible to that of H & H. It seems a bit incongruous to fit a DRP mount to a set of Numrich pads.

The reason for wanting to build a replica rather than buy a genuine is not simply cost.

I do have my eye on a genuine No.4 (T) that is in stock at BDL. Even made calls during the week to a local dealer to get a quote on the cost of importing, but then a few unexpected bills arrived, so those plans are now on hold for a short while. (Brian, I will contact you when the required funds are freely available)

Regardless, I want a Genuine No.4(T) because I want one . It will be shot infrequently.

I want a replica No.4(T) and a replica L42A1 to shoot regularly in competitions. With no worry about damaging their historical value and no worry about rebarrelling them if and when required.

It's never been about making fakes. I know a lot easier methods (and more financially rewarding) of trying to make an honest living.

To close, I do repect both the passion and the wisdom that you all bring to this forum.

Accordingly I have read all posts in the spirit that they were hopefully intended.

Where to next, I am not sure. Might have to read those Peter Laidler books and guides a few more times,

Cheers

Paul

PS does any one have the dimensions of the plate for machining.........