Enforcer questions...

[Thunderbox]

All these mismatched Enforcer magazines - what the heck is going on??? Were the police just sloppy keeping their kit together?

Lots of magazines and wood turned up on the market after the original rifles were scrapped. Caveat Emptor - genuine wood does not make a genuine Enforcer.....

[spinecracker]

That, Thunderbox, is why I am digging for answers. We do need to get a consensus of opinion regarding any normal variations that may be found on genuine Enforcers versus cobbled together fakes. If we don't do it soon, we may never get the opportunity again. For example, if it can be shown conclusively that genuine Enforcers never had the engraving in 2 ovals (e.g. this only turns up on fakes), then that would be a huge step in correct identification of some fake Enforcers. Until that time, however, we are peeing in the dark.

[spinecracker]

Another bloomin' question - this is what happens when I have spare time...

Are Enforcer barrels supposed to be stamped with the serial number? Anyone else have a stamping similar to "FB358" on the underside of the barrel?

[Terry Hawker]

I have been following that, too. Compared with that price, I think I got a very good deal on the one I bought!

By the way, I have found the owner of Enforcer #180, and he has the magazine for #380, that was apparently for sale at Bisley last year. Any leads on the whereabouts of #380, or anyone know who may have ben selling it? Wild stab in the dark, but that is how I found the owner of #424 lol.

All these mismatched Enforcer magazines - what the heck is going on??? Were the police just sloppy keeping their kit together?

Spinecracker,

Better a mis-matched mag than...??? Don't know if it was the police, or those handling them after dispersal, but I certainly have a bone to pick with the person that put bolt number 358 in my otherwise, all-matching, serial number 068. It originally went to the Somerset Police, but, rifle 358 went to another police department. (A department in Scotland, if I remember correctly. Can't get to my records while I wait for the carpet to dry.)

It still shoots well, as I discovered last week. Something else I discovered was the inherent weakness of the Parker Hale rings. The front clamping screw loosened up after only 50 rounds, and, in tightening it back up, you guessed it, I over-amped and broke the clamping screw. Although the screw looks pretty beefy from the left side, that is only the un-slotted head of the screw you are looking at, not a stud. Where the screw goes into the tightening knob, it is only a spindly, little, 1/8th of an inch in diameter.

Obviously I used too much force on it, but, it didn't feel like it was that tight before it let go, so be gentler than I was in doing them up after they shoot loose. These commercial rings and mounts can't begin to hold a candle to their tough counterparts on the 4 (T)s and L42s.

After checking around the inter-net and discovering how hard to find the high-mount Parker Hale rings are, I did what I should have done in the first place, and contacted Brian, at BDL LTD Rifles and Accessories . Brian informed me that the clamping screws on the low-mount rings are identical, and those he had in stock. At $45 a set, it is a bit more than I would like to pay for a simple clamping screw, but, it is really a bargain to get the Enforcer back in trim. A bit of careful work with the Dremel tool, plus a few tentative taps with a light hammer to get the broken ends of the screw out of the knob and ring, without damaging either part and now I await the arrival of the low-mount rings.

This set of rings will actually give me a spare clamping screw, which should be all the insurance I need to never do such a stupid thing again. Better yet, I think I'll shoot the L42A1 instead...It was designed for a bit rougher treatment than that dished out by a copper, (or an overly zealous civilian!).

Terry

[spinecracker]

Mismatched bolts, too? Add into that Thunderbox's comments, and I'm not sure if I can trust ANY Enforcer as being genuine, except for #001 in the Leeds Armoury lol (then again, you can't trsut those museum curators...).

Glad you had a good result in removing the screw. I will be using a spare set of rings and a different scope for shooting, just so I do not bugger up the very nice Pecar scope and a clean set of rings. I will also be using a loctite product (forgot the name) on the threads to prevent easy shifting. I will also be limiting my shooting to 30 rounds maximum per range visit - I am a cheap bugger! lol.

[Surpmil]

Was the front base not soldered onto the barrel ring on the Enforcers?

The recoil forces are supposed to be taken up by the lug on the bottom of the rear ring I thought.

Rather a Mickey Mouse set up IMO. Good enough perhaps for the occasional shot from a hunting rifle, but for a sniping rifle something like David Lloyd's mounts would have been far better. How's this for beefy:

[spinecracker]

Was the front base not soldered onto the barrel ring on the Enforcers?

The recoil forces are supposed to be taken up by the lug on the bottom of the rear ring I thought.

Rather a Mickey Mouse set up IMO. Good enough perhaps for the occasional shot from a hunting rifle, but for a sniping rifle something like David Lloyd's mounts would have been far better. How's this for beefy:

Police are only supposed to take the occasional shot, so a more robust method of fixing the scope was not deemed necessary. And they had to be cheap buggers as they had budgetary restrictions (hence Enforcers being bought without scopes, bipods, etc)

[Terry Hawker]

Was the front base not soldered onto the barrel ring on the Enforcers?

The recoil forces are supposed to be taken up by the lug on the bottom of the rear ring I thought.

Rather a Mickey Mouse set up IMO. Good enough perhaps for the occasional shot from a hunting rifle, but for a sniping rifle something like David Lloyd's mounts would have been far better. How's this for beefy:

Surpmil,

No, at least on mine, the front sight base doesn't appear to be soldered to the barrel ring, just simply attached with the two screws that the barrel ring was drilled and tapped for. It wasn't the base that came loose though, instead, it was the little aluminum mount on the ring that clamps to the base. This allowed the ring to slide forward on the mount, as the front ring has no locating lug. Each ring is held on to the base with one relatively small clamping screw. These are called "tip-off" mounts here in the US and "roll-off" mounts in the UK, but are more commonly used here for mounting scopes to .22's.

You are absolutely right, it is a rather Mickey Mouse set up, and I have to agree with Brian's opinion, that these Parker-Hale mounts are crap mounts. Good enough for something that has a very small chance of ever being fired in anger, but otherwise...

Reminds me a bit of Peter's wonderful description of the British military's commitment to pistol training with the allocation of, "...six rounds, per man, per year, perhaps." In other words, if you don't really plan on shooting it much, it is probably good enough.

Terry

[Surpmil]

Police are only supposed to take the occasional shot, so a more robust method of fixing the scope was not deemed necessary. And they had to be cheap buggers as they had budgetary restrictions (hence Enforcers being bought without scopes, bipods, etc)

Yes, I was thinking of that as I wrote, wondering if I was being unfair, but I suspect it was probably just as much a case of nobody really caring very much, apart from those who had to use the rifles, who of course had no say in what was chosen.

The scope was chosen because it was the type Parker-Hale had the agency for, and presumably the mounts were the best PH could supply from their stock.

I assume the rear base particularly was the steel variety, not the really 'orrible pot-metal/alloy one they also made?

I've got three sets here on the desk, two RALS3, and one RAHS3 and while the rings are themselves are robust enough, being very thick aluminum, the dovetail is too small to really hold up except in steel, IMO.

Pity, the rifle and barrel deserved better.

[spinecracker]

Should I keep the Enforcer, I might protect the Parker Hale fittings and Pecar scope by removing them (still keeping them for the classic Enforcer look, of course) and use an S&K mount with a different scope. I already have the mount and scope lol.

I have emailed the seller to find out who and where he got Enforcer #395 (and #391 for that matter) from in England. I have also emailed Brian Dick to ask him his opinion - I believe he has seen more Enforcers than many of us put together, and he is a very good judge of a rifle. Lastly, I have contacted the RSAF Enfield Apprentices Association to see what I can find out about the Enforcer program. As you see, my obsessive-compulsive streak is jumping on board with my anal retentiveness to make me dig for answers - not a pleasant sight lol.