Ishapore 2A1 1967

[jed1177]

New to this forum and have been reading the volumes on the 7.62 v.s. 308 debate regarding safe use in the 2A1. As the thread title says, I have an Ishapore 2A1 RFI from 1967 in very nice condition, all matching numbers including the bolt.

Thinking I was ahead of the game with about 100 rounds of US 7.62 Special Ball M118 ratholed away before the purchase, I made the Ishy purchase only now to see that it looks like this round with the 173 grain bullet might be a little stiff for the old girl. I read here that the standard safe round should be the 7.62 147 grain bullet (M80). Also I do not reload, so I'm only looking for factory ammunition.

I don't want to damage this piece and I'm just too handsome to finish my life with an Indian rifle bolt sticking out of my cheek!

Is this the general consensus (on the ammunition, not the handsome part)?

Thanks in advance!

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.

[jmoore]

Aside from safety concerns, it seems that M118 ammo is a rather expensive way to feed a 3-4 MOA rifle. I've shot a "few" rounds out of these, w/o regard to bullet weight particularly, but by and large it's been regular old NATO ball. (US M80 ball for short range work- it's the least accurate of all the NATO spec stuff.)

Check to make sure it's in spec berfore shooting anything out of it, and then drive on. In this case, since the chambers are generally chrome lined to start, DON"T lube your ammo, or Edward Horton will get you!

[coppertales]

Those rifles were made to shoot that ammo. The steel in the receiver/bolt is improved over the regular Enfield to handle the higher pressure cartridge. Enjoy your rifle.....chris3

[Peter Laidler]

I was interested to read that about the different steel spec of the Indian 7.62mm 2A1's copper,because we used a few at Shrivenham during student projects and they were the same spec as previous...., or certainly within the parameters of 60's/70's steel mixing capabilitie! In fact one was clearly a conversion of an old .303" Mk3.

Any other forumers any comments on this and the steel/material?

[Amatikulu]

I posted this information last year:

I have an awful lot of reference material and while reading today I came across a paper titled "Gun Proof in India - An Historical Account." It was written by Mr. A. G. Harrison the former Proof Master at the Rifle Factory Proof House, Ishapore, India and was published in "The Gun Digest, 33rd Edition, 1979."


From 1908 to 1950 all military bolt action rifles made at Ishapore were proof tested with a dry proof round followed by an oiled proof round. The proof cartridge was loaded to 24 tons (2240lbs = 1 ton) psi breech presure, or 25% higher than the service pressure.

In 1950 the material for rifle bodies (they made No.1 Mark 3* rifles; my addition) was altered from an EN steel to SWES 48 steel (not heat treated) except for the recoil shoulder and cam recess in the receiver. With this change the rifle receivers distorted when oiled proof cartridges were fired. This was discovered when hard and sometimes impossible bolt retraction was experienced. Large quantities of rifles were rejected. To avoid rejections the authorities ordered discontinuance of the oiled proof. Therefore from 1950 to the end of SMLE rifle production (June 1965) rifles made at Ishapore were proof tested with one dry proof only, although the specification called for both dry and oiled proof.

A bolt action rifle similar to the SMLE Mk. III*, modified to fire the 7.62 NATO cartridge was produced at Ishapore, first in February 1965. Their receivers were made of SWES 48 steel, un-heat-treated, and with the NATO proof cartridge receivers were found to distort with the oiled or the dry proof round! The material was changed to an EN steel so now the rifles stand up better to dry and oiled proof.

This suggests that the type of steel used in the 2A series of rifles was changed for a short period to SWES 48 but then changed back to an EN grade similar to the older No.1 MarkIII steel

[Alan de Enfield]

.........Therefore from 1950 to the end of SMLE rifle production (June 1965) ........

1965 ?
How about a 1986 No1 Mk3 ?

[Amatikulu]

Based on the Ishapore Proof House Master having written the extract above and publishing it in 1979, I can only conclude that Ishapore ceased No.1 production in June of 1965. Whatever was made after that is not covered by the article and is subject to speculation.

[Peter Laidler]

Mmmmmmmm. I'd check the thickness of the butt socket wall thickness because 1986 seems very late. On some of the 7.62's, you can just faintly see the old markings where they've been linished clean.

[krinko]

There are hundreds (thousands?) of these. All quite uniform and all quite uniformly crude. Still, the rifles are better than the nadir of Ishapore production---the 1963-65 SMLE.
The last ones, dated 1988, include "floor sweepings" rifles----JB White got one of those----otherwise, they show no sign of being rebuilds.
-----krinko

[garra]

Interesting questions about the 2A1, I just picked up a 1968 made Carbine conversion in beautiful condition, loaded up some ammo for it but have yet to shoot it. I have seen a number of recommendations of having it checked out for head spacing, but I also have seen some conversations about variations of the gauges between 308 and the NATO round. Has there been a NATO standard established and are gauges available?

I have had to sand bag a rifle down in the past and used a string to pull the trigger, that was the method I used on my 1876 Martini.