forearm bedding on a No.4

[Rumpelhardt]

As soon as I get the Acraglas Gel from Brownells I want to start bedding the forearm on my rifle. Is there any consensus as to the best way for accuracy to handle the barrel? Up pressure on the end, centre bedding or free floating? Any tips on peculiarities on the no.4? I have done a few 700 Remington's, my model70 Winchester and a commercial 98 Mauser but this looks to be a bit different.
I have the Canadian manual and plan to follow it but there seems to be some discussion as to the best method bed the barrel.
This is a Numrich special forearm that I cleaned up and patched the Ishapore screw hole so it is nothing special.

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]

If I was you Rumple, I'd wait until you get the acraglas package from Brownells, then I'd wrap it in tin-foil and give it to one of your friends as a fishing weight. Then I'd get hold of the UK Military EMER or read back issues of this forum and I'd fit the fore-end to EXACTLY the specification that has been used by Army Armourers since the history of the No4 began. Follow the instructions and fit the body, barrel reinforce and muzzle and don't forget the correct muzzle bearing weight too

Ignore those 'specialists' who really ought to know better and throw away the cork matting, Visa card strips, coke can shims and rubber whatsits and all the rest of that hoary old rubbish you might have read about in what I sometimes refer to as comics. There is only one way to 'stock-up' a No4 and that is properly.

I'll let you into a little secret that I'd like you to ponder on afterwards.................. Of all the trials and tests and ideas to simplify etc etc that have ever been tried - including 'better' ideas and ideas using so called 'new' technology, none of these methods EVER out performed the bog standard method espoused in the Armourers holy book, the EMER's. And, if they did, why was the fitting of the fore-end of the No4T NEVER relaxed for a 'better' method

[gunner]

Hi Peter, sorry but that old crap of a cork layer worked great for me. The wooden piece glued into the forestock will last longer as the cork wich is shrinking from time to time, but in minimum it seems to be a good way to find out the dimensons for the wooden piece. Am i that wrong?

[Rumpelhardt]

Mr Laidler you are absolutely correct. If this was the forearm that I planed on leaving on the rifle I would do just as you recommend but from what I have read on the subject it seams to be a lot of work for a temporary part.
I have successfully used Acraglas on several projects so I know what to expect with it.
I understand that this is not as good as a properly fitted forearm but as a temporary "place holder" I hope it will do the job.

[JBS]

The Chap in the first article knows a little about Enfields'

[Rumpelhardt]

Well after pondering this as Peter Laidler suggested I have come to the conclusion that his way is the better way. Better to learn on a less important piece.
There some one please tell my wife I'm not as thick headed and stubborn as she thinks I am
Watching a beautiful little whitetail doe munching grass in my back yard as I type this. I love Maine.

[Peter Laidler]

But first, I've got a confession to make................... It is a fact that during the last days of the L42, when a replacement was very likely and spare parts were at a premium and nobody wanted to spend any more money, Enfield was closed/closing and experienced armourers (I mean REALLY experienced Armourers and not quick change fitters.....) were even rarer, then a concession was made that in order to fit old fore-ends or those '.........used but without sufficient body to enable the correct fitting according to..................' blah blah. Armourers at Field and Base workshops could bed a fore-end with a 2 part epoxy.

However, they went on to explain, this was a paliative and not a cure, pending a rethink on the reintroduction of further stocks of fore-ends while awaiting the introduction of a new rifle. It also went on to suggest that any accuracy problems attributed to and stemming from the use of the epoxy bedding should be ignored! Well............., There was obviously more to this because how could you ignore an accuracy problem with a sniper rifle. Anyway, the rest is history

But on that note, has anyone got a well used and tired L42 that has been bedded in an epoxy type compound.

There must have been some but I never saw one......... But there was a sequel to the saga because some months later, a further information came out to the effect that the body and barrel had to be protected from the resin using a cling-film substitute to prevent the rifle from being permanently glued to the fore-end!

[Bruce_in_Oz]

To add a further variable, or three............

No4(T) s and general production No4swere set up to digest Mk7 .303 ball and pretty much nothing else. The L42 was set up to work best with the UK produced 7.62 ball of the day.

Interestingly, the "standard" bedding on a No4 seems to work better with heavier bullets. However, there is NO guarantee that ammo other than Mk7 will print anywhere like it is supposed to at any range past 10 yards.

When I was a lad, (living in shoebox in middle of road..............), I shot service matches with bog-standard, issued SMLEs. If we fed them nice clean Oz "MF" ball, they would deliver quite nice scores that kept us 14 to 17 year-olds happy. Some of the best stuff dated back to the 1930s. This being in the early 1970s, occasionally this "good stuff" would dry up and we would be issued "mystery ammo" with a "KF" headstamp. Results were not so good, despite it being, notionally, Mk7 ball. Being inquisitive lads, we discovered that projectiles recovered from the stop butts were internally different from Footscray bullets. The "KF" stuff had a nose filler that looked decidedly like plaster of paris. I do not recall ever encountering a hang-fire or failure-to-fire, but that stuff just would not group as consistently nor in exactly the same place as the "MF" Oz stuff.

Whilst we were just kids and not international hot-shots shooting for sheep-stations, shooters needed to hold about 80% scores or better to stay on the team; quite an ask for young teenagers and as-issued SMLEs. With the rifles, we did not just get handed a random rifle, but each firer would sign for four or five and then proceed to the range with an armourer in tow. The gum plumber would do a final visual, gauge and tighten and we would start shooting groups at 200yds. The rifles with the best groups were passed around until all firers were happy and then match training would start.

What a squalid way to spend a week of school holidays!!