-
Bruce in Oz and others. Re the .223 conversion and more to the point, ejection. Why wouldn't the simple friction ejection as per the standard No4 work. I did it with a 9mm conversion to a No4 body using a shortened 9mm Sterling magazine (or was it a Sten mag......) The 9mm case base rim diameter is the same (?) as .223 Then,the deeper 7.62mm ejector pushed the spent 9mm case over towards the left inner side of the body where it tipped against the ejector and flipped it out. BUT, it would never tip out the LAST round.
On that basis, surely it'd act the same with a .556 spent case
Last edited by Peter Laidler; 08-11-2011 at 01:55 PM.
-
Thank You to Peter Laidler For This Useful Post:
-
08-11-2011 08:48 AM
# ADS
Friends and Sponsors
-
I did it with a 9mm conversion to a No4 body using a shortened 9mm Sterling magazine (or was it a Sten mag......)
I was waiting for someone to mention a 9mm, I was looking at knocking these out, again based on old sporterised No4,s. ( I,m in total agreement with Son on not chopping up a decent milsurp, have been asked many times regarding conversions, but refuse on the grounds its a decent rifle as is leave it that way)
I was not far off from the prototype, but SG had just brought out the lever release 9mm, so I shelved the idea, in fact someone asked me only recently to do one, but the initial cost of a one off build, plus my hours, and new chamber reamers etc its just not cost efective.
For anyone looking at making a .30 M1 carbine conversion, this is quite easy using an old 7.62/.308 target barrel, see link and scroll down to part 5.
Military Surplus Collectors Forums
As for the chamber reamer easy to make using a standard tapered reamer. PM me for more details.
-
-
-
FREE MEMBER
NO Posting or PM's Allowed
I have been watching buttons going through blanks a bit lately.
The initial run of 20 P-14 barrels is just about finished to profiled and threaded state and then we move on to SMLE and No5 barrels. No4 barrels are bit further away because of the issues of indexing and absolute headspace reference.
I wonder how much interest there is for No1mk3 H barrels? There always seems to be enthusiasm for them.
-
Legacy Member
I would guess it depends on how much. I am always interested but a complete tight arse
-
-
FREE MEMBER
NO Posting or PM's Allowed
7.62x39 conversion with silencer | Trade Me
And just in time for this thread, this gent has an enfield in 762/39, his details are quite interesting, as well as the close up of the action. The bolt head is almost stock, and he's running a 10 round type 52/57 detachable mag, 40mm groups at 100 m, barrel by Lothian. Very interesting ...
-
Legacy Member
Click the link : Collecting and Shooting the Military Surplus Rifle - Surplusrifle.com
Here is someone who has done it, (barrel, magazine and bolt head included) and gets 1 to 1.5 MOA accuracy.
Mine are not the best, but they are not too bad. I can think of lots of Enfields I'd rather have but instead of constantly striving for more, sometimes it's good to be satisfied with what one has...
-
-
My simple, cheap and cheerful and admittedly none-too-scientific but shootable 5.56 conversion didn't use a collared or recessed bolthead. The only thing I did was to CHS it up and do the FPP to match the old spec SA80A1 spec. It seemed to shoot without rupturing the primers and it'd extract after a fashion. I was able to screw the sightless barrel in and out to achieve accurate CHS using the gauges.
Is there any technical or scientific reason to collar (or recess) the bolt head. I'm just thinking about someone doing a home conversion and taking the keep it simple line. Technically speaking and thinking out aloud - without the test facilities handy to back this up - a SPLIT collar, silver soldered to a bolt head lacks any modicum of radial strength which indicates to me that it is redundant. That's just thinking out aloud
Any views from the other engineers.............. Bruce from Oz, JM or Breaky.............
Last edited by Peter Laidler; 08-12-2011 at 10:15 AM.
Reason: horendus speeling misteaks!
-
-
Legacy Member
Apparently a UK company were asked to look at developing a modification (for Cadet use) of the No4 to make it suitable for .223.
They developed a 'patented' bolt head as can be seen on the link :
5.56 No. 4
The price is not currently listed on the website but from memory (when I looked a year or so ago) the bolthead was over GBP £100 each.
Last edited by Alan de Enfield; 08-12-2011 at 10:34 AM.
Mine are not the best, but they are not too bad. I can think of lots of Enfields I'd rather have but instead of constantly striving for more, sometimes it's good to be satisfied with what one has...
-
-
I certainly never heard of any GSR (General Staff Requirement) being made to convert No4's to 5.56 for Cadets. A Cadet version/variant of the SA80 was under consideration when the SA80 was pretty well first being considered
-
-
Is there any technical or scientific reason to collar (or recess) the bolt head.
To recess, just makes life more complicated cant see it being any advantage, the collar is just to aid ejection if you did this along with the plunger, this is just my experiance when I was building a 9mm, when building the .45ACP just left the original bolt head and made a new extractor, thing is when doing a conversion to something like .223 or .30M1 carbine, you have to think outside the box, dont look at mags available look at making a single stack mag, you only have to look at the Accuracy International AE 5 round mag as an example.
-
Thank You to bigduke6 For This Useful Post: