Post WW2 Sniper conversion question

[breakeyp]

Variations in pad dimension can also be attributed to cutting tool wear. Sizes vary as the tools ware and are replaced by sharpened or new tools.

[Roger Payne]

It might be my eyes but the photo's are a little blurry (I could only open them on drop box), but within those limitations I think you probably have the real deal. The serial number in the 71L range is also in a known range for Long Branch snipers. I would certainly try to restore it (but I'm biased!) though it may take some time to track down an original Canadian front body pad. Other parts are generally much easier to find.

Well done!

[Seaspriter]

Thanks Roger for the expert advice and quick response.

Now my strategy will be to restore it, even if it's missing an inch and a half of barrel (perhaps I'll have a muzzle brake threaded on the muzzle stub to give it a functional look to the missing nose) and look for the parts over the next year. If anyone has leads on the right parts in a box, please let me know.

As for the baby with the bent barrel, I'm sure I'll be able to hunt one down.

[gundoc2112]

Hello. Yes. The scope & bracket have been added after the event, IMHO. The font of the rifle serial on the bracket does not look right. I can't quite make out the serial of the scope stamped on the butt, but assuming it is that of the scope illustrated, I would suggest it has either been added to the butt of a scopeless rifle; been added after a previous number has been sanded out; it is a replacement butt. There is no receiver side wall T on this rifle so I think there is a good chance it is one of the 'scopeless' rifles, & so there may not have been a scope serial on the butt until someone added this one. Of course, it could have been done in service, but I doubt it, as if done in service it would probably have been as part of a FTR with a wholesale refurbishment & refinishing of the rifle.

I am also a little worried about the area on the body of the rifle just behind the ejector screw - has there been some welding or other interference here? If you have a chance take the scope & bracket off & have a good look at the fit of the rear body pad.

P.S. Bolt body looks likely a replacement as well.

From the pics and description of the rifle in question, I assume its the one for sale on Guns International. I assume it's not worth the $3995 they're asking. Lol

[CINDERS]

22963 when you blow it up the mark on the extreme left of the wrist appears to be a 2 possible mistamp who can tell?
Though looking at the scope on my T there is no staking of the screws on the other mounting bracket on the weapon in question did they discontinue this practice Peter !

[Roger Payne]

That's a very early Mk3 scope Cinders.

[Peter Laidler]

Wow..... zillions of Q's . Pads were made by the machine shop in the incomplete format shown in the book. Sorry if some of you ain't got it but they are shown there in the stages of manufacture. And the next answer has been told a zillion times on this forum so I won't elaborate too much. On a telescope rifle, the pads are fitted to the body WITH THE FINAL MACHINING AFTERWARDS solely to mechanically align mechanical HORIZONTAL, VERTICAL AND LONGITUDINAL axis if the bracket with the mechanical axis of the bore. So that when the telescope is fitted, the optical axis of the telescope is exactly aligned with the mechanical axis of the bore of the bracket WITH THE BORE OF THE BARREL - WHEN FITTED TO THAT RIFLE. The actual BODY of the rifle is simple a vehiucle that enables this collimation to take place. That's why they are cross-numbered*

So please, please, get out of your heads that this is a simple operation. It IS simple to get it all to cock. But highly skilled to get it correct

Armourers did RE fit pads to the rifle when they became loose but NEVER, ever did anything else. That is why while Armourers might change a telescope for a later one for several reasons, the thought of changing a bracket was a bit of a long winded chore - edging towards the '.....i'm in for a nightmare days work' scenario! They all seem to fit from an enthusiastic amateurs point of view, but an Armourer - and even more so a sniper - wants the pair fitted PERFECTLY.

*Reason for some brackets numbered and some not also explained earlier

Just a word of advice sea splitter regarding your idea of a muzzle brake (thread 13.....). You can either fit a muzzle brake or an optical sight. But not both. Certainly not if you want to hit a target!

[Bindi2]

Just a word of advice sea splitter regarding your idea of a muzzle brake (thread 13.....). You can either fit a muzzle brake or an optical sight. But not both. Certainly not if you want to hit a target!

Peter may I ask why.

I have just been firing a 338/375 WB with a side venting brake. It has less recoil than a 308 but the percussion is bad if you are in the wrong place like lying next door. It is so gentle a slip of a 12yr old lad fired it as well then asked if he could use it instead of his fathers 308. After looking at the monitor display of his shots we all decided he needed the 308 handicap.

[Seaspriter]

Wow..... zillions of Q's . Pads were made by the machine shop in the incomplete format shown in the book. Sorry if some of you ain't got it but they are shown there in the stages of manufacture. And the next answer has been told a zillion times on this forum so I won't elaborate too much. On a telescope rifle, the pads are fitted to the body WITH THE FINAL MACHINING AFTERWARDS solely to mechanically align mechanical HORIZONTAL, VERTICAL AND LONGITUDINAL axis if the bracket with the mechanical axis of the bore. So that when the telescope is fitted, the optical axis of the telescope is exactly aligned with the mechanical axis of the bore of the bracket WITH THE BORE OF THE BARREL - WHEN FITTED TO THAT RIFLE. The actual BODY of the rifle is simple a vehiucle that enables this collimation to take place. That's why they are cross-numbered*

So please, please, get out of your heads that this is a simple operation. It IS simple to get it all to cock. But highly skilled to get it correct

Armourers did RE fit pads to the rifle when they became loose but NEVER, ever did anything else. That is why while Armourers might change a telescope for a later one for several reasons, the thought of changing a bracket was a bit of a long winded chore - edging towards the '.....i'm in for a nightmare days work' scenario! They all seem to fit from an enthusiastic amateurs point of view, but an Armourer - and even more so a sniper - wants the pair fitted PERFECTLY.

*Reason for some brackets numbered and some not also explained earlier

Just a word of advice sea splitter regarding your idea of a muzzle brake (thread 13.....). You can either fit a muzzle brake or an optical sight. But not both. Certainly not if you want to hit a target!

Thank you Peter. I think I'll do it the right way and find a first class barrel from another Enfield and just replace the short nosed barrel. I'd rather spend the money to do it right the first time than live with a poor man's jury-rigged quasi-fix. Then I might be a tad poorer, but Bubba won't haunt me at night.

[Peter Laidler]

Sea spriter, you should also read and fully digest the thread about making a replica No4T as what you are doing is pretty much the same thing......., but startiung with a pre drilled body. But that could be another whole can of worms............

G'day Bindi. Muzzle brake on a No4 barrel. I will say nothing more than to suggest you fit a bayonet to your No4T and see what happens. It's all to do with dampened harmonics and they say that the only people who REALLY understand harmonics are those with a degree in music - which I ain't not got!

Strangely enough, Australia wanted to utilise a fluted L7GPMG/L4 Bren type flash eliminator on the L42's that they had on trial in order to eiminate the muzzle bulges that had become apparent during UK trials. I don't know what became of it but we solved the problem by increasing the o/d of the barrel at the muzzle before they were accepted into service. This is one of the reasons you'll see some L42 serial numbers issued TWICE. Yet another useless bit of Enfield info