No4Mk1 accuracy

[303carbine]

I have a No4Mk1 that has been FTR'd, it has an ROF receiver with matching bolt and magazine, the barrel was changed with the original serial lined out.
The wood is Savage as is all of the metal bits that went into the FTR. I wasn't expecting too much for accuracy due to all of the mods done to the rifle.
There was a bit of swelling in the wood at the muzzle, I took a wooden dowel with some sand paper and the barrel was free floated.
I shot some 174 grain Hornady's at a local gravel pit, the first shot was on a target at 200+ yds.
I found a rock that really looked like a deer and was the same size, my first shot rested prone was right on to point of aim, from the 200+ yds distance I was shooting I saw the puff of dust but couldn't see the hit on the rock.
I strolled over and saw the mark on the rock, a high heart lung shot, the FTR was done properly I would guess.

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.

[Brian Dick]

Wow, if I'm reading this correctly, you sanded out the bearing at the front of the forend and it still shoots well? Just think how much better it would shoot if you'd read up on it and left it alone. The No.4 wasn't intended to be floated at the muzzle end of he forend. That bearing is there for a reason.

---------- Post added at 05:16 PM ---------- Previous post was at 05:15 PM ----------

I'm seriously hoping that with a name like .303carbine, you're just pulling our legs.

[303carbine]

Wow, if I'm reading this correctly, you sanded out the bearing at the front of the forend and it still shoots well? Just think how much better it would shoot if you'd read up on it and left it alone. The No.4 wasn't intended to be floated at the muzzle end of he forend. That bearing is there for a reason.

---------- Post added at 05:16 PM ---------- Previous post was at 05:15 PM ----------

I'm seriously hoping that with a name like .303carbine, you're just pulling our legs.

I shot it quite a bit before free floating the tip, it definitely shoots better after. The bearing on the tip was making the shots rise when the barrel heated up, I never like to touch anything on my Enfields unless it improves accuracy, in this case, it did.
One writeup stated that there should be 20 thou free float at the muzzle from the factory, I know my Remington rifles shoot better without the pressure point at the muzzle as well.

[Brian Dick]

Can you remember what/who's writeup that was? I've been using the No.4T EMERS to properly fit No.4 forends for many years and it can be a real bastard sometimes. I'm still learning!!

[303carbine]

Brian, I will look through the writeups and web stuff I have and let you know what I find, I hope it didn't deleted when my computer crashed last year.
I remember the 20 thou free float in the writeup, I don't remember reading anything about the bearing at the muzzle though.

[mr.e moose]

About 6 lbs pressure at the tip of the fore-stock isn't it?

[303carbine]

About 6 lbs pressure at the tip of the fore-stock isn't it?

I read it as "designed with a heavier free floating barrel", this was done to overcome the problems with the No1Mk111 bedding issues.
The No1mk111 rifle is more complicated than the No4 as it has multiple bedding points.
The biggest concern was simplified manufacturing when the No4Mk1 was designed and to speed up production.
I was out again tonight shooting at longish (200+) range with 174 grain Hornady's using the main battle sight, I got multiple direct hits with no misses.
The same shots at the same distance before I free floated the barrel steadily climbed on target.
I used the same batch of reloads and the free floated barrel seems to shoot better, your mileage may vary though.

[CINDERS]

Guess they are like cars of the same make and model, same as but different animals all my 4's have the @6lbs up pressure and we do some pretty stiff shoots that require throwing a good amount of lead in a short time span at medium say 300m to longish 600m and at that point the POI climb if they have it is the least of my problems the heat haze from the top wood remains an issue (And no I will not stick green felt on them .)
If your 20 thou dowel job works then good for you go back to say 400 and try it out as a comparison and give us some feedback not that I am modifying something that outshoots me

[Peter Laidler]

Mmmmmmmmmm. I wonder just how accurate your now muzzle bearing-less No4 rifle would shoot if it were to be subject to something more scientific. Scientific like the post war trials held to ascertain the most accurate and reliable method of stocking up. Or tested from an Enfield Rest which is designed to eliminate all traces of human interference, however small.

The strange part about your findings is that they clash with the 1946/7 trials NOT of the No4T sniper rifle, but the bog standard rifle which clearly and distinctly states that the wartime expedient of eliminating the muzzle bearing will cease forthwith. Or words to that effect. Just my view of course, probably shared by one or two others I'd say

[303carbine]

Mmmmmmmmmm. I wonder just how accurate your now muzzle bearing-less No4 rifle would shoot if it were to be subject to something more scientific. Scientific like the post war trials held to ascertain the most accurate and reliable method of stocking up. Or tested from an Enfield Rest which is designed to eliminate all traces of human interference, however small.

The strange part about your findings is that they clash with the 1946/7 trials NOT of the No4T sniper rifle, but the bog standard rifle which clearly and distinctly states that the wartime expedient of eliminating the muzzle bearing will cease forthwith. Or words to that effect. Just my view of course, probably shared by one or two others I'd say

My No4 was FTR'd back in WW2, the ROF rifle was stocked with Savage wood and muzzle bearing appeared to be more wood swell as it was very uneven and was tighter on right side of the muzzle than the left.
This was making the rifle shoot higher as the rifle heated up, after 5 shots the shots would string vertically and left slightly.
After removing the uneven bearing surface, it changed the accuracy to the good and vertical stringing ceased, this may be just my rifle though.
I have heard many opinions of how to properly bed the No4, I have seen wood, cork, felt, plastic, body filler, acraglass, etc.
I have seen No4's where the method used was to bed the barrel channel with acraglass from the king screw to the middle barrel band and leave the rest of the barrel to free float.
I have never seen that method used by anyone except for youtube "experts.
I am going to do some more shooting and determine if I need to redo the bearing pressure at the muzzle, as it was, it was about 45lbs upward pressure and was way too much.
If I find that it does need 4 to 6 lbs upward pressure, I will glue in a small piece of wood and form it until I get the required amount of upward pressure.
As it is, I get good repeatable accuracy, I am not shooting in any competitions where stock rifles are required, if the rifle requires muzzle bearing to shoot even better, I will do that if and when needed.
With my computer down for the count, all I could find was Wikipedia where they state that the No4 was made for easier manufacturing with a free floating barrel, I am not sure how accurate their info is though.