-
Legacy Member
-
-
11-21-2019 03:29 PM
# ADS
Friends and Sponsors
-
Legacy Member
-
-
-
Contributing Member
Nice rifle, much improvement in the sporter configuration! If you go down the repro No.32 I can recommend the RSM No32 Mk2. Here is photo of my faux t
-
-
Legacy Member
Originally Posted by
Micheal Doyne
Nice rifle, much improvement in the sporter configuration! If you go down the repro No.32 I can recommend the RSM No32 Mk2. Here is photo of my faux t
Very nice! Except for the scope and mount it could almost be the same rifle. Thanks for sharing.
-
-
Advisory Panel
No offence, but that is some of the roughest filing and machining I've ever seen on a No.4. The "I don't give a ____, how long is it till tea break?" serial number stamping is not so rare though. 
I wonder what the Canadian
soldier who was issued that thought if he'd ever seen a Long Branch No.4?
You may want to move the cheekrest back so that you can get a proper grip on the wrist of the stock. The standard position made absolutely no sense and many snipers apparently got them repositioned. To get a close fit the butt can be held in soft jaws, some thin sandpaper stretched over the top of the butt and with careful short strokes of the cheekrest along top of the butt a pretty close fit can be obtained. The old method of using chalk to mark the high spots and then cutting those away gradually is another option.
Nice clean up job, but the last picture shows a lot more elevation in the scope mounts than should be necessary, unless shooting at very long range.
“There are invisible rulers who control the destinies of millions. It is not generally realized to what extent the words and actions of our most influential public men are dictated by shrewd persons operating behind the scenes.”
Edward Bernays, 1928
Much changes, much remains the same. 
-
-
Legacy Member
Originally Posted by
Micheal Doyne
Nice rifle, much improvement in the sporter configuration! If you go down the repro No.32 I can recommend the RSM No32 Mk2. Here is photo of my faux t
How has that scope held up and maintained zero? Currently I’m planning on topping a repro (T) I have coming with a vintage K3, but if there’s a repro scope that’s decent quality I’d certainly prefer that route.
-
-
Contributing Member
Originally Posted by
amadeus76
How has that scope held up and maintained zero? Currently I’m planning on topping a repro (T) I have coming with a vintage K3, but if there’s a repro scope that’s decent quality I’d certainly prefer that route.
Very well, I would recommend the RSM scope as a cost effective substitute. Mine holds zero well, despite being stored off the riffle (but in its mount). The rsm pads are apparently too thin to achieve columniation on most rifles which may be the source of some zero issues. My scope was fitted by Fulton, who used alternative pads, others have shimmed the rsm pads and had good results.
-
-
Legacy Member
I had a set of pads that were too thin, the front pad was square cornered which also looked terrible.
I brought a replacement set (Rounded corner type front pad) from DS solutions, also came with a full set of screws that just needed blueing.
Alignment was then alot easier, but I would still recommend it to be done by a professional unless 100% confident.
-
-
Legacy Member
Originally Posted by
Surpmil
No offence, but that is some of the roughest filing and machining I've ever seen on a No.4. The "I don't give a ____, how long is it till tea break?" serial number stamping is not so rare though.
I wonder what the
Canadian soldier who was issued that thought if he'd ever seen a Long Branch No.4?
You may want to move the cheekrest back so that you can get a proper grip on the wrist of the stock. The standard position made absolutely no sense and many snipers apparently got them repositioned. To get a close fit the butt can be held in soft jaws, some thin sandpaper stretched over the top of the butt and with careful short strokes of the cheekrest along top of the butt a pretty close fit can be obtained. The old method of using chalk to mark the high spots and then cutting those away gradually is another option.
Nice clean up job, but the last picture shows a lot more elevation in the scope mounts than should be necessary, unless shooting at very long range.
Yeah, it's rough and ready for sure, certainly compared to my LB. All part of the charm.
I wondered about the placement of the cheek piece, the thumb groove seems to be pointless, but I have smallish hands and it works ok for me. To fit it I did a combination of chalk marks to remove high spots, and the sandpaper over the stock. If I'd spent more time I could have got it a perfect fit, but it's not bad.
I plan to switch to a different mount, probably repro, when I have funds, I'm not overly keen to put more holes in the receiver, so I've kept the mount that was on it when I got the rifle. Yeah, it's too high, but at least loading it is easier.
Thanks, for your comments.
---------- Post added at 10:21 AM ---------- Previous post was at 10:19 AM ----------
Originally Posted by
Scout Sniper
I had a set of pads that were too thin, the front pad was square cornered which also looked terrible.
I brought a replacement set (Rounded corner type front pad) from DS solutions, also came with a full set of screws that just needed blueing.
Alignment was then alot easier, but I would still recommend it to be done by a professional unless 100% confident.
Good advice on the pads! I'll be going to DS for mine then!
-
PM
