-
Legacy Member
Originally Posted by
RobD
I find it difficult to understand how a wood/metal object remembers the shot before, and fires a predictable sequence. Is it not possible that the shooter was correcting for the previous shot by aiming off? That would explain the observed pattern.
What happens when another shooter uses the rifle?
Other shooter has used it with the same effect. Both have used it in a lead sled with the same results. All shots being at 100 yds. No issues with any of my other Lee Enfields like this.
-
-
09-30-2020 03:46 PM
# ADS
Friends and Sponsors
-
Legacy Member
Is the trigger-guard firmly retaining the fore-end? Are the "draws" that mate with the sear-lug blocks mating symmetrically and fully?
The trick with these beasties is that the fore-end bedding is totally unlike what one expects after tinkering with one-piece stock systems. Two-piece stock systems are not inherently inferior on a rifle. There are several "sporting" rifles that have two-piece stocks and impressive consistency down-range. Also, consider a couple of military sniping rigs; The L42A1 and the French FR-F2. Then you get all modern and consider the performance of AR- based rifles. Not only two-piece (three, really), stocks but a TWO-PIECE receiver setup.
Have a look back at the various "How to" articles on setting up the bedding, as published hereabouts.
-
-
-
Legacy Member
Originally Posted by
Bruce_in_Oz
Is the trigger-guard firmly retaining the fore-end? Are the "draws" that mate with the sear-lug blocks mating symmetrically and fully?
The trick with these beasties is that the fore-end bedding is totally unlike what one expects after tinkering with one-piece stock systems. Two-piece stock systems are not
inherently inferior on a rifle. There are several "sporting" rifles that have two-piece stocks and impressive consistency down-range. Also, consider a couple of military sniping rigs; The L42A1 and the
French FR-F2. Then you get all modern and consider the performance of AR- based rifles. Not only two-piece (three, really), stocks but a TWO-PIECE receiver setup.
Have a look back at the various "How to" articles on setting up the bedding, as published hereabouts.
I haven't bedded it yet as I've just made sure it's set up properly essentially as issued being that it's mostly like new parts. I do have the following that I have used as resources, "Lee Enfield Performance Tuning Manual", "Lee Enfield Accuracy Secrets", "2012 Complete Book on Lee Enfield Accurizing", along with quite a few articles from Peter Laidler.
-
-
Contributing Member
How are you checking the "draws" contact for even load on both sides?
-
-
Legacy Member
Originally Posted by
30Three
How are you checking the "draws" contact for even load on both sides?
Engineer blue. This Lithgow has the original recoil plates so it's easier.
-
-
Legacy Member
Not sure about Lithgow No.I rifles however when I got my SSA No.I it's accuracy wasn't quite what I thought it should be....close but rather random groups. My jungle carbine was better and so was my No.4 Mk.I rifle.
I investigated the deal a bit and found that all the parts were there except the spring for the screw that holds the mid barrel band...it was gone. I found a similar looking coil spring and cut it to length and tightened it down. Then it shot just as accurate as the others or better....and this with damaged draws(which I fixed later)
There are a lot of parts screws and springs involved in the No.I Mk.III* forearm/barrel fit. I noted the old SSA still appears to wear it's original forearm(worn walnut) and nosecap while the rest is replacement beech. I sort of figured Commonwealth armorers perhaps tried to keep the original front wood and parts together to maintain accuracy and sight regulation?
-
-
Legacy Member
Originally Posted by
Havenot
Not sure about
Lithgow No.I rifles however when I got my SSA No.I it's accuracy wasn't quite what I thought it should be....close but rather random groups. My jungle carbine was better and so was my No.4 Mk.I rifle.
I investigated the deal a bit and found that all the parts were there except the spring for the screw that holds the mid barrel band...it was gone. I found a similar looking coil spring and cut it to length and tightened it down. Then it shot just as accurate as the others or better....and this with damaged draws(which I fixed later)
There are a lot of parts screws and springs involved in the No.I Mk.III* forearm/barrel fit. I noted the old SSA still appears to wear it's original forearm(worn walnut) and nosecap while the rest is replacement beech. I sort of figured Commonwealth armorers perhaps tried to keep the original front wood and parts together to maintain accuracy and sight regulation?
Havenot; not sure if it was your suggestion, but I took my middle band spring out, opened it up slightly. I also took a little bit off the top handguard ears as they were touching very slightly. Well went to the range this morning and 5 shots is all 1.5" or less with a circular pattern vs the previous pattern.
Only other things I did since the last range trip was another coat of RLO and cleaned the barrel
-
-
Legacy Member
Does it have the tension spring and plunger under the nose-cap?
The barrel band spring tension deal on mine was odd....shot so-so with no spring(as received)...I made a new spring and shot it some more playing with the spring tension on the middle barrel band....more so-so to fair accuracy. Took the screw to tight as it would go and she shot pretty decent then.
I will say that this was years ago and I did not understand the LE draws and stock fit all that well. My rifles draws were hammered loose and I did not really figure that out until later. I repaired the SSA rifle's draws a couple years ago and it still prefers the barrel band snugged tight.
I'm just saying that the SMLE rifle has a lot of parts in play just in the forearm!
-
-
Legacy Member
Originally Posted by
Havenot
Does it have the tension spring and plunger under the nose-cap?
The barrel band spring tension deal on mine was odd....shot so-so with no spring(as received)...I made a new spring and shot it some more playing with the spring tension on the middle barrel band....more so-so to fair accuracy. Took the screw to tight as it would go and she shot pretty decent then.
I will say that this was years ago and I did not understand the LE draws and stock fit all that well. My rifles draws were hammered loose and I did not really figure that out until later. I repaired the SSA rifle's draws a couple years ago and it still prefers the barrel band snugged tight.
I'm just saying that the SMLE rifle has a lot of parts in play just in the forearm!
It does have the tension spring and plunger. Draws are good as this was an unissued Slazenger forend with copper lugs. I'm guessing it was a combination of the middle band tension and top handguard ears touching slightly.
-
-
Legacy Member
And ALWAYS remember than from about 1912 onward, SMLEs were TUNED to Cordite-fueled Mk Vll ball and nothing else, because that was the "ammo du jour" for the next half century.
Not Mk VlllZ, not 150gn BTSPs: 174gn, flat-based Mk Vll.
Yes, there WAS a Mk VllZ, but that stuff was pretty much exclusively for aircraft MGs, because it produced less muzzle flash for AIRCRAFT guns, at night!.
Mk Vlllz ammo was designed to extend the useful "reach" of machine-guns (Vickers) , firing on fixed lines, off a sandbagged-in tripod against AREA targets. Such guns operated in teams of eighth to ten and were fired on calculated trajectories determine by ballistic tables, meteorological data and precision surveying equipment. Old-school "Volley fire" raised to a science. These days, mortar platoons to a similar job, but with greater gusto. Done right, you can saturate a couple of grid squares with HE and White Phos, and have the tubes and crews in vehicles and gone before the last bomb has fallen. It's NOT a game; never was.
The "Z" indicates "nitro-cellulose" granular propellant which has a different burn curve and peak temperature.
-
The Following 3 Members Say Thank You to Bruce_in_Oz For This Useful Post: