+ Reply to Thread
Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 1 2
Results 11 to 20 of 20

Thread: Proposed No.4 Mk1 T Camo scheme

Click here to increase the font size Click here to reduce the font size
  1. #11
    Legacy Member Alan de Enfield's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Last On
    Yesterday @ 12:25 PM
    Location
    Y Felinheli, Gogledd Cymru
    Posts
    2,526
    Real Name
    Alan De Enfield
    Local Date
    03-29-2024
    Local Time
    05:08 AM
    Quote Originally Posted by Lee Enfield View Post
    AdE,
    The OP is rebuilding it from a stripped receiver - if it gauges OK (and I would hardness test it too) it is OK.

    From discussions with PL, the reason that a rifle is DP'd is generally because of the receiver, every other part is replaceable.

    I wonder if the OP has all of the necessary gauges to say it is 'safe' ?
    Good point on the hardness, as PL says that the hardness of the locking lugs was a failure point, and that the bolt locking lugs could actually 'hammer thru' the body locking lugs and get into 'soft' metal.

    Bearing in mind that these are Indian DP bodies it may be advisable not to try and resurect them particularly if they are post 1949, as after independence Ishapore decided to change the steel from that specified by the UK and that led to 1000s of rifles being declared DP and many scrapped. Eventually they changed the proofing standards until the actions with the new steel just passed.

    Short extract from an Article :

    Extract from “Gun Digest 33rd Anniversary 1979 Deluxe Edition”
    Article Author : Mr A G Harrison
    Qualification : Former ‘Proof Master’ of the ‘Rifle Factory Proof House, Ishapore, India’

    From 1908 to 1950 all military bolt action rifles made at Ishapore were proof tested with a dry-round, followed with by an oiled proof round. The proof cartridge was loaded to 24 tons psi breech pressure, or 15% higher than the service pressure. In 1950 (after the departure, in 1949, of India from Britishicon control) the material for the rifle bodies was altered from an EN steel to SWES 48 steel with the recoil shoulder and cam recesses being heat treated. With this change the rifle receivers distorted when oiled proof cartridges were fired. This was discovered when hard and sometimes impossible bolt retraction was experienced. Large quantities of rifles were rejected.


    It goes on and more about the testing and also the 7.62 rifles failing proof testing.
    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...

  2. # ADS
    Friends and Sponsors
    Join Date
    October 2006
    Location
    Milsurps.Com
    Posts
    All Threads
    A Collector's View - The SMLE Short Magazine Lee Enfield 1903-1989. It is 300 8.5x11 inch pages with 1,000+ photo’s, most in color, and each book is serial-numbered.  Covering the SMLE from 1903 to the end of production in India in 1989 it looks at how each model differs and manufacturer differences from a collecting point of view along with the major accessories that could be attached to the rifle. For the record this is not a moneymaker, I hope just to break even, eventually, at $80/book plus shipping.  In the USA shipping is $5.00 for media mail.  I will accept PayPal, Zelle, MO and good old checks (and cash if you want to stop by for a tour!).  CLICK BANNER to send me a PM for International pricing and shipping. Manufacturer of various vintage rifle scopes for the 1903 such as our M73G4 (reproduction of the Weaver 330C) and Malcolm 8X Gen II (Unertl reproduction). Several of our scopes are used in the CMP Vintage Sniper competition on top of 1903 rifles. Brian Dick ... BDL Ltd. - Specializing in British and Commonwealth weapons Specializing in premium ammunition and reloading components. Your source for the finest in High Power Competition Gear. Here at T-bones Shipwrighting we specialise in vintage service rifle: re-barrelling, bedding, repairs, modifications and accurizing. We also provide importation services for firearms, parts and weapons, for both private or commercial businesses.
     

  3. #12
    Advisory Panel Lee Enfield's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Last On
    03-16-2024 @ 12:24 PM
    Location
    out there
    Posts
    1,820
    Local Date
    03-28-2024
    Local Time
    11:08 PM
    Firearms Accessories

    Here is the link.

    They are all Britishicon No4 T actions

  4. Avoid Ads - Become a Contributing Member - Click HERE
  5. #13
    Legacy Member Alan de Enfield's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Last On
    Yesterday @ 12:25 PM
    Location
    Y Felinheli, Gogledd Cymru
    Posts
    2,526
    Real Name
    Alan De Enfield
    Local Date
    03-29-2024
    Local Time
    05:08 AM
    Quote Originally Posted by Lee Enfield View Post
    Firearms Accessories

    Here is the link.

    They are all Britishicon No4 T actions

    Agreed, but when a seller is not confident enough to quote them as 'safe to fire' and says 'probably' made DP for convenience of storage ............................


    Purchased in a batch of No.4 MkI T barreled receivers from India, these show that during the early 1960s, Indian Ordnance was looking at upgrading the Mk I T to Mk II T. These barreled receivers appear to be original British sniper rifle Mk I T actions, modified to Mk II.

    These barrelled receivers still have the pads fitted to take the scope bracket, and in this particular action, the barrel is a very good condition 2 groove barrel. The actions and barrels are marked "DP" for drill purpose, but in this case was probably for obsolescence and ease of storage



    To quote PL :

    Would YOU fire one? I’ve been an Armourer for a couple of years and while I or your local gunsmith could examine one and give it a bright clean bill of health, would YOU trust it. NO, I wouldn’t either!
    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...

  6. #14
    Legacy Member DeeBee's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2019
    Last On
    08-20-2021 @ 06:25 PM
    Location
    Victoria, Oz
    Posts
    16
    Local Date
    03-29-2024
    Local Time
    03:08 PM
    Thread Starter
    Quote Originally Posted by Roger Payneicon View Post
    This rifle is exactly as I acquired it in 1997. You can see I've not rushed to refit the cheekpiece, rear sight, & tap the foresight block back a little & fit the waited foresight protector as yet! I believe that it had only been warehouse stored by the one civvy owner who had had it since it was disposed of by the MoD. I doubt that it was ever fitted with a triangular swivel. On top of which that splodgy green paint looks too old & shXXXy to be anything other than of the era, & has now faded somewhat. I've just presumed it to be the work of a previous user who for some reason preferred that to scrim netting, or maybe used both......

    It's been on this forum before, when we were discussing bolt head sizes. The bolt body is factory matching, & the bolt head is also M marked (I'm pretty sure it's the original but I can't prove it) & is very clearly marked with a size of '4'.
    Thanks very much for that. That is very interesting. It's nice to see proof of camo paint use. This forum really is quite a deep mine of information.

    ---------- Post added at 06:47 PM ---------- Previous post was at 06:37 PM ----------

    Quote Originally Posted by Alan de Enfield View Post
    Agreed, but when a seller is not confident enough to quote them as 'safe to fire' and says 'probably' made DP for convenience of storage ............................


    Purchased in a batch of No.4 MkI T barreled receivers from India, these show that during the early 1960s, Indian Ordnance was looking at upgrading the Mk I T to Mk II T. These barreled receivers appear to be original Britishicon sniper rifle Mk I T actions, modified to Mk II.

    These barrelled receivers still have the pads fitted to take the scope bracket, and in this particular action, the barrel is a very good condition 2 groove barrel. The actions and barrels are marked "DP" for drill purpose, but in this case was probably for obsolescence and ease of storage



    To quote PL :

    Would YOU fire one? I’ve been an Armourer for a couple of years and while I or your local gunsmith could examine one and give it a bright clean bill of health, would YOU trust it. NO, I wouldn’t either!
    Hi AdE
    I have read through your replies. Thanks for your concern.
    I have asked a few gunsmiths if they would test and/or possibly rebarrel the action. If they find it not to be safe, I'll bin it of course.
    Whatever happens, I accept the risk.

  7. #15
    Legacy Member Bindi2's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Last On
    Yesterday @ 06:57 PM
    Location
    Western Australia
    Posts
    1,446
    Local Date
    03-29-2024
    Local Time
    01:08 PM
    DB you accept the risk for yourself but what about those standing next to you or those that use it with or after you.

  8. The Following 3 Members Say Thank You to Bindi2 For This Useful Post:


  9. #16
    Contributing Member 30Three's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2013
    Last On
    03-19-2024 @ 03:50 PM
    Location
    France
    Posts
    809
    Local Date
    03-29-2024
    Local Time
    06:08 AM
    Would you jump out of an aeroplane with a parachute that was marked "classroom training only"?
    Probably not! so why would you risk your face with a DP rifle!

  10. The Following 4 Members Say Thank You to 30Three For This Useful Post:


  11. #17
    Contributing Member
    Buccaneer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Last On
    Yesterday @ 02:15 PM
    Location
    Cardiff Wales UK
    Posts
    472
    Real Name
    Paul Ellis
    Local Date
    03-29-2024
    Local Time
    05:08 AM
    As a lowly ex RAF armorer with a lot more experience with aircraft weapons than small arms I'm always amazed at the potential lack of respect that some people seem to want to show to ex military firearms.
    If a rifle is DP it was done for a very good reason and unless you can somehow travel back in time to find out the reason then you just have except that it is U/S for any other purpose than carrying out Drill Practice on the drill square.
    It is simply stupid and foolhardy to treat it in any other way as it will almost certainly be a ticking time bomb that will fail at some point and kill or seriously injure some innocent party at some point in the future. The military are very well know for recycling and reusing equipment but if someone decides to say that something is now unsafe who are we to argue. I'm sure that there are plenty of people on this forum who understand "Cut & Shut" when it comes to repairing wrecked motor vehicles, they can be made to look great and perfectly ok until they are involved in another accident when they just fold up and kill the poor occupant who in all probability did not realize that he was driving a death trap.
    REME and other military Armorers have knowledge built up over decades of working with the equipment that we now collect shoot and enjoy, pay heed to there wisdom and don't do something that could cause you harm or kill an innocent person somewhere down the line just because you think that you know better.

  12. The Following 6 Members Say Thank You to Buccaneer For This Useful Post:


  13. #18
    Legacy Member DeeBee's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2019
    Last On
    08-20-2021 @ 06:25 PM
    Location
    Victoria, Oz
    Posts
    16
    Local Date
    03-29-2024
    Local Time
    03:08 PM
    Thread Starter
    As it happens, I have a mechanical engineering design qualification. I have years of experience designing a variety of complicated machines. I have been trained in, and have experience in, material strength design and analysis, material failure modes, machining operations, surface treatments, and testing methods for all of these. I know how & why steel breaks, and how to check for its likely hood.

    And I'm telling you, if a component passes adequate specification tests, it can be used in the machine. If it passes the tests, it won't likely fail.
    These tests are not worth doing on a common item, but the "T" receiver is exotic enough to warrant it.

    I'm not inventing a whole raft of new & untried methods, these are known & routine tests.
    They might not be what you would learn when maintaining a large quantity of a limited range of machines, with a large spares inventory, but they are standard operations in my field.
    There is no great mystic to attach to this. It's just engineering.

    I am satisfied with the material & operation tests outlined by the gunsmith I communicated with. A gunsmith who seems to entirely disagree with many of the people on this thread.

    This operation may be outside of your range of experience, but it's not out of mine.

  14. #19
    Advisory Panel
    Peter Laidler's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Last On
    03-24-2024 @ 09:52 AM
    Location
    Abingdon, Oxfordshire. The home of MG Cars
    Posts
    16,507
    Real Name
    Peter Laidler
    Local Date
    03-29-2024
    Local Time
    07:08 AM
    I have been asked if I would like to pass comment on this thread. But after reading DB's thread (above) and to keep the thread diplomatically sound, I'll keep any other views to myself thanks very much. Except for one thing if I might. Experience! But that said, in the world of No4's and rifles generally mine is quite trifling compared to to DB's

  15. The Following 3 Members Say Thank You to Peter Laidler For This Useful Post:


  16. #20
    Legacy Member Bindi2's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Last On
    Yesterday @ 06:57 PM
    Location
    Western Australia
    Posts
    1,446
    Local Date
    03-29-2024
    Local Time
    01:08 PM
    D B
    Do you have the Master gauges.

+ Reply to Thread
Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 1 2

Similar Threads

  1. Proposed ITAR changes
    By Vincent in forum The Watering Hole OT (Off Topic) Forum
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: 07-28-2015, 01:09 PM
  2. Non-political question about proposed sale of Korean M1s
    By RBruce in forum M1 Garand/M14/M1A Rifles
    Replies: 25
    Last Post: 07-19-2011, 12:44 PM
  3. M1 Carbines on the proposed Forbidden list
    By Louis of PA in forum M1/M2 Carbine
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 04-21-2009, 10:05 AM
  4. NFA Official Response to Proposed Amendments to Bill C-301
    By X-man in forum Milsurps General Discussion Forum
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 03-20-2009, 05:43 PM

Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
Raven Rocks