N° 8 Mk I trainer fitted with an A. J. Parker 8/53 sight attachment

[Didier]

PH No 5D was used for the No8 it did not use the threaded hole as used for the ejector on the No4 .It had a higher mounting arm than the PH 5 and used threaded holes on the left side of the receiver. One that was much higher then found on the .303 cal. No4 and the hole just in front of the safety . that is not found on the No4 .

Thank you.
So, if I got it right, the receiver of my No. 8 is already threaded to accommodate such a PH No 5D sight?

Here are some better pictures:

[Didier]

- was it common for .22 LR Enfield trainers to undergo FTRs?

Most definitely not. I have collected auction sales adverts of (almost) all No.8s offered here in Germany for several years. I have never seen one marked with FTR before. The FTR UE 66 refers to a factory thorough repair at Enfield in the 1960s. See "the Lee Enfield Story" P.442.

BTW. thanks to the FTR, that looks like a "very low mileage" No.8. You were lucky!

Patrick

I have found on the Internet another No. 8 from the same batch of 1966 Enfield FTR'ed trainers:



This one is serial # A5938; mine is serial # A5685, which leads me to think that they might have been renumbered at Enfield - surely you will know whether there is such a possibility?

[Mk VII]

Some, at least, of them, had a shorter windage arm with less adjustment (because with .22 you were not going to shoot with huge amounts of wind). Some appear to have used the standard PH5C one, which may have been clearup of parts on hand.

https://www.rifleman.org.uk/PH_Service_sights.html#5A

[Didier]

Some, at least, of them, had a shorter windage arm with less adjustment (because with .22 you were not going to shoot with huge amounts of wind). Some appear to have used the standard PH5C one, which may have been clearup of parts on hand.

https://www.rifleman.org.uk/PH_Service_sights.html#5A

Thank you for the explanation and the link.

[tr63]

Thank you.
So, if I got it right, the receiver of my No. 8 is already threaded to accommodate such a PH No 5D sight?

Here are some better pictures:

https://www.milsurps.com/images/impo...gqM3jePh-1.jpghttps://www.milsurps.com/images/impo...5qk5su5h-1.jpghttps://www.milsurps.com/images/impo...DgqC3SRh-1.jpghttps://www.milsurps.com/images/impo...9DgqIyQh-1.jpghttps://www.milsurps.com/images/impo...fz4eKBkh-1.jpghttps://www.milsurps.com/images/impo...9kssyNdh-1.jpghttps://www.milsurps.com/images/impo...fSAuQEqh-1.jpghttps://www.milsurps.com/images/impo...frsmoSKh-1.jpghttps://www.milsurps.com/images/impo...mquC8PQh-1.jpghttps://www.milsurps.com/images/impo...uETPbPch-1.jpghttps://www.milsurps.com/images/impo...OL1vxi1h-1.jpghttps://www.milsurps.com/images/impo...ilrbnSMh-1.jpghttps://www.milsurps.com/images/impo...gH5oKhEh-1.jpghttps://www.milsurps.com/images/impo...aeAzDxph-1.jpghttps://www.milsurps.com/images/impo...9e4UDL8h-1.jpghttps://www.milsurps.com/images/impo...331S5UHh-1.jpghttps://www.milsurps.com/images/impo...ndm2fkyh-1.jpg

Yes your No8 is set up to have you to screw a PH5D sight to the left side of the receiver .

[Didier]

Yes your No8 is set up to have you to screw a PH5D sight to the left side of the receiver .

Now finding one and being able to afford it is another matter altogether !
Were these PH sights rather the exception or the rule at the time when No. 8 trainers were in service? They must have added considerably to the cost of the rifle, so I suppose they must have been used for small-bore competition rather than the basic training of cadets. As regards small-bore competition, I would be interested to know which of these sights were officially acknowledged for participation.

[RobD]

For a selection of sights with prices, see Untitled 1

[Strangely Brown]

Now finding one and being able to afford it is another matter altogether !
Were these PH sights rather the exception or the rule at the time when No. 8 trainers were in service? They must have added considerably to the cost of the rifle, so I suppose they must have been used for small-bore competition rather than the basic training of cadets. As regards small-bore competition, I would be interested to know which of these sights were officially acknowledged for participation.

Didier,

They were purchased privately by the cadet force the No.8's belonged to; my own county cadet force in the 1960's had No.8's but with the plain issued leaf sight that the 8/53 fits onto.
Many of the public schools cadet forces (CCF) were better funded and had the 8/53; I don't think a distinction was made in competition between the various sights as these were mainly used at 25 metres so not offering a huge advantage.

[Nigel]

Back in 1981 when, as a cadet, I shot a No.8 in the Country Life competition there were two distinct classes. Class A Cup was for No.8 rifles fitted with Match sights. We used the PH 5D with aperture/globe foresights. 93 units entered this class. Class B Cup was for the as issued rear sights with blade foresights - 60 units entered this class.

[Didier]

Many thanks to both of you for this first hand information - these are the details that we do not read much about on the Net although they give us a better understanding of how and why these PH and AJP sights were used.