MPI of Lee enfield No.4 MkII UF55 series

[ToineS]

You have been reading things on the internet ..........................

The quality produced, not only wartime, but post war was probably the worst of all manufacturers, the working relationship was appalling with unionisation and refusal to meet 'conditions' causing huge problems, and because of this they did not get future work and were closed down.

Another small extract from one of Peter Laidlers training lessons :

After the end of the upgrading programme, the ‘new-build’ PF- and UF55A- No4 Mk2 rifles were produced. But by this time, industrial relations at Fazakerley were best described as ‘tense’ and the factory began its slow inevitable decline. Even the offer of the secretive L2A3 Sterling and L1A1 rifle contract couldn’t sweeten or un-blinker the suicidal workforce. So while Sterling got on with making and selling its guns to the rest of the world and BSA stepped in at the last moment to rescue the L1A1 SLR, the remaining SLR machinery went from Fazakerley to Lithgow …………….. but that’s another story.


Why do you think almost all of the No4T's were made using BSA manufactured rifles ?
(The quality was better and more consistent)

Wow. Live an learn.
Yes, I did read that on the internet.
As I’m reading this on the internet! 😇
But a source like Peter can’t be ignored, of course…

I’ll try other ammo and if the results are the same, I’ll try a No.1 sight blade. If all else fails, I’ll convert a No.4 sight blade to -0.060 specs…
I can also just set the MkI rear sight to 450 yards, but that just doesn’t feel right…
Shame, as it’s a lovely (and to my layman’s eyes, well made) rifle!
Thanks for the info, Alan. Much appreciated!

[Alan de Enfield]

I’ll convert a No.4 sight blade to -0.060 specs…

A fairly easy modification to do, but, as I'm sure you know all of the actual blades are the same height (about 0.14") - it is simply the thickness of the stool (base) that changes. You cannot modify the base by taking 0.03" off it so you must take it off the blade and re-profile it.

[ToineS]

A fairly easy modification to do, but, as I'm sure you know all of the actual blades are the same height (about 0.14") - it is simply the thickness of the stool (base) that changes. You cannot modify the base by taking 0.03" off it so you must take it off the blade and re-profile it.

Thanks! Yes, I was aware of that: you have to take an equal amount of the base and the blade and re-profile the blade.
Shouldn’t be to big a job with a lathe.

Do you know if the No.1 foresight specs were identical to No.4 foresight specs, dovetail-foot wise?
In other words, will a No.1 foresight fit a No.4 foresight without the need to change anything?

[Alan de Enfield]

you have to take an equal amount of the base and the blade

If you take anything off the base, then the dovetail will not fit into the slot. You will need to take all 0.030 from the top of the blade.

Re the No1 blades - I think the answer is NO.
They have different part numbers so I thnk they are different.

[ToineS]

If you take anything off the base, then the dovetail will not fit into the slot. You will need to take all 0.030 from the top of the blade.

Re the No1 blades - I think the answer is NO.
They have different part numbers so I thnk they are different.

Of course: off the top of the base! The parts left and right of the blade, gotcha!

[Alan de Enfield]

Of course: off the top of the base! The parts left and right of the blade, gotcha!

Remove 0.030 from the top (the area marked colour yellow) of a -0.030 sight blade.
or
Remove 0.060 from the top (the area marked colour yellow) of a 0.000 sight blade.

Both will give you an effective -0.060 sight blade.

Ensure that you buy the correct type of foresight blade (solid, split, type 1 or type 2 etc etc) for your modification.

[browningautorifle]

Yes, I will try a different ammo brand. Maybe that’s what’s causing it…
Thanks for the suggestion!

And...that was what post two said.

[CINDERS]

So now to throw a crushed crab into the mix, before all else buy different brands of ammo and maybe even tailor some reloads and find what best groups in the rifle me I'd go with option 2 and reloads but it depends on how often you are going to shoot the rifle.
Get the best grouping one and keep that then do the sight -.060 as no use going with changing the sight and finding the dispersion is up sh*t creek at 600yds.
Now here is what I think is the kicker with all this palava trying to get the correlation on the sight ladder to bullet strike with modern pills they just fly flatter so you may get the impact on at 100 but still find your correlation does not match up at say 600 yds. I am interested to see if it all works.

I have loaded some 303 174 SMK's up some time ago to do a test on velocity V's known trajectory with them, I matched it to within an inch or so on a MKVII ball round mid range for 600yds I thought that would be a better way to go rather than sight blades.
I then reasoned that the said load may be okay for 600 but at say 300 I may find the arc higher than what it should be as these pills will be travelling allot slower than the 2440Fps of the MkVII ball load it may be mere conjecture but until I get off my sorry date and do it its pure speculation.
I did however spend allot of time looking over the charts and doing the trajectory figures & comparisons and arrived at the set velocity for that range, be interesting perhaps, however you may find you have to do the yardage and with the round you chose and keep the DOPE.
As far as my testing goes being the absolute slack ar*e I brought motor bikes instead so most week ends are spent belting around on them instead of shooting.
And with fine weather here why wouldn't you be out on this instead of being a lizard lying in the hot sun!

[Daan Kemp]

Lizarding doesn't sound so bad.

[browningautorifle]

wouldn't you be out on this

You make it look pretty small Cinders...good to see you.