brown dog Posted January 28, 2012 Report Share Posted January 28, 2012 Heard various thoughts on the original No4(T) accuracy requirement; interested to spot this in the 1960 book "The Lee Enfield Rifle" by Major EGB Reynolds (which I understand to be authoritative): Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Davy Posted January 28, 2012 Report Share Posted January 28, 2012 Seems reasonable, I can put three shots in a 12" group at 1000 yards on a good day with mine which I think is impressive for such a rifle. I have only shot snaps and McQueens at short distances so it is hard to say how it grouped. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tackb Posted January 28, 2012 Report Share Posted January 28, 2012 Here's a cool idea , why not all of you with no4t's shoot the 7 shot groups at 2 and 4 hundred yards and see how the old war horses are ageing? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Davy Posted January 28, 2012 Report Share Posted January 28, 2012 That would be an interesting exercise, I can try the 200 during the HME zero session but 400 would not be so easy as we seldom shoot below 800 other than to confirm zero. I will see if I can get something sorted out over the next few weeks. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bunny Shooter Posted January 29, 2012 Report Share Posted January 29, 2012 Interesting requirements. I would have thought it would have been more like half those figures. That data is obviously with the original scope. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
brown dog Posted January 29, 2012 Author Report Share Posted January 29, 2012 Interesting requirements. I would have thought it would have been more like half those figures. That data is obviously with the original scope. Have you looked through one? I'd liken it to aiming through a toilet roll tube with your thumb sticking up in the middle as the reticle. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
brown dog Posted January 29, 2012 Author Report Share Posted January 29, 2012 That would be an interesting exercise, I can try the 200 during the HME zero session but 400 would not be so easy as we seldom shoot below 800 other than to confirm zero. I will see if I can get something sorted out over the next few weeks. 'Postal' competition? Think there's a bunch of us on here with them - I could create and upload a standard 5 inch circle target and we post pics of the result with named ammo /load details. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bunny Shooter Posted January 29, 2012 Report Share Posted January 29, 2012 Have you looked through one? I'd liken it to aiming through a toilet roll tube with your thumb sticking up in the middle as the reticle. Only looked through a reproduction one, never shot with one, and I agree with you're description of what it looks like Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Davy Posted January 29, 2012 Report Share Posted January 29, 2012 I am up for that. For anyone that has not looked through a No32 Mk* 'scope, the centre post is probably 3.5MOA wide, it certainly covers the black on a small frame at 1000 yards. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
brown dog Posted January 29, 2012 Author Report Share Posted January 29, 2012 I am up for that. For anyone that has not looked through a No32 Mk* 'scope, the centre post is probably 3.5MOA wide, it certainly covers the black on a small frame at 1000 yards. How about this? Thought the inverted triangle point maybe a useful aiming spot (?) (annoyingly, as a word document it's spot on 5"; as a pdf it shrinks a bit - will need playing with scalle printing to get it spot on) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bunny Shooter Posted September 9, 2012 Report Share Posted September 9, 2012 How about this? Thought the inverted triangle point maybe a useful aiming spot (?) (annoyingly, as a word document it's spot on 5"; as a pdf it shrinks a bit - will need playing with scalle printing to get it spot on) Was this to be done with "issue" scopes as I'm thinking of scoping my No.4 (haven't an "issue" scope but have an old Tasco with 4x mag on it ) and I'm going to give this a try Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gazzar15 Posted September 9, 2012 Report Share Posted September 9, 2012 Was this to be done with "issue" scopes as I'm thinking of scoping my No.4 (haven't an "issue" scope but have an old Tasco with 4x mag on it ) and I'm going to give this a try I would like to try my No4 with optics but been trying recently to get hold of a scope mount with little success. Any suggestions?? Thanks Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bunny Shooter Posted September 9, 2012 Report Share Posted September 9, 2012 I would like to try my No4 with optics but been trying recently to get hold of a scope mount with little success. Any suggestions?? Thanks Hi, I'm using the S&K one & find it rock solid http://www.brownells.com/.aspx/pid=12461/Product/NO-DRILL-NO-TAP-SCOPE-MOUNT Stock #: 794-001-045WB Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gbal Posted September 9, 2012 Report Share Posted September 9, 2012 Have you looked through one? I'd liken it to aiming through a toilet roll tube with your thumb sticking up in the middle as the reticle. Bloody brilliant-why don't we call it S class.This could sort the men from the men,though no doubt some will persist in being slightly more equal than others. ('bog standard class' is just gratuitouslysilly so I'll suggest it). It will be seriously interesting though to see what relatively basic kit can do.My son and I were casually talking about old military rifles etc-I don't suppose a 10 moa one would excite accuracy fiends,but as we were having a pizza,we tried just holding the ten inch pizza base plastic circle on our upper bodies.Try it- from 100 yards,where would you like the bullet to go?!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chris-NZ Posted September 9, 2012 Report Share Posted September 9, 2012 From my experience, No.4s are -on average- a pig with lipstick in the accuracy dep't. Some will shoot "acceptably" but most are quite disappointing by modern stds. I'm down to one Fulton-regulated No.4- ditched the other one as it wasn't even close to acceptable despite a bore in "OK condition". The thing that put this into perspective was shooting my US mate's '03 A3 Springfield in a Mil Rifle comp while over there. That thing is a tackdriver. Your average No.4 isn't in the same league. He has two No.4s in very good condition and shoots these in their occasional .303 comps but neither can hold a candle to the average Springfield. Chris-NZ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tackb Posted September 9, 2012 Report Share Posted September 9, 2012 From my experience, No.4s are -on average- a pig with lipstick in the accuracy dep't. Some will shoot "acceptably" but most are quite disappointing by modern stds. I'm down to one Fulton-regulated No.4- ditched the other one as it wasn't even close to acceptable despite a bore in "OK condition". The thing that put this into perspective was shooting my US mate's '03 A3 Springfield in a Mil Rifle comp while over there. That thing is a tackdriver. Your average No.4 isn't in the same league. He has two No.4s in very good condition and shoots these in their occasional .303 comps but neither can hold a candle to the average Springfield. Chris-NZ There is millions of 'ex' enemy's of the empire who may disagree with you! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
c18rch Posted September 10, 2012 Report Share Posted September 10, 2012 From my experience, No.4s are -on average- a pig with lipstick in the accuracy dep't. Some will shoot "acceptably" but most are quite disappointing by modern stds. I'm down to one Fulton-regulated No.4- ditched the other one as it wasn't even close to acceptable despite a bore in "OK condition". The thing that put this into perspective was shooting my US mate's '03 A3 Springfield in a Mil Rifle comp while over there. That thing is a tackdriver. Your average No.4 isn't in the same league. He has two No.4s in very good condition and shoots these in their occasional .303 comps but neither can hold a candle to the average Springfield. Chris-NZ How can you compare a 70+ year old rifle by modern standards? One of the lads that shoots at Bisley with us shoots his a 1000yds and whilst not F-Class standard he can keep them all on the target. Thats better than some modern rifles I've seen attempting to do the same. Likie any rifle brand/model there are good ones and bad ones, just the good ones are becoming more rare as you would expect for a rifle of their age. Rich Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chris-NZ Posted September 10, 2012 Report Share Posted September 10, 2012 How can you compare a 70+ year old rifle by modern standards? .. Rich Umm, might pay to read more carefully Rich. I was comparing them with a 1903 Springfield. Pretty fair wouldn't you say? Chris-NZ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
c18rch Posted September 11, 2012 Report Share Posted September 11, 2012 From my experience, No.4s are -on average- a pig with lipstick in the accuracy dep't. Some will shoot "acceptably" but most are quite disappointing by modern stds. Rich Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tackb Posted September 11, 2012 Report Share Posted September 11, 2012 it's just another mauser clone YAWN , in fact i believe the yanks had to pay royalties to mauser for copying there design? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gbal Posted September 11, 2012 Report Share Posted September 11, 2012 How can you compare a 70+ year old rifle by modern standards? One of the lads that shoots at Bisley with us shoots his a 1000yds and whilst not F-Class standard he can keep them all on the target. Thats better than some modern rifles I've seen attempting to do the same. Likie any rifle brand/model there are good ones and bad ones, just the good ones are becoming more rare as you would expect for a rifle of their age. Rich Maybe it was the rifle shooters that differed.As you say,thee are good ones and good ones,but not all good ones are equal. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gbal Posted September 11, 2012 Report Share Posted September 11, 2012 it's just another mauser clone YAWN , in fact i believe the yanks had to pay royalties to mauser for copying there design? ...and therfore not at all bad.The US armed forces have some choice/expertise,as has US industry-you have heard of 'Lend Lease',I assume-when it comes to military hardware.Was there a better bolt option all round than a mauser design?( magazine is arguable,I agree).The unsporting Boers too even had the affrontery to use the 7x57 round,a bit earlier.And,yawn,yawn,it still works quite splendidly,but not perhaps better than say 7-08 in a ...which mauser related modern rifle do you find most boring?There aren't many turn bolts around that would surprise old Paul,though he might not quite get royalties any more.If you want a Blaser,try a Ross,and be damned!Some designs have improved.I believe the very best bespoke (London) rifle suppliers were quite partial to mauser actions too,and their customers were not financially limited in any way,old chap.They needed the best,if they opted for a bolt,but knew when to call a 7x57 a 275 Rigby. george Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tackb Posted September 11, 2012 Report Share Posted September 11, 2012 ...and therfore not at all bad.The US armed forces have some choice/expertise,as has US industry-you have heard of 'Lend Lease',I assume-when it comes to military hardware.Was there a better bolt option all round than a mauser design?( magazine is arguable,I agree).The unsporting Boers too even had the affrontery to use the 7x57 round,a bit earlier.And,yawn,yawn,it still works quite splendidly,but not perhaps better than say 7-08 in a ...which mauser related modern rifle do you find most boring?There aren't many turn bolts around that would surprise old Paul,though he might not quite get royalties any more.If you want a Blaser,try a Ross,and be damned!Some designs have improved.I believe the very best bespoke (London) rifle suppliers were quite partial to mauser actions too,and their customers were not financially limited in any way,old chap.They needed the best,if they opted for a bolt,but knew when to call a 7x57 a 275 Rigby. george Never said they were bad ? Yes, the Enfield was a better option . The boars mausers wernt responsible for our bloody nose it was stupid tactics (ww1 was the same) I've yet to handle any strait pull I'd stake my life on! My original reply was to object to a kiwis criticism of our splendid 303 . Russ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Strangely Brown Posted September 11, 2012 Report Share Posted September 11, 2012 From my experience, No.4s are -on average- a pig with lipstick in the accuracy dep't. Some will shoot "acceptably" but most are quite disappointing by modern stds. I'm down to one Fulton-regulated No.4- ditched the other one as it wasn't even close to acceptable despite a bore in "OK condition". The thing that put this into perspective was shooting my US mate's '03 A3 Springfield in a Mil Rifle comp while over there. That thing is a tackdriver. Your average No.4 isn't in the same league. He has two No.4s in very good condition and shoots these in their occasional .303 comps but neither can hold a candle to the average Springfield. Chris-NZ It also depends greatly on what diet you give a No.4, quite frankly there is (was) some awfull milsurp out there and a lot of idiots. A thread a couple of years ago on a Lee Enfield themed forum was discussing the poor accuracy of the No.4 when it was revealed the user had purchased some Yugoslav Mk VIII machine gun ball which comes heavily greased. I purchased 700 rds of this some years ago and thought it shot reasonably well. However it subsequently became clear that our user (in the USA) hadn't thought to clean the grease off! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
.jpg.0972b4e2bdf0b5a4109eb96f2b1b62ad.jpg)
(200x135).jpg.0fd0a94f065c6cb243fdff1b40e0819a.jpg)
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.