German 8mm vs. British Enfield .303 Your Pick?

J

Jamie Young

New member
If you had a choice between the German 8mm Mausers and the British Enfields which would you pick and why? I have held a few Mausers but never fired one and I have just a little experience with a friends Enfield. I like the bolt on the Enfield better but I don't like the Iron Sights. To me all Iron Sights should be like the Mausers. From what my Amatuer experience with Ballistics tells me, both rifles would seem to perform similarly right?

Is it true that the V1 Rockets were designed after the 8mm Mausers BoatTail bullet?
 
I own a No4Mk1, and at one time owned a few K98'sI sold or gave away the K98's and kept the Enfield. Personally, I can't stand the open sights of the Mausers and can't hit the broadside of a barn with them. The Enfield, on the other hand, is a different story altogether. Bowling pins at 250 yds are not safe when I'm shooting Ellie Enfield!
 
Myself I prefer the 8mm and have better luck shooting with the sites on them. I think the sights on both leave a bit to be desired to a 1903 sight.
 
If you dislike the ghost rings on the Enfield No. 4 Mk I, why not try a No. 1 Mk III? The rear sight is forward of the bolt, with a "V" similar to a Mauser.

I like the action of the Enfield better. The Mauser's have a tendency to stick hard after firing, mainly due to cocking on opening, while the Enfield cocks on closing. For rapid fire, the Enfield will be faster every time.
 
You're right Chessman, an Enfield's bolt is so much smoother than any Mauser bolt I've had my hands on. I, also, have noticed that the Mauser bolt tends to stick hard after firing and have never experienced the same phenomenom with Ellie.

I also prefer the ghost ring sights of the No4Mk1 to that of the Mauser.
 
I go for the 8mm. Has more velocity and power (when using fullhouse military or handloads) than the 303. The surplus ammo is cheaper for the 8mm. I like the mauser action better but I agree with the sight issue. I remedy this by grinding out the V-notch to a rectangular notch. Instantly better. Takes away from the originality a little though. My Yugoslavian M48a mauser with an aperture rear sight is deadly past 200 yards. Pick whichever you like best. The sights are pretty much insignificant as well as the caartridge.
 
Both are well-made full power battle rifles. Biggest difference is going to be ergonomics - which one feels and works best for you. Personally, other than the sights, I like the Mauser.

I think that ammo issues favor the 8mm:
-Milsurp 8mm is significantly cheaper right now than .303.
-You can get commercial full-power loads reasonably cheap ($7-9/box) for the Mauser from S&B.
- If you reload, you can make 8mm brass by cutting down '06 brass; can't do that with .303.

Semper fi.

Bruegger out.
 
enfield #4 mk1 or 2 is the superior battle rifle of WW2.
1. better sights - ghostrings like suggested for a "scout"
2. 10rd mag - twice as many
3. faster operation - bolt can be operated without breaking "cheek weld"

that major advantage of the 8mm over the .303 is the cost of surplus ammo, but...the cheap 8mm is corrosive, while the .303 is non-corrosive and reloadable (south african pmp)

the enfield can be turned into a very nice "utility scout" too

i also recall reading somwhere, in my youth, that the v-2 was patterned after the 8mm bullet
 
I have two SMLE#4. Very nice guns, and .303 British
is a really good caliber for just about anything.
Those who used Enfield rifles long enough know their
weak point - if feeding lips of the magazine are a bit off,
and unfortunately it's not a rare situation, there may be a serious feeding problem. Otherwise, SMLE has an incredibly fast action (2 shots in one second is no problem) and average accuracy is better than accuracy of Mauser.
But Mauser has a better trigger, by design, and it's difficult to make SMLE trigger light enough for a good target work. Still, if given a choice, and assuming that magazine is up to the specs, I would pick up SMLE
in preference to Mauser. .303 bullet, although does not
look like something special, is capable of doing the terrible damage to anything it hits.
 
I've owned and fired both and over the years I've ended up with more Enfields (Last count was 8. [Or is it 9? Hmmmmm... So many guns so little time... {CHORTLE!}]) sitting in my `vault' than Mausers. (The 2 `little?' 6.5 Swedes being the only exceptions. {WAN GRIN!}) And dispite the the aforementioned feed `problem' with the mag lips *personally* I'll always go with an Enfield.


But... As always... Remember, "Buyer Beware!" There is a *lot* of `junk' out there in *both* `flavours'. Whatever you finally decide make certain that you look it over *really* carefully and be sure to buy from a *reputable* dealer who will `stand behind what he sells' just in case ole Edsal Murphy decides to pay you a visit.
 
This is ironic that this would come up. I was at a friends house the other day and decided to buy one of each from him. Anybody have any comments on the No. 1 MK3 ? I don't know a whole lot about these surplus rifles and any help would be appreciated. Is this the same as an SMLE ? Are these the earlier versions of the Enfield from WW I ? What are the caracteristics of this model that make it different from the others ? What about strength of the action etc. ?This particular rifle is in perfect condition and is marked U.S. Property.
 
I'll have to give my vote to the SMLE. I have owned several mausers and loved them in their turn. The one I have kept is the Swedish 96, modified a bit of course. The number 4 mkII I picked up for a song is arsenal new, shoots 2in groups at 100yds and would be a rifle I truly would trust to operate in any conditions. I have owned a No. 4 mk I, No. 1 mk.III and others, I can't remember a time that any problem occured that could not be directly attributed to ammo.
 
444,
The No 1 Mk III is the WWI version with the barrel sights. The British WWII versions have a peep sight and the wood and forend cap is a bit different with the barrel protruding past the cap in the peep sighted versions. There are exceptions to this WWI vs. WWII explanation as the Australian WWII rifles were of the No 1 Mk III pattern and I think the Ishapore arsenal (India) versions were also. The barrel on the No 4s (peep sighted versions) is also a bit heavier and the rifle is then a bit heavier, but not much. All of these are SMLEs.

The one marked U.S. Property is likely a Savage. They made some during WWII (I think) and they are just as good as any of the others. As for the strength of the SMLE action, it isn't as strong as many other rifles so don't load it as hot as you would rifles based on the M98 Mauser. That isn't really a weak point since all the factory ammo you might buy is within pressure specifications for this rifle. Just don't think you can exceed the reloading manual with impunity.

One problem the SMLEs have, and probably the 8mm Mausers though I have no experience with those, is that the barrel specifications vary a great deal. You could end up trying to make .311-.312" jacketed bullets shoot well in a .316-.318 barrel, which is fairly hopeless. They aren't all oversize though and I think I have read that the Savage versions tend to be smaller (like they should be).
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top