Whats the best Lee-Enfield?

[KBM1]

Of the two choices you listed, I'd go with the earlier gun. All things being about equal.

 

[Ignition Override]

With so many Enfield #4/Mk1s produced with 2-groove bores, why does almost all Prvi and similarly-priced commercial ammo have boat tail (BT) bullets?

My Longbranch has a bright bore and good rifling, but it keyholed badly at 100 yards with new Prvi BT bullets. They looked like long gashes.
Forgot to check the bullet weight and this was months ago.

Maybe the BT 147 (150) or so grain bullets spin/stabilize better than the heavier bullets?

 

[wogpotter]

I guess you have to think of other .311 bores like the Arisaka 7.7 that factor into the commercial side of bullet making. Only 2-groove Lee-Enfields have the problem so makers go for bore diameter rather than the Lee-Enfield.
It seems standard to have 150 Gr flat base, but 174Gr BT but switching back to FB for 180 Gr RN types. I don't know why, possibly to duplicate the performance of the MkVII round's light tip filler?

 

[mkk41]

A Canuck might want the Long Branch , but I'll stick by my Savage-made No.4Mk.1*.

 

[adrians]

canadians should get a lithgow and the aussies should get the longbranch,
just to confuse people and have a laugh aswell,,,,,
just joking fella's don't shoot!!!!

 

[adrians]

my next one

 

[argyle1812]

Ishapore Enfield

 

[Ignition Override]

Rustle in the Bushes:
To answer your original question, if you only want aperture sights on a rifle like I do, the #4 or the #5 (my 'family').

For what it is worth, a guy walked away from his car in either AK or BC to take a leak.
Luckily he had his "Jungle Carbine" on him because the loud "rustle in the bushes" or thuds from the trees was a charging grizzly.

Four very quick shots later the grizzly was stopped, and very close. If anybody can describe how to find the original story, please don't hold back.

 

[30-30remchester]

Without any whining and crying, how does the Savage rate in the scale of SMLE quality? I know they doent have the fine machining of pre war models, but how is the quality of steel,fit, ect?

 

[gyvel]

A Canuck might want the Long Branch , but I'll stick by my Savage-made No.4Mk.1*.

Judging by the "U" stamp on the receiver, I'd say your Savage is a South African re-issue.

 

[Tikirocker]

Judging by the "U" stamp on the receiver, I'd say your Savage is a South African re-issue.

U stamp just means S.A Government ownership ... does not indicate reissue of any kind.

Tiki.

 

[Tikirocker]

how does the Savage rate in the scale of SMLE quality? I know they doent have the fine machining of pre war models, but how is the quality of steel,fit, ect?

Even though the Mk1* rifles were a war time expedient, all factories had the same standards for quality control in production. I have seen good and poorly finished rifles from every factory that produced the No4 rifle - very often the rifles at the end of a production run may be rougher than others as the tooling started to wear down - this happened at every factory.

There are really no appreciable differences at the end of the day apart from the fact that BSA markings can be sloppy by comparison to other factories. I have No4's from every factory that made them and they are all excellent rifles, you wouldn't question any of them for fit and finish.

Wear during a rifles service life is the chief concern ...

Tiki.

 

[gyvel]

U stamp just means S.A Government ownership ... does not indicate reissue of any kind.

???????? How do you figure? It wasn't issued to the South African government to begin with. It became their property later, hence, "reissue."

Bit of a semantics problem here.

 

[Tikirocker]

Gyvel,

Allow me to explain. The British Government provided rifles to all member states of the Commonwealth Empire during WW2 ... they also purpose built and provided No4's on contract to dozens of nations and colonial backwaters - shall I list them all?

South Africa was a part of the British Commonwealth Forces during WW2 and they were indeed contracted rifles directly, upon which they placed their Government Ownership mark.

The British Government did not therefore issue these rifles to themselves first, they sent them directly as contract to South Africa and South Africa then issued the rifles to their Military. No reissue anywhere ... if they were re-issued, you would find another Government Ownership mark on the rifle, barred out or scrubbed, and then the S.A mark placed near it or over it - much like the Inidans did with their own I.P Indian Pattern refurbs.

The rifle is not re-issued, it is just S.A Government ownership marked ... that's the semantics of it.

Tiki.

 

[madcratebuilder]

Without any whining and crying, how does the Savage rate in the scale of SMLE quality? I know they doent have the fine machining of pre war models, but how is the quality of steel,fit, ect?

The first 17K Savage No4's had the standard bolt release then switched to the war time expedient bolt release. Overall fit and finish is good, I've never encountered a "A" suffix Savage, the "A" suffix means a non standard part was used in the rifle. Fazakerley seems to hold the "A" suffix record.

The Savage roll marks and serial numbers are very well done, no EP used on them.

Early 42 Savage-Stevens No4 MkI.

 

[MJ1]

I like my BSA

...............................................