Scoping a No. 4 Enfield?

[Blackwater]

I have a No. 4 Brit Enfield that I want to scope. I'm aware of some of the mounts that are available, but none quite suit me or, I think, this particular rifle. I want to make it into a facsimile of the old Brit Sporting Rifles of the early to middle days in Africa. I think I've found the stock I want, but I want the scope mount to look like it "fits" on this rifle. Any recommendations would be appreciated. The Enfields don't have the most flowing lines, so I'll be polishing and sanding/bead blasting different parts of it to give it a more pleasing visual texture. If anyone has an idea how to do this or what mount can be modified to give it a nicer profile, I'd really appreciate your relating it here. I suspect others would be interested also.

[Petrol & Powder]

Most of the mounts that I've seen on Enfields place the scope way too high above the receiver. Even when combined with a cheek rest they are rather tall. The mounts typically attach to the left side of the receiver or use some type of front band that encircles the barrel.
If you're sporterizing it anyway, the Lee-Enfield may be a candidate for an extended eye relief scope mounted forward of the action in Scout rifle fashion. That would allow you to retain the stripper clip feed and good access to the magazine from above.
In any event, I would stay away from large objective scopes, you want the scope to be as thin and short (vertically) as possible.

Just my $0.02 worth.

[Outpost75]

Here is how mine was done, mount machined from one piece, scope offset to permit charger reloading, unobstructed use of the battlesights. Uses Ruger rings. All it takes is MONEY and a clever gunsmith with a Bridgeport mill.
Attachment 151342Attachment 151343Attachment 151344

I started with a No. 4 Mk2* Long Branch. My "Bush Rifle" was inspired by Major Blashford-Snell' s expedition rifle and has a heavy hammer-forged 22” barrel, P.14 front sight, is glass bedded in the DCRA style, with custom scope mount screwed, pinned and the pin heads TIG welded to the scope base.

I carried for years a copy of the British magazine Shooting Times and Country, which had a detailed article and pictures of Major Blashford-Snell’s “expedition rifle” which was converted from a No.4 Mk.I*T sniper. Blashford-Snell was a CBI vet who had been an adviser to Wingate's Chindits. Most of Blashford-Snell’s African postwar "expeditions" were conducted under auspices of the British Museum, though knowing what we do now about what was going on at the time, I expect Mi6 might have been the real client. His "bush rifle" put together by Holland & Holland, started from a No.4 Sniper, shortened to make a short, half-stocked, scoped, heavy barreled jungle carbine in 7.62mm NATO.

While my first thought was to convert to 7.62 NATO, I was convinced otherwise and stuck with the .303.
I spoke with UK NRA and DCRA gunsmiths at GREAT length. They said that there were always "issues" of one sort or another trying to make a reliable-feeding 7.62 rifle on the No.4. While the Long Branch and Savage receivers had better steel than UK production and were strong enough, feeding was never 100%. Also, when shot "alot" headspace loosened and it was necessary to refit the next larger bolt head "before the barrel was shot out." So, I was advised in strongest possible terms to forget about building a 7.62, but to keep the rifle in its original .303 caliber, because I would be much happier.

I was assured that it was completely OK to go ahead and use a match quality .308 groove diameter barrel, of 10-inch twist, to enable use of common US bullets and stabilize everything. You could shoot ordinary .303 ammo down the .30 caliber barrel without issue and everything would be just fine. I was skeptical at first of that claim, but was able to obtain radial copper pressure test barrels with both .303 British and US cal. .30 rifling dimensions, by Boots Obermeyer and tested them with Cdn and UK military, US and Cdn. commercial as well as handloads with Sierra and Hornady bullets of both diameters. Yes, pressure is higher, but it is not dangerous, the resulting sample averages being within design limits of a sound Long Branch, essentially +3500 psi or 48,000 max vs. 44,500 max. - much less than 7.62 NATO at 52,000 which gave problems with bolts compressing, receivers stretching and less than stellar magazine feeding.

The WW2 style battlesight is zeroed with the two apertures for 200 and 400 yards with 180-gr. Remington ammo. You can use iron sights or scope at will and stripper clip load from the top. The scope comes off or goes back on easily without loss of zero. The barrel is 7.62 NATO blank of 4-groove government form, the chamber cut with the SAAMI .303 British pressure-velocity test barrel reamer. This is a minimum chamber which does not blow the shoulder forward like the Military chambers do. Indeed, it shoots any factory .303 Brit ammo fine, or handloads with common .308 diameter bullets. Brass life is quite good. A solid 2-1/2 moa rifle with good lots of ball ammo, and about 1.5 moa with handloaded Sierras. Good enough.

Its short-stroke bolt and 10-shot magazine give it good rate of fire. I shot it at the Cherry Ridge, NJ Infantry Trophy Matches, starting with full magazine I could bang those off, reload with two strippers and usually get the second ten off in 50 secs. at 500 and 600 with enough hits on the "E" silhouette to get bonus points. I scored about the same with it as I did my issue-grade M1 Garand. It is true that one will get off a few more shots with the M1, but my hits per string were the same until I got back to 300 yards, where the Garand has the clear advantage in sitting rapid by not having to work the bolt.

100-yd. test Gibbs Rifle Co. (Martinsburg, WV) No. 4 Long Branch Carbine, "Historical Recreation"- CENTER BEDDED

Ammunition---Avg Five Consecutive 5-shot groups at 100 yds with issue iron sights, fired from sandbags

------------------------------------------ LARGEST-----------Smallest---------AVERAGE
Greek HXP ball, 1975-------------------4.1-------------------2.4----------------3.9

Remington 180-gr. SPCL---------------3.9-------------------2.3----------------2.9

WW2 GB43 Mk.VII (Cordite)-----------8.5-------------------3.0----------------6.7

This is the best which can be hoped for using an issue barrel and stock with original chamber, properly bedded, without glass. This Gibbs historical recreation is no longer available, but was a more accurate rifle than original No. 5 carbines, and equal to the best standard No.4 rifles because it is simply a cut-down standard No.4 Mk2* fitted into a new jungle carbine stock. The cut down No. 4 barrel is stiffer and more rigid than original carbine barrels. Fitting the No.5 carbine flash hider on the muzzle adds some dampening. Also, the No.4 receiver does not have the lightening cuts which WW2 carbines did. When assembling these rifle new barrels and wood were fitted, and they were assembled by former Parker-Hale gunsmiths who had been trained in UK. They were good rifles out of the box and the test sample did not suffer from the "wondering zero" common of No.5s.

================================================== ===============
100-yd. test of No.4 Long Branch "Bush Rifle" 7.62 barrel chambered .303 British - CENTER BEDDED

Ammunition -------Avg five consecutive 5-shot groups at 100 yds., Weaver K4 scope, from sandbags

------------------------------------------ LARGEST-----------Smallest---------AVERAGE
Greek HXP 75 Ball-----------------------4.2-------------------2.5----------------3.3

Remington 180-hr. SPCL----------------3.1-------------------1.5----------------2.3

WW2 GB43 Mk.VII (Cordite)------------7.0-------------------2.4----------------4.6

HL, LC87 M118 pulls, 42 RL-15---------2.6-------------------1.2----------------2.2

HL, Sierra 175MK, 40 IMR4064---------2.5-------------------1.1----------------1.7

This is the reasonable expectation of a hunting rifle, set up with .30 cal. barrel and .303 chamber.

[yovinny]

You want a battle rifle or a hunting rifle ?
For hunting rifle, cut off the charging bridge and rear sight, grind it all into flowing lines
Cut the barrel to get rid of the big brush catcher up front and re-crown.
Then you can use a plain old Williams side mount....Or for more class, find an old G&H flat plate mount.
The Williams will place the scope almost like the side mount in the pic above, but I believe a little lower and more to center....Too low to retain the top hand guard with a belled scope.
Use standard rings, not the off set ones. The off set ones are actually off set too much and place the scope to the right of center on a lee enfield.
If you still want open sights, you can still mount a Williams wgrs on the barrel and use a low front ramp.

Though,,, lee enfields arent $39. anymore and you'd probably be $$ ahead just selling it and buying a nice 700.

Just my .02
Cheers, YV

[Petrol & Powder]

I think you retained all of the best qualities of the Lee-Enfield while improved upon what could be improved.

That's a nice rig and an excellent write up. Thank You for sharing that Outpost

[Outpost75]

I think you retained all of the best qualities of the Lee-Enfield while improved upon what could be improved.

That's a nice rig and an excellent write up. Thank You for sharing that Outpost

Could not afford doing it today, but when I worked in the industry and had a Universal Receiver, a budget for test and experimental work, and was trying to develop load data to assemble .303 SLAP ammo and to see if it would function a BREN and defeat the belly armor of an Mi24, the rest was easy....

[Petrol & Powder]

I know what a BREN gun is and the Soviet Hind, What is SLAP?

Self Loading Armor Piercing ?

[Artful]

SLAP as in Saboted Light Armor Penetrator

[Outpost75]

Yup, when the 7.62mm SLAP program was discontinued, in favor of the Cal. .50, a project was undertaken to load-assemble-pack most of the remaining components into .303 British cases to get to the Afghans who were then fighting the Soviets. BRL developed the load data, 11th MI Co. performed the functional trials on the test ammo and the stuff was loaded into leftover WW2-era primed .303 cases with sterile headstamp, which remained in inventory. The powder was WC680 and the rounds worked fine.

The reason the cartridges were not safety certified and the 7.62 program was discontinued was that when the M60 and M134 barrels got hot, there was a problem of the penetrator setting back in the sabot, because it didn't have a steel "pusher plate" as did the Cal. .50, and the penetrator would get started cockeyed in the bore and exit through the side of the barrel!

The Lee Enfields and BRENS had a lower enough rate of fire that the risk of set-back wasn't as much a concern as blowing up the guns, so velocity and pressure were limited on the .303 rounds, compared to the 7.62, but penetration was still much better than .303 AP ammo.

[Petrol & Powder]

Got it, thanks.

[Blackwater]

Thanks for all the info. This one already has a new barrel on it in a .35/.303 improved caliber, and it's heavier than my Whelen's Shilen #4 contour, so I'd rate it at about a #5 contour, or thereabouts. I'll be stocking it soon, I hope, and the scope thing is really bugging me. I want it low and central over bore. Don't need strippers for the uses I have in mind, but my aging eyes just plain NEED optics if I'm to do any really good shooting with it, I'm afraid. I've thought about cutting the big rear sight off, as suggested, cleaning up the lines, and making a side mount to fit. I really like the pinned and welded thing. Should be a really good way to go and have it really sturdy, immobile and yet detachable. I should be able to gain access to a mill to do this.

I'd really like to retain the std. military rear sight with flip up ladder, and just make a new front sight for it, but the lower mounted scope would be more desirable, so it's kind'a looking like it's decision time. I'd hoped there was some "magic" way to get both, but knew that was unlikely. Figured if anyone would know that "magic" way it'd be you guys. There's an awful lot of talent and experience and ingenuity here, and I'm actually kind'a used to having to make decisions between one thing and another, so now I'm leaning toward cutting the rear sight off and going with the lower mounted scope. Can always put a Williams on as a stand in, as suggested, or maybe even keep a Wms./Lyman peep handy.

I really like this rifle, and have long liked the strange looking Enfield actions. One very accomplished shooter friend of mine in VA who just gave me a new puppy turned to his excellent shooter wife, and said, "Look at this. Ever seen an automatic bolt action?" He lifted the bolt, and it "automatically shot backwards to the fully open position. She wasn't familiar with the Enfields, but he knew them well, and appreciated what those old Brits did with them, particularly in WWII.

The caliber ought to be a real whomper in the swamps, and if we ever get inundated with lions or tigers or bears, I think it'd prove up to some eradication. We just don't have many here, so I guess it's already doing a good job of keeping them at bay?

As stated above, it'd probably be cheaper to just go get a rifle off the shelf, but it'd never be what this one is wanting to be, or have its class and character, and that's important to me these days. The more rifles get cheapened and then hawked with all manner of marketing claims, the less I like them, and the more I tend to want to turn to guns made in an era I can identify better with. I think this one's gonna' have some real class, AND utility. I really like it. Making these type decisions as above is usually the hardest part, and thanks for the suggestions and comments and expanding info. Keep it coming if you have more. I really appreciate it.

[Outpost75]

The .35/.303 would be a really great hunting round. I think you are on the right track.
I look forward to reading your updates on the project.

[Frank46]

There was an article regarding scoping the #4 rifle. Now before you laugh just take a minute and listen. get a piece of 1/4" 2"x2" angle iron. just clamp it on the left side of the receiver. Scribe a center line as close to the center of the action. Then using a weaver base for a marlin 336 locate drill and tap the three or four holes. Round off all sharp edges on the top of the angle iron and on the left side drill a hole for the ejector screw. Once you've done that then drill and tap for 4 mounting screws. Disassemble, file and polish and either have your smith blue it or just cold blue. For a little class get the same angle iron in bronze. My description probably leaves a lot to be desired but you get the idea. Frank

[screwcutter]

I posted a pic of this mount in one of your other Enfield posts.
Here are some pics in progress, I cut off the charging bridge, leaving part of the left side to act as a recoil spot. Drilled 2 mount holes and mounted angle to receiver, the mounted in Forster jig to make pilot holes for making dual dovetail mount holes. Made a dovetail hole cutter from a 5/8th drill bit and made the dovetail hole cut on the bottom of the angle, then filed the hole so the dovetail tab would fit. Then installed dual dovetail ring with an extension ring in front. Here is left side pic and a whole rifle.
Here is a link to the mount Frank described, http://www.303british.com/id32.html
mr

[Blackwater]

Thanks again, guys. Good info, and helps me believe I'm kind'a at least on the right track. I've about made up my mind to cut off that rear sight so I can mount the scope lower. This will be purely a sporting arm for hunting, and I'm a stock crawler, and low mounted scopes aid my shooting quite a bit, so it looks like the better decision is to let that good and very tough old military sight go in favor of greater utility and efficiency with a good scope. Heaven knows, I NEED some optics these days, and it's not promising to get any better, either. The son and grandboys who'll wind up with it one day also like scopes, too, which is one of the reasons I wanted to keep the irons if I could. They can't learn to use irons if they don't have a rifle to learn on.

And Outpost, I'll post when I can, but this is going to be a slow motion project. I just got enough steel, etc. to make 10 knives for Christmas, and that's going to set me back a bit on the project. A gunsmith buddy said he wanted to GIVE me a blank of English walnut! WOW! Now THAT is a FRIEND! But I'll pay for it. Can't accept that much from him! Pride an' all, ya' know?

I love being distraught by all the decisions involved in making up a good rifle. Seems I'm never happy unless I'm miserable and stumped in a project like this. Ain't it funny how that works?

[KLR]

I'm going to re-scope my Enfield this winter as well. I want to make the mount lower and lighter. Also going to fit a higher buttstock that will give me a better cheek weld. May grind off the charger bridge and rear sight ears too.

Screwcutter and any others that have an extremely low mount- Do you have any problems with ejection?

Here's my version:

[nekshot]

I have a pic on the forum called lee mannlicher or something like that, it shows what I did using a weaver rest for a smle and retaining all the guns parts except for removing the rear sight of my mk 4. I think it looks great but my computer does not allow me to download pics.

[screwcutter]

KLR,
I had to work to make sure I had ejection clearance, it was worth it. I have a S&K no gun smith mount I use to test my as issued stuff. This is my prototype just to see if it would work, like Blackwater I can't work with a high mounted scope. I left the rear sight mount on just in case.

[Der Gebirgsjager]

Outpost75, just curious, why didn't you use a premium .303 barrel for the project; or .303 ammo necked down to accept .308 bullets for the .308 barrel? Nice looking rig.

[Mhars]

Special Interest Arms has the lowest siting scope rail for Enfields that I know of. Along with some very interesting Enfield conversions.