303 Brit brass, preferences?

[Canuck Bob]

I'll be buying brass soon for a 303Brit in a Ruger no.1. Anyone have a preference? I am not worried about case stretching and would like the most consistent case thickness and volume for the brass.

Thanks for any help.

[felix]

Presently, Lapua makes the best rifle brass. 303 might be odd for them, however. ... felix

[docone31]

I am partial to Remington.
I get lots of loads with it. A Ruger #1, should be a snap.

[Multigunner]

I use Remington only these days, bought in bulk not reloaded once fired.
Some don't like Remington if they have a rifle with loose headspace, but I used a no.3 bolthead to bring my No.4 to a very close headgap, and replaced a damaged bolt to bring my No.1 to better than average headspace.
With the Ruger headspace should be minimal, if not I'd raise sand.

[Canuck Bob]

This info is beyond any expectation. No money to burn here! The truth is I just had to have a 303 Ruger.

Thanks

[PAT303]

One thing I do with new 303 cases is to first run them in a 8x57 die and then size back to 303 in a 303 FLS die to widen the neck and then load over 10grns of shotgun powder with the boolit seated to engage the lands.It sounds like work but if you load with one grade slower powder regardless wether you use jacketed or lead and neck size the cases last for years. Pat

[JeffinNZ]

Remington has given me a VERY good run but you can't beat DI V WWII GI brass from Canada.

[303Guy]

I have a little trick I use with my 303 brits. I lube the loaded cases with STP - not dripping or anything but nice and slippery. My cases last forever. What that does alloy the case to settle back against the bolt face early, while the pressure is still building. The shoulder then get formed into place and that's it. Neck size only and keep the cases lubed. This for a 1902 No.I MkI* Lee Enfield and my loads were not mild. That doesn't prevent neck splitting from failing to anneal regularly.

P.S. It has been demonstrated that a lube layer on a loaded cartridge does slightly raise chamber pressure. It does not increase boltface thrust (other than raising chamber pressure).

[3006guns]

Lubing the cases to allow easier forming with light charges is an old trick when the shoulder is too far back.......works well. Just don't gob huge amounts of grease on there! A small amount of STP or oil is all that's needed. The tapered portion of the case allows it to slide back on firing and presto! Now it fills the chamber properly and can be neck sized from that point on. This is assuming your head space is correct in the first place.

I agree on the Dominion Industries cases. I had a pile of surplus ammo and was merrily blasting away some years ago when I happened to look inside one of them. Holy Toledo.......they were boxer primed! Like an idiot, I ASSUMED they were berdan. I've been saving/reloading them ever since. Good stuff.

I haven't seen anyone mention Norma .303 cases yet and I'm really curious about everyone's opinion.....mostly because a friend gave me five boxes of unloaded brass just a few days ago. I really have to buy him lunch sometime.........:smile:

[3006guns]

You are correct and your information is correct........with full charge ammo. The pressure will allow the cartridge to slide to the rear and overload the bolt lugs horribly, especially in a semi auto. Brass is SUPPOSED to grip the chamber.

Cartridges that are greased (not oiled) are even worse. Grease does not compress and increases chamber pressures tremendously.

However, I think you missed my point. Done correctly with REDUCED forming loads only (light or NO projectile), it is an excellent, accepted way to put a case shoulder back where it belongs. You do this only once to form your case, cleaning the chamber of any excess lube between shots. Degrease your cases and load nomally afterwards and you have nice "chamber filling" brass. This info from a couple of books on case forming. I've actually used the "no projectile" approach, like a blank (6 grains Bullseye, COW filler, glue plug and oiled case). Loud report, no recoil and a nicely formed case.

Another method is to seat a light bullet so that it firmly touches the rifling. There will be a space in front of the shoulder, which will fill with expanded brass when fired. The danger in this is that the bullet may not exit the barrel with a light load.

Edit to 303guy: You shouldn't use the oil techique on full house ammo, but if you do (and with no ill effects) you should only have to do it ONCE. Your case is formed after that. Just neck size, shoot 'em dry and enjoy!:)

[sundog]

+1 on lightly oiling a case for forming on the first firing with a light load. Same thing with belted magnums (rim is just in a different place) to set the shoulder. A fellow club member who is a BR world record holder put me onto this several years ago. Works great for fixed lock up. For a gas gun? I wouldn't.

[curator]

Bob,

Would that we could buy Dominion brass still! Lacking that, I have excellent results with ANY commercial cases fire-formed new. The worst way to get brass is to fire new commercial ammo! The other posters have mentioned most of the good ways to insure that your cases expand forward on the first firing to set the shoulder with the case head held firmly against the breech face.

I personally like to seat my cast boolits long enough to contact the rifling leade as the bolt is closed. This not only gives the best accuracy but cases last nearly forever. While Winchester brass is my least favorite (I NEVER reload S&B brass!) It too will last 20+ firings when loaded to about 35,000 psi. If I bother to aneal case necks after each 10 loadings I can get even more as the only defect that my cases show after a lot of use is cracks around the case mouth.

[Canuck Bob]

Great discussion, thanks again.

I reloaded extensively 25 years ago and left the hobby dormant until this year. I always reloaded my own once fired factory ammo. For this rifle I have months to wait so the oppurtunity to custom load the brass and fire form on the first shot allows me to tailor the ammo from day one.

I will load to a medium pressure and seat the cast bullets to touch the lands. I used to get best accuracy this way years ago. Even then my loads were worked up to give best accuracy at 10-15% reductions from factory pressures.

It is hard to believe but 303 surplus ammo seems to be all but gone in Canada!

The PRVI brass looks interesting and in stock at Graf's. The Winchester and Remington brass is available locally.

Anyone bother to check the uniformity and thickness of the necks for any of these?

[3006guns]

"Since a great deal of fire forming operations involve moving the shoulder forward, headspace presents a problem. One solution is to lightly oil the forward part of the case before firing. This reduces the cases's grip on the chamber walls, allowing the entire case to be driven back against the bolt face by the powder gases." Source: "The Home Guide to Cartridge Conversions" George Nonte 1967

Considerably before the internet and any "myths".

Again, we're talking apples and oranges. You are correct as far as FULL CHARGE ammo. The bolt thrust would be tremendous, as has been proven by several noted accidents. Most noteably during the high power shoots of the 1920's when competitors were trying to keep cupro nickel fouling in check. Someone discovered that applying grease to the bullet (not case) reduced the fouling. Unfortunately, the heated barrel would cause the grease to melt into the chamber eventually and .... boom. One destroyed Springfield. Mentioned in Hatcher's Notebook in the barrel obstruction section I believe.

When trying to fireform a case to fit a specific chamber, a light pistol powder charge combined with a lubricated case will allow the case to slide rearward and the shoulders to form correctly. Once the batch of cases is formed, you clean the chamber, cases, etc. and load normally......this time with a full charge load. Done.

[303Guy]

Mmmm..... A bit of a controversy there. I've had a Lee Enfield with excess headspace and a lubed case that the lubed case remained forward in the chamber with the primer sticking out. The next case had head separation. I have heard all these tales of doom and gloom regarding lubed cartridges but have never come across any proof.

Not to confuse greased ammo or ammo dipped in oil with a lightly lubed case. All excess lube must be removed - that's a no-brainer.

I did say I developed my loads with lubed cases and that the lube does raise chamber pressure some but 50% increase in bolt face thrust? Someone is BS-ing.

Case grip? It only accounts for about 10% of rearward thrust. Reducing will only increase thrust by a percentage of 10% One of the first signs of overload or excessive bolt face thrust in a Lee Endield is case elongation if it's lubed and case head separation if dry - it's a flexi-action. I get neither. Another sign of overload on a Lee Enfield is bolt lug set back. Hasn't happened. I Lube all my cases for all my guns always. I just can't see how a case head separation produces less bolt face thrust than a case that does not fail. I'm not recomending the practice to anyone, just telling what I do and that I'm quite confident that it's actually better for the firearm. And I can demonstrate it.;-) (I've had to answer this one many times!):mrgreen:

Think of this. A case gets driven fully forward in the chamber on firing. It expands, grips the chamber walls, pressure continues to rise, the pressure acting on the unsuppoerted base of the case overcomes case wall friction and the case slams back onto the bolt face at full load. A lubed case still grips the chamber wall but alloys the case head to settle back at lower pressure so by virtue of progressive case elongation along it's length.. Notice how the striations on the case get shorter toward the neck?



Anyway - back to topic.8-)

[Multigunner]

"Since a great deal of fire forming operations involve moving the shoulder forward, headspace presents a problem. One solution is to lightly oil the forward part of the case before firing. This reduces the cases's grip on the chamber walls, allowing the entire case to be driven back against the bolt face by the powder gases." Source: "The Home Guide to Cartridge Conversions" George Nonte 1967

Considerably before the internet and any "myths".

Again, we're talking apples and oranges. You are correct as far as FULL CHARGE ammo. The bolt thrust would be tremendous, as has been proven by several noted accidents. Most noteably during the high power shoots of the 1920's when competitors were trying to keep cupro nickel fouling in check. Someone discovered that applying grease to the bullet (not case) reduced the fouling. Unfortunately, the heated barrel would cause the grease to melt into the chamber eventually and .... boom. One destroyed Springfield. Mentioned in Hatcher's Notebook in the barrel obstruction section I believe.

When trying to fireform a case to fit a specific chamber, a light pistol powder charge combined with a lubricated case will allow the case to slide rearward and the shoulders to form correctly. Once the batch of cases is formed, you clean the chamber, cases, etc. and load normally......this time with a full charge load. Done.

Since tightening headspace I've had no problem with case stretching.
One trick I picked up long ago is to mark the case rim and rotate the case 180 degrees on the second firing.
This results in a perfectly centered case in all subsequent firings.
I size only 2/3rds of the neck, the evenly expanded unsized portion of the neck along with evenly expanded case body presents the bullet to origin of rifling with out cant.

An undersized expander plug and no crimp works best for me.
Theres always some variation in pull strength when a crimp is used.
The less the pull strength, within reason of course, the less the effect of any variation.

[3006guns]

Actually, since the 303 British is a rimmed cartridge there's your headspace right there. It can only be corrected by either another bolt head or cases with thicker rims. The practice of using an O ring is pretty clever in that regard when used to "adjust" the case....JUST ONCE....and then reload normally afterwards. I was talking about just moving the shoulder forward while the rest of the case stays put.

303guy....I wasn't jumping on your technique, far from it! If your method works for you, terrific. I myself won't allow any lube on a case or in a chamber, unless I'm fireforming from one case to another (usually an antique) and have to move the shoulder forward. I always shoot dry.......the beer comes afterwards.

Actually, I'm lucky in one regard. I picked up an Ishapor several years ago at a batch price and the rifle is new.....or darn close to it. Chambering any of my cases, no matter who made them, requires just a bit of effort to turn the bolt handle down. Close headspace....since I'm shooting cast at moderate pressures, that gun will still be nice when someone else gets it down the road.

[wiljen]

I use a simple trick taught to me by a very smart Canadian to fire form undersized American SAAMI cases. Slip a rubber o-ring around the case, it will hold the case against the bolt face at "zero" head space and "center" the undersized cases in the chamber. (NOTE: over sized o-ring shown for photo purposes only...unless you own a really head space gifted Enfield)


I went out to Lowes today and bought 3 boxes of #47 sized o-rings to try this trick. Thanks much for mentioning it. I also need to order some PRVI brass

[sundog]

thanks, I'll stay with my lightly oiled cases for forming whenever I need to. It works just fine...

[303Guy]

Umm... I should just hasten to add that oil or grease in a chamber between case and chamber wall will likely atomize and inject that oil mist into the hot, oxygen rich, combustion zone and detonate! So all the cautioning should be well headed! (I am guilty of slightly overdoing the lube bit - the cases come out dry! So, don't do it! (Well, wiping the lube off is actually 'lubing' the loaded round).

By the way, bigedp51, thanks for posting that info!


Nor do any advocates of lubing or oiling cases have the pressure measuring equipment or strain gauges to prove their theories. No, but the effect has been pressure measured and it does raise chamber pressure.

[Dutchman]

FYI - re: oiling full power ammunition

The Swedish m/41 sniper cartridge, "Skarp patron m/94 m/41 prickskytte", proved itself so superior to the old patron m/94 that the Swedish military introduced the new m/41 cartridge for general use in all 6.5x55 small arms.

The problem arose with the patron m/41 in that the burn rate of the powder was not completely compatible with the direct gas impingement of the Ljungman, which lacked any gas regulator of any sort. The patron m/41 powder burn rate was too slow. What that meant was the pressure at the point of the gas port was still too high and could cause problems with extraction, which we've seen in both Ljungmans and Hakims, in the form of the extractor ripping open the case rim while the case was still in the chamber... the result was usually destruction of the stock and magazine.

The Swedish military, in their great wisdom, simply ordered the soldiers to oil their ammunition to facilitate extraction.

Dutch

[3006guns]

Well, hey while we're at it..............how about all those zinger recoil operated machine guns that required oiling the ammo, such as the early Nambu, Schwartloz (sp) to prevent ripping the extracted case in two?

I'll still shoot mine dry...............

[Multigunner]

When pressures are as high as between case wall and chamber wall few lubricants can maintain any significant lubricant effect, Very special formulations are required for effective lubrication under such pressures. Bullet lubes are suited to high pressures.
Lathered on grease or cases dripping with oil would of course maintain a temporary fluid barrier between case and chamber. Water which has little measurable lubricating effect will produce much the same increase in bolt thrust as would oil under the same circumstances.

The British regulations of musketry describe "oiling in the service manner" as simply wiping the ammunition clean with a flannel cloth with oil on it, the ammunition set aside to dry, resulting in a micro thin dry to the touch barrier against corrosion and a surface not conducive to accumulation of mud, dirt, or sand, and which water would not cling to. The chargers were also oiled in the same manner to avoid rust freezing the rounds in place.

Bores and chambers were kept well oiled until immediately before a battle, and then the only oil removal was simply pulling a dry flannel patch through from breech to muzzle, no solvents involved.
So in service the SMLE was no more oil free than the average sporting rifle.
Since primers were staked there was no cushioning effect of the primer as there would be for sporting ammo or reloads.
A thin film of protective oil, allowed to dry in place would not cause any significant increase in bolt thrust. Protective oils generally dry to a laquer like finish, very thin of course, with no noticable change in the surface quality of the item applied to.
If slathered on in a layer too thick to dry completely thats another matter.

If bores were left dry of all oil for any length of time in humid weather they rust beyond redemption in a short time, especially since boiling water was part of the cleaning process.
Instructions in manuals of the time say that if you can not oil the bore after cleaning you'd do better not to clean it at all.

Cleaning the chamber of residual oil with mineral spirits was suggested for the target range, to avoid excessive shift in elevation on the first few shots, not due to any expectation of excessive bolt thrust due to a thin dried protective film.
Simply running a dry patch through the bore was considered enough to remove any excessive remnants of the standard bore preservative "Russian Petroleum" and rifles left in racks for long periods might have mineral jelly in the bore which should be cleared by running a few patches through before issued. Red Mineral Jelly for areas under handguards and white (possibly yellow) for the bore and action IIRC.

If you feel that a solvent is necessary to remove traces of bullet lube, by all means use it.

I usually polish my cases by hand after resizing using a very fine abrasive such as white emery in an alcohol carriers, then clean all residue away with an alcohol soaked cloth followed by a wipe with WD40 or liquid wrench penetrating oil, which is then wiped with a dry cloth. Ammo looks as fresh ten years later as the day it was reloaded, and never oily to the touch even minutes later much less days later.

My No.1 has an extremely smooth chamber, not mirror polished but simply slick as a ribbon, no oil or lube needed to reduce stress on the case, no annular rings to promote separation.

[Multigunner]

If anyones interested heres what Regulations for musketry 1915 says about oiling the bore.


4. Oil. — No oil other than Russian petroleum should be
allowed to remain in the bore. The function of this oil is
to cover the bore with a waterproof film, and thus prevent
moisture attacking the steel and forming rust. It must be
well worked into the flannelette with the fingers, otherwise
it will be scraped off by the breech end of the barrel.
When paraffin has been used, all traces of it should be
removed thoroughly, and the bore coated with Russian
petroleum, for paraffin, though an efficient agent for
removing rust, does not prevent its formation.



3. Daily Cleaning. — The outside of the rifle will be cleaned
daily, and ail parts of the action wiped with an oiiy rag.
The bore of the rifle will always be left oily, but once a
week this oil will be removed and the bore relubricated.
In the case of rifles that have once become rusty, the bore
vidli be wiped out with flannelette and reoiled daily, and it
will, in addition, be cleaned once a week with the gauze on
the pull-through. The gauze is to be packed as already
stated, so as to fit the bore tightly.



4. Cleaning before Firing. — (i) The action will be wiped
with an oily rag, and all traces of oil will be removed from
the bore and chamber by the use of a pull-through which
has no gauze on it.

(note no mention of any form of solvent, just wiped clean, not chemically clean}

(ii) Caution. — Neither the cartridge nor the chamber of
the rifle are on any account to be oiled before loading, nor
is any other form of lubricant to be used with a view to
facilitate the extraction of the empty case. Such a pro-
cedure greatly increases the thrust on the bolt-head due to
the explosion of the charge, and is liable to injure the rifle.


The action body and bolt on the otherhand.


(iv) Caution. — The instructions regarding the use of an
oily rag for cleaning the bolts and bodies will not apply in
dusty countries, where all parts of the action will he kept dry
and clean.

So in arid regions the bolt is left unlubricated to avoid accumulation of dust or sand.


16. Effect of Oily Barrel. — The first round fired from an
oily barrel is liable to follow an erratic course, the rifle
throwing sometimes high, sometimes low, and at other
times to the right or left. A dry rag should therefore be
passed through the bore before practice is commenced.


Just run a dry patch through it.

In the Preface
"NOTES ON EXPERIENCE GAINED AT THE
FRONT "

By General Sir O'MooRii Creagh, V.C.




(iii) A large number of cases have occurred of rifles be-
coming unserviceable from the following causes :

{a) Mud in the lock, owing to the rifle being rested on a
wet parapet, or dropped on wet ground. The remedy for
this is to cover the bolt with a cloth wrapper or an old sock
whenever the rifle is not in use, and to place canvas on the
parapet. The protecting material can be pulled back when
it is required to use the rifle.

{b) Muddy ammunition, resulting in mud in the chamber.



PREFACE xiii

The remedy for this is to prohibit ammunition being put on
the ground, and to provide boxes or tins in which to place
the ammunition. It is a good plan to rub over the ammuni-
tion with an oily rag.

(c) Mud in the muzzle, owing to rifles being pushed into
the sides of trenches. The only remedy is to see that rifles
are clear before firing.

{d) Sticking of cartridges, owing to dirt in the chamber or
magazine. If the chamber be not kept free from dirt, the
cartridge case may jam and extraction become difficult.
Similarly the magazine must be kept clean and oiled, other-
wise the platform will not work freely.

(e) Rust in the lock, and insufficient oiling

Free Downloads here
http://www.archive.org/details/musketry30322car00sola

[303Guy]

I'm listening! Lots of interesting info. I still have many questions though. Like why, if the bolt face thrust is raised by 50%, are there never any shiny spots on the case head? If the pressure is being raised dangerously, why is there no primer flatening or cratering. Why is there no case head expansion? And why is there no case elongation and stiff bolt lift? And in an old Lee Enfield, why is there no bolt set-back? And surely erratic bolt face thrust would affect accuracy? Mine always shot accurately.

Many Lee Enfields have developed excess headspace and those were supposedly shot with dry, standard MkVII ammo.

I accept that oil between the case and chamber can and probably does do scary things - like detonating. But a thin film of lube that is still there after firing? (A thick film dissappears - mostly!) Pressure testing has shown that the presence of oil on a case increases chamber pressure by a small amount. It does not change the pressure curve. Changing brands of cases will have a greater effect due to case volume differences. Just so many unanswered questions! More info would be appreciated.:Fire:

By the way, PMP cases have an internal volume far smaller than PPU. They weigh 206.5gr and 184gr respectively.

A question was asked on the quality of Norma brass. I still have some from 25/30 years ago. Nothing wrong with Norma brass.

[sheepdog]

Presently, Lapua makes the best rifle brass. 303 might be odd for them, however. ... felix

Not always so. In fact the 54r, very similar size to the 303, was reviewed on 54r's site with this eval:

"About 25% of the cases burned through the side wall upon firing and the accuracy was not what it should be as seen on the targets at the bottom of the page. Several bullets were pulled and corrosion was found on the bullet bases as well as the inside walls of the cases which have a green tint to them."

As always buyer beware but yes as a general rule Lapua makes very good brass. But I'd put Norma above them.

[sundog]

Biged, if that is a depiction of a .303 chamber, you'd better get the right bolt head and tighten things up a little. Too, in a typical .303 chamber the neck portion of the chamber will not be tight enough to support the case coaxially to the bore - it will lay down - unless you use a larger boolit to fill it up. It also shows what appears to be a full powder charge.

I am not aware of any 'case lubing myths' on the internet of which you speak.

Dry firing a case to demonstrate firing pin pressure is not the same thing as fire forming a case with a charge, with or without filler or bullet.

[sheepdog]

Anyone who doesn't think lube in your chamber is a dangerous thing let me introduce you to my friend Mr Hydraulic Pressure (http://www.sphaera.co.uk/hydPressure.htm).

See my friend Mr Pressure will not give. If you push, even with thousands of pounds of pressure really fast he push pushes along with you. Hes really helpful with jacks and elevators and the like but not so much with guns.

[Multigunner]

I'm listening! Lots of interesting info. I still have many questions though. Like why, if the bolt face thrust is raised by 50%, are there never any shiny spots on the case head? If the pressure is being raised dangerously, why is there no primer flatening or cratering. Why is there no case head expansion? And why is there no case elongation and stiff bolt lift? And in an old Lee Enfield, why is there no bolt set-back? And surely erratic bolt face thrust would affect accuracy? Mine always shot accurately.

Many Lee Enfields have developed excess headspace and those were supposedly shot with dry, standard MkVII ammo.

Actually a minimal setback effect is part of the final proof test, since they could not get the lugs to bear perfectly evenly by stoning alone the oiled proof load served to set the lugs, evening out the bearing surfaces.
Theres a proof test of the barrel before its installed on an action body, then two rounds for the completed action, one dry one oiled. Thats three proof cartridges used per rifle.

I've run across several No.1 rifles with visible setback and bulging of the bolt lugs, the locking recesses are more substantial so they seldom show visible setback.
The more stress an action body is put to the greater will be the inclination of the action body locking surfaces. The bolt will usually match that inclination unless its a unfitted replacement. The inclination is usually so small as to be undetectable to the eye.
Nothing to worry about there unless the inclination is extreme. Its one reason the bolts are so easy to operate.

The Enfield bolt is subject to compression, and wear of the mating surfaces of bolthead and body. I believe most instances of excessive headspace were due to unathorized use of MkVIIIz ammunition coupled with poor maintenance and heavy fouling. Unavoidable firing in rain or after the rifle got dunked crossing streams is another factor.
Theres no way of knowing if the boltheads of most rifles were original to a rifle or switched out at a later date, to bring a more favored rifle to a tighter fit.
It was common practice to use boltheads savalged from unservicable rifles to bring good rifles back to spec, with new replacement boltheads used only if necessary.
In a way this was a good idea, the salvaged bolthead had been proven under pressure.
A replacement Bolt head would be more likely to have an undetected defect than a well used BH that passed inspection.

Boltheads were at one time made of maleable cast iron, No.37 Gun Iron, a high compressive strength white cast iron. Actually well suited to the purpose, but subject to defects in manufacture if wartime rush was a factor.

I've noted signs of compression on many bolt heads, the standard steel versions,at the interface between bolt head and bolt body, a displacement at the edge, often unequal, often more on one side than the other.

Due to sand and grit a loose headgap would allow cartridges to chamber under harsh conditions, The wide variance in cartridge dimensions was another factor, also dented cases, etc. Being able to stuff a muddy, bent, or corroded cartridge in the breech doesn't mean its always a wise idea to fire it. But if thats all you had and you had no choice but to give it a go you'd roll the dice. With luck the worst would be you'd miss and be left with the action jammed shut, or the case left jammed in the chamber till it could be dislodged with a cleaning rod, "which you have not got" as the old WW1 poem about the MkIII* goes.
The bolt can warp or sidewalls spred making the rifle an unrepairable reminder of folly.
If luck runs against you there are recorded incidents of the right sidewall being broken away and the bolt blown out to severely injure the shooter, or the case blown out at the base to shatter the bolthead sending high velocity fragments to injure or kill the shooter or bystanders.
I've found it odd that some who claim that the Enfield can't be blown up except by handloads would in the next breath urge others to use 60-70 year old milsurp ammo of unknown history, and that showing verdigris , dents, etc, and also recommend use of MkVIIIZ ammunition, which both British and Australians proscribed for use in the No.1 and allowed its use in the No.4 only if no other ammo was available .
So far the only cratered primers I've had,( other than my one and only slight overload due to using the wrong bullet over an otherwise safe charge, no damage done fortunately, a heads up I needed), were from MkVIIIZ equivalent FN 1950's ammunition.


Properly cleaned and lubed the Enfield bolts and action body would last tens of thousands of firings without undue wear, but most were not used under the optimal conditions of a rifle range, so a great many became badly worn within months of combat duty under harsh conditions, and required adjustments and replacement bolts etc.
A numbered bolt is no garantee that its the original bolt, replacement bolts would be numbered to the receiver after fitting and testfiring.

[robertbank]

Canuck Bob get friendly with some Rangers. The IVI brass is about as good as it gets. If you need .303 Brass PM me and maybe we can work something out. As an aside what did you pay for your Ruger. I missed the thread on gunnutz and forget who brought them in and what they are selling for. Love to have one.

Take Care

Bob

[StarMetal]

Canuck Bob get friendly with some Rangers. The IVI brass is about as good as it gets. If you need .303 Brass PM me and maybe we can work something out. As an aside what did you pay for your Ruger. I missed the thread on gunnutz and forget who brought them in and what they are selling for. Love to have one.

Take Care

Bob

Bob,

You're so right. Long ago I got some IVI 308 brass. Asked BruceB about it. He goes "oh, that's Canadian brass and about the best there is and just about indestructible. That's an understatement, the stuff is great and I don't see LC holding a candle to it. So if that 303 is the same it's got to be among the best.

[quasi]

IVI is made in the old Dominion-C.I.L. Plant. I have some Ranger discard .303 brass, it is exactly the same weight as the old Dominion brass. I have a few thousand 7.62 Nato IVI brass, it is tough stuff, and lasts a long time even in my M-14's .

[Multigunner]

They say that Canadian manufacture .303 was always of higher quality than other military grade ammo.
They held strictly to the original specs.
Its one reason the ross rifles failed in WW1. Those rifles had a tight chamber that worked fine so long as the ammo was within the specs, but British supplied ammo was often far out of spec.

Tolerances got so loose that the RAC and later RAF had to examine and mark for their own use lots of ammo within specifications to avoid jammed guns in combat, the origin of green cross, green spot, and red spot ammo. That being how ammo cases would be marked. Snipers apparently liked to raid the flying corps stash to get the best ammo.
The RAF finally independently contracted for its ammo from the best manufacturers.

[Canuck Bob]

I won't be lubing mine for what its worth, never have and never will. However I've had a real eyeopener on the headspace issues on some fine old rifles. I would do whatever it takes to fireform my brass on first firing. Wow weedwhacker cord or o-rings between your rim and chamber!

[Canuck Bob]

No luck on the email yet. Thanks for the note.

[walltube]

the info on fire forming new, unfired .303B cases in the SMLE using an "o" ring to 'zero headspace' the rim (flange). This method should work equally well with fresh 7.62x54R brass in the various Moisin-Nagant 91 type rifles as well.

An Eddystone P14 with its Mauser style action may well get a chance to fire form some R-P brass ala "The Ring" in its chamber this coming Sunday. Saturday night's foam will encourage No. 1 son to 'O-Ring' his Savage SMLE this Sunday as well... :)

Y.T.,
Harold

[303Guy]

As per usual, this has turned into a really interesting thread! (A bit off topic - appologies, that was my doing!)

Multigunner, my uncle was a WWII armourer in Tabruk (he escaped when Tabruk fell, by taking a vehicle and heading into the dessert, off the beaten track). We spent hours talking about the war, guns and the Lee Enfield (he went on to become a gunsmith). 'Meeting' you is a real pleasure. You are a mine-field of knowledge!:drinks: (I have long wanted hear about blown Lee Enfields - my uncle did tell me of how they fail. One often hears of blown Mausers but never Lee Enfields).

P.S. I am giving this 'lubing' of cartridges a serious rethink!:shock:

[Multigunner]

Enfield are strong enough for the intended pressure levels, but they are not idiot proof, when they were a major issue military rifle the professional armies tried to be sure that every rifleman was educated in the proper use of the rifle and care of rifle and ammo. I don't think anyone in the UK forces had any illusions of invincibility. They knew the rifles must be kept free of mud and at at least reasonably protected from rain and dust, thats what the action cover was for. The earlier LE rifles had a sheet metal reciprocating action cover for that purpose.

Glamorising the Enfield may lead to serious situations in the future. The British NRA has made an effort to head off problems before they get out of hand by setting limits on ammunition types and requiring reproof for higher pressures, and repeating the admonitions against firing wet or oiled cartridges. The reaction among those with unrealistic beliefs about the rifle has been amazing.

[303Guy]

It seems that mauser type actions can fail catastrophically without killing or injuring the shooter. I've have heard of one LE that unhooked and bent the bolt with only brass fragments hitting the shooter. I suppose the LE failures would have occured mostly in the military so one would not readily hear about it. But someone must have info and pictures of blown LE's - civilian type blow-ups. I am given to believe that Arisaka's were rediculously strong.

[Multigunner]

It seems that mauser type actions can fail catastrophically without killing or injuring the shooter. I've have heard of one LE that unhooked and bent the bolt with only brass fragments hitting the shooter. I suppose the LE failures would have occured mostly in the military so one would not readily hear about it. But someone must have info and pictures of blown LE's - civilian type blow-ups. I am given to believe that Arisaka's were rediculously strong.


The only fatalities from Lee Enfield Kabooms I've found out about so far were those involving shattered or blown out boltheads. Some other bolt head failures were potentially fatal, such as a Range officer in Canada around 1908 who got a bolthead blown completely through his neck, he was not the shooter , the shooter apparently escaped injury.
Of the Enfield failures listed in the Ross Rifle debates in the Canadian Hose of Commons, I can remember only one which was blamed on the ammunition, that involving a "riflelite" propellant. All others used fresh Canadian manufacture Service Ball manufactured strictly to British specification.
One fatality is mentioned in the debates but the victim's name is not given. You'll find in British publications of the 19th and early 20th century that names were often not given even in news stories or official records without express permission.

A motion in Parlement to award funds to a British Non Com who'd been severely injured by failure at the range of the right sidewall of an Enfield was the first I'd heard of a sidewall breaking away. I'd really like to see a photo of that action and a detailed examination of the fracture lines.
Luckily the Non Com was expected to recover from his injuries but unlikely to be able to return to duty for six months or so. The money was to tide his family over.

I looked long and hard for information on the metalurgy of the Enfield and only in the last few months have those with access to old records begun to post official specifications for alloys used to construct the SMLE.
Near as my sources have determined The action body was as I'd suspected made of a Nickel Steel alloy similar to that used for the M1917, but with a slightly lower Ni content range. Those whose alloy is at the top end of the Ni content are almost indentical to the alloy used for the M1917, those at the lower end contain significantly less Nickel than M1917 receivers at the lowest allowable percentage.
The result would be that all else being equal some SMLE receivers are far stronger than others.

When the UK Police contracted for the Envoy rifles these were assembled using parts strenuously tested, and its said far more parts went to the scrap bin than reached the assembly line.
Early production L42 rifles palmed off on the police were too often judged to be dangerously unsafe to fire.
I've seen demilled L42 rifles for sale on UK sites, I suspect these were condemned due to some sort of damage not detectable to the naked eye.
I've also noted that among collectors those most vocal in defense of using high pressure 7.62 ammunition in converted No.4 rifles are also those who are most perturbed by any alteration of the rifles, even replacement of damaged or worn parts.
They seem to have a blind eye when such a radical alteration as rebarreling to 7.62 is mentioned.

I think most on this board recognize that failures of abused rifles, or those subjected to overloads aren't a condemnation of the rifle in general.
Every action type has its limitations.
The 1895 Winchester handled WW1 era .30-06 just fine, but did not always hold up well to post WW1 .30-06 ammunition.
If someone owned a Model 95 that held up just fine to modern ammunition, I would not consider that to be proof that every other example of the rifle could handle the same pressures, or that warnings against use of higher pressure ammo had no basis in fact.

According to the Preface of Major Reynolds book on the Enfield ,around the time the Enfield first became obsolete, There was a "slaughter" of Ministry of Defence records on the development of the Enfield along with many older records. No one seems to have had much interest in looking for any accident reports that may have been in files at the time.
His book does have some information on testing under extreme conditions , bore obstructions, etc.

The only solid records of action failures I've found are in records of the British Parlement and Canadian House of Commons. There are occasional mentions of action failures in articles on civilian matches at Bisley, but no details which might settle questions.

During WW1 enough rifles were rendered all but unserviceable that they created a new category, the EY (safe with ball ammo in emergency situations) and relegated these to use as grenade launchers.
Its not uncommon for EY marked actions to show up, the owner having no idea that his rifle was considered only good for limited emergency use, or that the bore likely had been subjected to extended use with grenade launching blanks.

[robertbank]

My Grand-dad carried a Ross for the first couple of years in WW1 until thye finally got the #1 Rifle. Grand-dad said they jammed in the mud and if you didn't assemble the bolt properly the damm thing came back at you. He spent four years in the trenches, not much time in Parliament I am afraid. This was a rather big scandle back in Canada I am told.

He of course is gone now as are all our WW1 vets. April 9th has a special meaning for us.

Take Care

Bob

[Multigunner]

Grand-dad said they jammed in the mud and if you didn't assemble the bolt properly the damm thing came back at you.

And you'd have a hard time finding a Ross collector who'd deny that.

You'd also find that the Ross made an excellent sniper rifle, and was stronger than the Enfield.

Also oddly enough in testing before WW1 the Lee Enfield came out second best to the Ross in cold weather functioning in deep forest or snow fields.

The loose tolerances of British supplied .303 ammo contributed to jamming of the Ross rifles in France. Efforts were made to cut chambers a bit looser to compensate.
The lack of good leverage doomed the Ross as it did almost every straightpull design applied to infantry rifles with the Swiss Rifles a notable exception though they seldom were used in combat much less trench warfare.

Superiority over the Ross seems to have grown into the perception that all other Infantry rifles of WW1 had the same problems of jamming in mud.

[robertbank]

And you'd have a hard time finding a Ross collector who'd deny that.

You'd also find that the Ross made an excellent sniper rifle, and was stronger than the Enfield.

Also oddly enough in testing before WW1 the Lee Enfield came out second best to the Ross in cold weather functioning in deep forest or snow fields.

The loose tolerances of British supplied .303 ammo contributed to jamming of the Ross rifles in France. Efforts were made to cut chambers a bit looser to compensate.
The lack of good leverage doomed the Ross as it did almost every straightpull design applied to infantry rifles with the Swiss Rifles a notable exception though they seldom were used in combat much less trench warfare.

Superiority over the Ross seems to have grown into the perception that all other Infantry rifles of WW1 had the same problems of jamming in mud.

Unfortunately having a rifle that is stronger than another when the latter is strong enough is less important than having one that goes bang when you must have it go bang. My conversations with him regarding the war were very brief as he had little desire to talk about his time overseas much less attempt to glorify the war. Killing other humans was not something he found particularly satisfying nor did he think it did much good or have any lasting effect on world events.

Given events over the last hundred years I think he was right.

The Ross was a very good hunting rifle. Didn't fair very well as a combat rifle.

Take Care

Bob

[Multigunner]

Killing other humans was not something he found particularly satisfying nor did he think it did much good or have any lasting effect on world events.

Given events over the last hundred years I think he was right.

Unfortunately the vast majority of mankind could never reach the same conclusion, so those not willing to fight became either the subjects or slaves of those willing to kill.
As for lasting effects, civilization has been shaped by war, theres simply no way of knowing what the world might have been like without it, so the effects for good or ill are definitely lasting.

As for WW1 era rifles, I was never particularly impressed by the Mauser, I've owned a few and had no problem parting with them in trading. They do have significant advantages, especially simplicity and ease of maintenance.
I've seen nothing in the Mauser that would lead me to believe it was at all prone to jamming under muddy conditions.
The Springfield had a potential flaw in its two piece firing pin, and some low number receivers were defective due to improper forging temperatures. Both proved more consistently accurate than the SMLE, though the SMLE MkIII rear sight with windage adjustment offset that advantage a bit if the troops were properly trained in its use.
Rapidity of fire and the ten round capacity were the best features of the Enfield, with handling qualities a matter of personal preferance.
I think the Book "Sniping in France" gives a pretty good evaluation of the Enfield in comparasion to contemporary infantry rifles. The main criticizm being the tendency of fore ends to swell or warp under wet weather conditions, and loss of precise long range accuracy due to Cordite erosion after as little as 500 rounds in extreme cases and usually losing its edge for long range work after 1500 rnds. Thats more due to ammo quality than anything else, but the generous tolerances of the barrel probably contributed to shorter accuracy life.
With high quality ammo, and care taken in cleaning, a barrel on the tight side of tolerances could remain reasonably accurate for 6000 rounds, with 12,000 rnds given as the maximum useful bore life.
Careless cleaning with pullthrough and wire gauze could damage the bore very easily, and cord wear at the breech was downright dangerous.

The improper assembly of the Ross bolt could result in a blown bolt, and the seperate bolt head of the SMLE has on occasion been left out, though it would take a real dunce to do so, and an unsupported round fired. Neither was completely idiot proof.

PS
Rapid fire was a very real advantage of the SMLE, but the Springfield was fairly quick to operate as well.
From the Handbook of Ordnance

Exterior ballistics.—With the model of 1903 rifle, 23 aimed shots have been fired in one minute using it as a single loader, and 25 shots in the same interval, using magazine fire. Firing from the hip without aim, 30 shots have been fired using the rifle as a single loader and 40 shots using magazine fire
The Tenshot Enfield mag was certainly an advantage, but in practice they seldom fired more than 6 rounds before topping up with a five shot charger, and due to the rimmed case reloading of those five rounds took more attention and was just a hair slower than with rimless cartridges and stripper clips.
The straight bolt handle of the Gew98 made it less easy to operate rapidly from the shoulder. The bent bolt handle of the 98a short rifle was a bit easier to manipulate.
The 98a was a much closer match to the US and UK short rifle type.

[303Guy]

I would hazzard a guess that the rimmed 303 Brit cartridge would be more tolerant od dirt than a rimless cartridge. But only if the chamber was a bit longer than the cartridge to give a little clearance at the shoulder. Many were made that way for that reason, I'm given to believe. So much so that when I had a No4 barrel fitted to my NoI MkI* the chamber did not need recutting (the barrel gets set back half a turn or so because the thread start is in a different position). The LE could probably tolerate mud and debris with smaller tolerances than it's Mauser counterparts due to its design - that's my assesment, anyway. The cockng on closing made it real fast together with its slick action but that same cocking on closing is a pain for hunting and target shooting!

There is a rather serious safety defect with the Lee Enfield that I discovered one day. If one closes the bolt onto a chambered round rapidly with the trigger depressed, IT WILL FIRE:!:

[bigedp51]

There is a rather serious safety defect with the Lee Enfield that I discovered one day. If one closes the bolt onto a chambered round rapidly with the trigger depressed, IT WILL FIRE:!:

Two thoughts come into my mind about your statement...................

I can't help but wonder if a policeman had been at the shooting range that day, if your hand would have been cited for speeding. (for breaking the speed of sound)

Or possibly some of the STP you put on your cases got on your sear and made your trigger slippery than snot on a door knob.

http://i122.photobucket.com/albums/o254/bigedp51/trigger-3a.jpg

http://i122.photobucket.com/albums/o254/bigedp51/trigger-4a.jpg

http://i122.photobucket.com/albums/o254/bigedp51/RUGBY4a.jpg

[303Guy]

No, definately due to the striker falling on the primer as the 'safety cam' fell away under it. It took a while to figure out what had happened. The trigger was fully depressed and the cartridge was already in the chamber, so fast closing and locking was required to get the extractor over the rim. Needless to say, I have changed my procedure for closing a bolt on a chambered round. Oh, it was the old MkI bolt with that huge and heavy integral safety in the cocking piece.


I can't help but wonder if a policeman had been at the shooting range that day, if your hand would have been cited for speeding. (for breaking the speed of sound) Yup. It was a fast movement. Never to be repeated!

[Multigunner]

So much so that when I had a No4 barrel fitted to my NoI MkI* the chamber did not need recutting (the barrel gets set back half a turn or so because the thread start is in a different position).
Well how about that, great minds move in the same channels, I also have begun fitting a No. 4 two groove to a No.1 action, the receiver ring of the No.1 was too mashed in to take the standard No.1 barrel so it was either set a No.4 back just short of half a thread or set back a No.1 about 3/4 of a thread ( not a ful thread in this case due to the damaged receiver ring face). I'd already been given a no.4 barrel that a friend had gotten for another project he had abandoned, trying to reactivate a DP no.4.
I haven't finished the alterations yet. This chamber was tight and the shortened chamber istoo tight at the base to take the case even if the shoulder were cut deeper. I'll have to freshen the chamber.
I've considered making it a 7.7X54R, The shorter civilian target version of the .303 once popular in Australia and France, but those require a full thread of set back, and I'd still have to open up the chamber body a hair.

A very sensitive primer can be set off by a very light blow, and broken firing pin points of the two piece Springfield could set off a round on closing rapidly with only the mainspring pressure holding it forwards. My SKS dented a primer so deeply the first time I loaded it that I'm suprized it didn't go off, and the pin was not jammed in a forwards position, the gun was pointed straight down so the rather heavy pin had a gravity assist.

The Enfield bolt can be manipulated with great speed.
Your AD was a one in a million, probably never to be repeated by design, but I can see how it could happen.
An alternate possibility would be if the sear were not coming all the way down when the trigger was pulled. Sometimes a bent sear leg will allow the cocking piece to be released but the sear catch in the half bent notch. I repaired a No.4 that had this problem years ago. In that case the sear caught the half bent notch every time and the rifle could not be fired. each time it had caught the sear leg bent more and more.
If the sear caught the half bent at the rounded ingress just enough to momentarily retract the pin and then it over rode just as the action were closed the pin could strike with enough force to ignite a sensitive primer or probably a regular primer for that matter.

Which reminds me, after figuring out that bolt handle kick up was due to vibration of the striker hitting home it occured to me that in a hangfire situation the bolt of a very loose Enfield could kick up enough to reduce locking surface contact by about 20-25% before the hangfire ignited the charge. Too much of that might cause undue stress on the right sidewall, and might be a source of microfractures such as those Armorers were told to look for.
My 1915 bolt looked fine, and headspace was very good with almost no over clocking, but there was too much side play, so I fitted a unissued BSA replacement bolt made in the 1950's along with a new condition bolthead. No kick up at all now.
After replacing the bolt body and the old bolthead which was a non correct SMLE MkI which may have been the source of excessive wear and sideplay, the new bolt fits perfectly cycles easily yet has no kick up at all.

Also I screwed the pin in an etra turn to shorten the gap between cocking piece and rear of the bolt. This reduced the play between the stud of the cocking piece and the retracting cam surface of the bolt, now the bolt could not kick up nearly as far if it did become loose again. A single extra turn cut the play in half.

When I'd earlier replaced the badly worn bolt of my No.4 it also lost any tendency to kick up, partly due to my having filed the underside of the handle to remove all contact with the action strap when closed. Not by design, but since the bolt handle had to be filed a bit anyway to allow the bolt to rotate fully closed.

Before getting the replacement No.1 Bolt I had noticed that if I nudged the bolt handle up enough to leave daylight between action strap and underside of the handle there was almost no kick up. Thats how I finally figured out what supplied the energy for bolt handle kick up, simple vibration.
The Nickel Steel alloy rings like a bell, though not so loudly in the human range of hearing, and may contribute to the various vibration related accuracy considerations such as bullet throw and compensation tuning.
The British were masters in mass production of swords, and I think this was carried over in the metalurgy of their rifles. Hard where hardness was needed and flexible where flexibility was advantageous.
Had the Enfield not been made of superior alloys it would have been far less sucessful.

Its said the Mauser was made of whatever metal was strong enough for the job, while the Enfield were made of the very best alloys available.
Mauser post WW1 were made of better steels than previously, perhaps they recognized the qualities of the British steels as a deciding factor in durability.


PS
RE the set back barrel. Be sure theres enough clearance in the end of the neck, otherwise it might bind with a crimp fitting into the chamfer but not opening up fully to allow the bullet to leave the neck without undue pull.

[303Guy]

... I had noticed that if I nudged the bolt handle up enough to leave daylight between action strap and underside of the handle there was almost no kick up.Aah-hah! Thanks for that tip!:drinks: Most of the time my LE don't kick up simply because the bolt closes firmly onto the loaded round. Actually, I'm not even sure any of them kick up. Mmm.... I can't be that lucky!:roll:


RE the set back barrel. Be sure theres enough clearance in the end of the neck, ...Yup, thanks. My gunsmith did pass a reamer into the chamber. He did the same for my Dad's rifle. That one closes down firm on unfired cases, leaving a ring mark on the shoulder.

Both these rifles were pretty accurate. I was a bit unhappy when I couldn't get under 1¼ MOA groups at 100m with 10 shots. Mine had a free loating barrel with bedding under the Knox form and a full action body bedding.

[PAT303]

I had an EY rifle,in Oz they are painted with a yellow nose and I had it a few years before it let go,the action split through the middle but neither the bolt head or bolt or any other part of the action came away.I stripped it down and rebuilt it with a new frame and it's now had nearly 6000 rounds through it and shooting fine.Most LE have excessive headspace because they were used so much,in Aust hands they fought from the 1890's through to the late 1960's and the L42's lasted until the late 80's and the police only replaced thiers in the 1990's so those rifles did some work.The best advice I'll give is get the headspace done to the minimum setting,it's very easy to do and load and shoot just like any other rifle,forget oiling your ammo or any other stupid idea's,just fireform and neck size and keep cases to the one rifle only,most important enjoy shooting a classic military rifle. Pat

[Multigunner]

Aah-hah! Thanks for that tip!:drinks: Most of the time my LE don't kick up simply because the bolt closes firmly onto the loaded round. Actually, I'm not even sure any of them kick up. Mmm.... I can't be that lucky!:roll:

Yup, thanks. My gunsmith did pass a reamer into the chamber. He did the same for my Dad's rifle. That one closes down firm on unfired cases, leaving a ring mark on the shoulder.

Both these rifles were pretty accurate. I was a bit unhappy when I couldn't get under 1¼ MOA groups at 100m with 10 shots. Mine had a free loating barrel with bedding under the Knox form and a full action body bedding.

The first beeding instructions I ran across stated that the center section of the side rails should not make contact.
I'll have to check the figures but I think its around 1 1/2 -1 3/4" from at the rear end and the same from the ring back that should be firmly bedded with the center section left free of contact. The ring should contact on a narrow strip at the bottom, and the knox for should contact with a tapered truncated triangular pad.
The barrel may work best free floating but a light upwards press several inches in front of the Knox Form is recomended. The bedding point being in the center between the routed out lightening cuts of the No.4 fore end.
At one time they used a narrow metal shim with teeth to dig into the wood at the barrel beeding point, but these sometimes were pressed deep in the wood as time went on reducing the upwards pressure.

At the action strap contact with the upper portion of the rear of the fore end, the area above the stirup, is more important than full contact.
If the rear of the fore end has spread trying to close the spread is counter productive, once warped outwards bringing it back together just shifts the side pressures somewhere else.

I'll dig out an old fore end I'd bedded long ago and check the measurements.

[303Guy]

Thanks Multigunner. I wonder whether my full bodied hand made fore-end would change how the best bedding would be?

I'm just going to have to pull this rifle out of storage and load up some cast boolits for it and see what it can do. Paper patching for it would be another test I can do but I did get promising results with plain cast a while ago. That was using a mold of my own making that was taylored for that throat. (I don't use it much because it is quite heavy and has no suppressor. I can fix that!)

This is the boolit that showed promise.
http://i388.photobucket.com/albums/oo327/303Guy/MVC-745F_edited.jpg

How I mounted the scope over the dust cover.
http://i388.photobucket.com/albums/oo327/303Guy/MVC-538F.jpg

[bigedp51]

"Also I screwed the pin in an etra turn to shorten the gap between cocking piece and rear of the bolt. This reduced the play between the stud of the cocking piece and the retracting cam surface of the bolt, now the bolt could not kick up nearly as far if it did become loose again. A single extra turn cut the play in half."

The proper adjustment for this is called bolt head timing and has nothing to do with screwing the firing pin further into the cocking piece. You were working at the wrong end of the bolt......WARNING Bubba maintenance alert.

"When I'd earlier replaced the badly worn bolt of my No.4 it also lost any tendency to kick up, partly due to my having filed the underside of the handle to remove all contact with the action strap when closed. Not by design, but since the bolt handle had to be filed a bit anyway to allow the bolt to rotate fully closed."

I wonder why the manual states you should have .050 clearance between the bottom of the bolt and the receiver socket "WITHOUT" filing the bolt.

I wonder why the left edge of the resistance column must not rotate beyond the inner edge of the resistance shoulder of the body with a #3 bolt head fitted.

WARNING, Bubba bolt jump repair and maintenance alert :rolleyes: worn actions have more bolt jump and it has nothing to do with the firing pin collar hitting the rear of the bolt head and making the bolt vibrate like a tuning fork. :groner:

When the Enfield is cocked you have the force of the firing pin spring pulling the bolt to the rear and the extractor spring pushing on the bolt from the front. When you pull the trigger you have 45,000 CUP pushing on the bolt lugs and the bolt CAN'T move. The bolt can NOT move upward until the chamber pressure is dissipated.


http://i122.photobucket.com/albums/o254/bigedp51/PrecisNoSARifles1A-pg06.jpg

http://i122.photobucket.com/albums/o254/bigedp51/PrecisNoSARifles1A-pg07.jpg

I wonder why a 03 Springfield that cocks on opening doesn't have bolt jump, but a Enfield that cocks on closing does. :rolleyes:
I hope Mr. Sir Isaac Newton isn't rolling over in his grave and filing on the bottom of his apple.

http://i122.photobucket.com/albums/o254/bigedp51/IMGP6498.jpg

:groner: I'm getting another migraine headache.............................

[303Guy]

bigedp51, may I 'borrow' your pic with the machine gun? I think it's brilliant!:mrgreen:

[303Guy]

I'm kinda sure I have an almost unused No4 that has bolt lift. I also think it has an unreasonable bolt hande contact with the action strap. I'll have to pull it out and check.

[Multigunner]

I'm kinda sure I have an almost unused No4 that has bolt lift. I also think it has an unreasonable bolt hande contact with the action strap. I'll have to pull it out and check.

Well there should be contact when fully closed, so closing the bolt rapid won't unduly strain the bolt handle which I'm told is welded on. I don't see one snapping off, but I guess its possible.
The replacement bolt of my No.1 makes contact more fully than the old bolt if anything, but since everything else is now tight and solid theres no kick up.

What Mark LE is that with the scope?

[bigedp51]

"The barrel may work best free floating but a light upwards press several inches in front of the Knox Form is recomended. The bedding point being in the center between the routed out lightening cuts of the No.4 fore end."


The dark gray areas below are the bedding points for the No.4 Enfield with 2 to 7 pounds of up pressure at the fore end tip. So tell me just when did they add bedding points between A, B, C, D, and E for "standard" military Enfield bedding????????????

If you notice the area between D and E is missing in the drawing because there are NO bedding points. :groner:

http://i122.photobucket.com/albums/o254/bigedp51/beddingpoints.jpg

Don't tell me you were the one who donated these manuals on bedding the Enfield rifle.

I thought my name was Ed Horton..........Gee let someone read a Enfield manual and right away he becomes an "expert" Armourer :groner:

http://www.milsurps.com/showthread.php?t=3322

http://www.milsurps.com/showthread.php?t=867

When are you going to stop this delusional act you are putting on from reading someone elses postings and then still getting it wrong???????

[303Guy]

Oh crud! :groner: All my Lee Enfields have bolt lift and have bolt handles that contact the action strap! (I have eight). The one that's hardly been used has the least bolt lift. I tried dry-firing it with clearance between bolt handle and action strap and the bolt drops!

Having just handle the No4, I am motivated to take for an outing! The boolits I have need to be sized to two-diameter to fit the throat after patching. It should accept the same boolits that fit the 1902 NoI with the No4 barrel.

[bigedp51]

bigedp51, may I 'borrow' your pic with the machine gun? I think it's brilliant!:mrgreen:

NO! Only Americans are allowed to be that funny..............:mrgreen: :drinks:

http://i122.photobucket.com/albums/o254/bigedp51/I-Support-Sign.jpg

Did I tell you I hated loosing the Americas Cup ;-) "And" loosing a Enfield postal match to the Australians [smilie=b:

http://i122.photobucket.com/albums/o254/bigedp51/payback.jpg

[Multigunner]

Oh crud! :groner: All my Lee Enfields have bolt lift and have bolt handles that contact the action strap! (I have eight). The one that's hardly been used has the least bolt lift. I tried dry-firing it with clearance between bolt handle and action strap and the bolt drops!

Having just handle the No4, I am motivated to take for an outing! The boolits I have need to be sized to two-diameter to fit the throat after patching. It should accept the same boolits that fit the 1902 NoI with the No4 barrel.

The kick up is pretty common, and not a reason for great concern unless excessive. Excessive kick up is a sign of wear, or poorly fitted parts, and should be addressed.
As I mentioned earlier the amount the handle can kick up can be reduced by fitting the firing pin so the stud on the cocking piece is a closer fit to the retracting cam surface of the bolt.
This can be done euther by screwing the pin into the cocking piece a bit further, or by filing the mating surface at the rear of the bolthead shank and shortening the tip of the pin to be sure it doesn't protrude too far. Proper pin protrusion is from .045 to .05.
The bolt handles normally should make contact with the strap if for no other reason than to avoid putting stress on the welded on handle, though some are not well fitted and can prevent the bolt from rotating fully closed. If the line of the guide rib is proud of the bolthead lug when the handle is fully down then theres to much contact.
If your ammo is fresh and not prone to hangfire, though most old milsurp .303 is prone to hangfires and misfires POF especially so, the handle has little time to lift before chamber pressure prevents further movement.

If my old bolts had not kicked up enough to reduce locking surface contact by aprox 20-25% I'd not have really taken notice of it and figured out why it happens.
I figure armorers used the amount of kick up as a tell to reveal potential problems and repair them.
Worn threads at the front of the bolt body seems a common cause. There main force keeping the bolt from turning if the knob is bumped when closed and cocked is the binding of the body to side walls due to spring pressure on the extractor. A weak spring may contribute but excessive side play of a loosely fitting bolthead is a far more urgent situation.

If the threads aren't too badly worn you may find another bolthead thats a better fit. If the threads are very worn its time for a replacement bolt body. Fortunately these are still to be found, both new old stock unissued and new condition used or complete bolts are available at reasonable prices.
If a bolt is badly worn its best to replace it now while parts are still available.

Much of the problems with poorly fitted firing pins may come from pins being replaced by untrained personel.
Several No.1 rifles I've examined had unfitted replacement pins still flat at the point. Armorers would shape the points as part of the final fitting operation, unissued pins were delivered with over long points still flat.
The point should be a sugarloaf profile, not too sharp of course.

You may find some useful information here
http://www.euroarms.net/EFD/manuali/No4Mk1Arm.pdf

[bigedp51]

"Also I screwed the pin in an etra turn to shorten the gap between cocking piece and rear of the bolt. This reduced the play between the stud of the cocking piece and the retracting cam surface of the bolt, now the bolt could not kick up nearly as far if it did become loose again. A single extra turn cut the play in half."


Oops, if you screw the firing pin in one extra turn, then the cocking piece will hit the rear of the bolt. Forward travel of the firing pin is to be stopped by the collar of the firing pin hitting the rear of the bolt head. (Bolt head timing controls the gap between the cocking piece and the rear of the bolt body)

Your reducing bolt jump by letting the cocking piece hit and drag on the rear of the bolt and thats a NO NO!

Any other Bubba suggestions on how to mess up a perfectly good Enfield rifle.

[wiljen]

Ok, lets keep it polite. Some of this is starting to be aimed at others rather than just discussing the topic at hand. Disagreement is fine, name calling is not. Clean up your act gents.

[bigedp51]

"Much of the problems with poorly fitted firing pins may come from pins being replaced by untrained personel."


If you screw the firing pin in one full turn the firing pin will protrude from the rear of the cocking piece and the firing pin keeper screw will also protrude. This would be out of adjustment and just plain ugly.

http://i122.photobucket.com/albums/o254/bigedp51/IMGP6595.jpg

If you screw the firing pin in one complete turn the rear of the cocking piece will hit the rear of the bolt body which it should NOT DO.

http://i122.photobucket.com/albums/o254/bigedp51/IMGP6596.jpg

Bolt head timing or when the bolt head contacts the collar of the firing and begins pushing the cocking piece to the rear is used for the correct adjustment. You are to have1/64 to 1/16 "air gap" between the bolt body and the cocking piece.

http://i122.photobucket.com/albums/o254/bigedp51/IMGP6586-a-1.jpg

The cocking piece is NOT used as a friction device to prevent bolt jump.

WARNING, maintenance alert :groner:

[303Guy]

Thanks for all the good information.

None of my guns have bolt lift during firing. I'n not worried about headspace either but I will check them all with a guage I'll be making sometime. It'll be a no-go guage.

[Multigunner]

Thanks for all the good information.

None of my guns have bolt lift during firing. I'n not worried about headspace either but I will check them all with a guage I'll be making sometime. It'll be a no-go guage.

The bedding instructions in the Canadian Armorers manual are unusual, lots of sheet metal and stiff paper shims.
I noticed they bed the front of the action body about as far back as I'd mentioned earlier but don't seem to bed the rear except at the corner of the interface with the action strap. Not sure how to interpret those drawings, I'll have to study them more closely, they may be on the something there.

[bigedp51]

"The bedding instructions in the Canadian Armorers manual are unusual, lots of sheet metal and stiff paper shims."

There is NO "sheet metal" or "stiff paper shims" used in the standard bedding of the No.4 Enfield rifle, Arborite shims are used in the forward draws area and in American English Arborite is called Formica.

"I'll have to study them more closely, they may be on the something there."

Please do study the bedding instructions in the manuals, the British decided on these bedding methods long before we were born. :rolleyes:

You place the shims in the forward section of the draws and the rear of the draws is to contact the receiver socket at the shaded areas. The draws area acts like the second missing bedding "screw" and "draws" the stock up tight into the receiver socket.

http://i122.photobucket.com/albums/o254/bigedp51/drawsarea-b.jpg

http://i122.photobucket.com/albums/o254/bigedp51/IMGP2022.jpg

http://i122.photobucket.com/albums/o254/bigedp51/IMGP2023.jpg

If you can stick any size feeler gauge between the fore stock and receiver socket you have wood shrinkage and the draws needs shimming.

http://i122.photobucket.com/albums/o254/bigedp51/IMGP0921.jpg

You can download these manuals I donated to Milsurps below, also please note my old buddy Multigunner has NEVER donated any Enfield books or manuals anywhere.

http://www.milsurps.com/showthread.php?t=3322

http://www.milsurps.com/showthread.php?t=867

[PAT303]

I'd like to add that in Oz we always set up our range rifles with a sliver of light showing between the forestock and receiver socket.Like most things it isn't black and white,it was trial and error till you bedded it the way it liked to be,no rifle was bedded until it was shot with different packing to see what it liked or didn't like.We mostly shot the Mk111,the No.4 came alot later for us. Pat

[robertbank]

I'd like to add that in Oz we always set up our range rifles with a sliver of light showing between the forestock and receiver socket.Like most things it isn't black and white,it was trial and error till you bedded it the way it liked to be,no rifle was bedded until it was shot with different packing to see what it liked or didn't like.We mostly shot the Mk111,the No.4 came alot later for us. Pat

Ya, my girl is pretty finicky herself. I have the barrel free floating. Not sure I want to bother bedding the rifle until I am satisfied I have wrung all I can out of her unbedded. Then we shall see.

Take Care

Bob

[bigedp51]

I'd like to add that in Oz we always set up our range rifles with a sliver of light showing between the forestock and receiver socket.Like most things it isn't black and white,it was trial and error till you bedded it the way it liked to be,no rifle was bedded until it was shot with different packing to see what it liked or didn't like.We mostly shot the Mk111,the No.4 came alot later for us. Pat

If you Ozmanics would stop drinking that rotgut Fosters beer for long enough to read your own countryman books you would become enlightened.

http://i122.photobucket.com/albums/o254/bigedp51/cover-a.jpg

On top of this the daughter of Jim Sweet has republished her Fathers book "Compeditive Rifle Shooting" first published in Sydney in 1946 which has a full chapter on "The Black Arts of Enfield Bedding".

http://i122.photobucket.com/albums/o254/bigedp51/1A-Cover.jpg

And as far as "a sliver of light showing between the forestock and receiver socket" I was told by a very experienced Australian shooter the draws area should be as tight as buggery" :roll: (I'm innocent and had to look that up and found out thats why we had the War of 1812, the British were "impressing" our sailors) :mrgreen:

This Australian range rifle below has screw adjustable draws for tightness where YOU want to see light and the light colored shims to prevent up and down movement and help keep a constant up pressure at the fore end tip.

http://i122.photobucket.com/albums/o254/bigedp51/blocks-adjustable.jpg

Now don't argue with me on bedding the Enfield rifle or I shoot you with my magnum "Barbie" :Fire:

http://i122.photobucket.com/albums/o254/bigedp51/BBQ-a.jpg

[Multigunner]

I'd like to add that in Oz we always set up our range rifles with a sliver of light showing between the forestock and receiver socket.Like most things it isn't black and white,it was trial and error till you bedded it the way it liked to be,no rifle was bedded until it was shot with different packing to see what it liked or didn't like.We mostly shot the Mk111,the No.4 came alot later for us. Pat

I haven't used any glass on my No.1 MkIII EFD fore end, this came completely untouched as far as bedding goes, not even a relief cut for the bolt takedown latch.
The bedding is shallow enough that it can be deepened and should be to bring the top surface even with the line at top of the action body rail. Figured I'd leave it screwed down tight for awhile then use any marks of impressions as a guide, then deepen where needed by a bit less than 1/16" still short of bringing the lines together. Theres a good deal of extra wood on the undersurfaces.
When settled in just right the only shiming that should be called for would be inside the inletting of the triggerguard to give it plenty of clamping force when screwed down tight.
After that I'll keep track of any improvement over the course of several hundred rounds as the recoil works to settle it all in as evenly as possible.

Most no.1 fore ends I've worked on have room for settling the action body in a tad further. Few seem to have been given more than minimum fitting , and of course most appear to be replacement wood, probably not the first set of replacement wood at that.

The rifle shot decent two MOA with no load development for the previous owner with its warped fore end cut back as a sporter, luckily the numbered nosecap was saved along with other fittings.
The fore end that had been on it was a badly warped but otherwise new looking replacement of a very white wood, probably Indian Whitewood or English White Beech which is known to warp unexpectedly about six months to a year after being finished out as a stock, if it doesn't warp within one year it never will and can make a pretty good and stable stock once you are sure its past the danger period.

The fitting at the action strap seems to be a case of either perfectly even bearing or none at all. If you can't get an even bearing its best to leave it with the sliver of daylight you speak of.

Interference of the squared end of the MkIII stock bolt with its matching slot in the backplate can be a problem. I found my stock bolt was protruding a hair too far and not letting the rear of the fore end come all the way back. There were also some burrs that would bind in the slot. I used a whetrock on the burrs, the steel was too hard to file, and found a very thin washer to fit under the head of the stock bolt. Everything slid into place properly then.
I don't care for the look of the later style stirup type fitting of the No.4 and later Lightgow fore ends, but it and the bolt without the square protusion make bedding a bit simpler.
Old records show complaints of earlier LE buttstocks coming unscrewed, with no long screwdriver handy to tighten them up again, so the square ended bolt and back plate were probably in answer to those complaints.

[herbert buckland]

If you read these books you will see there were difrent metods of beding yoused,but one thing in comon is that all recomend the stock be fimly butted up firmly with the action,by the examples of very acurate rifles i have one a Lithgow set up H rifle and the other H barelled range rifle with cork beding & a ruber gromet at the muzell,firm means tight,to remove the stock you have to jently tap the rear sight guard down,it is to tight to remove by hand,and to be replaced you have to tap it into place by yousing a modified triger guard,that is the way i was shown by a armourer that worked on these rifles half his working life

[Multigunner]

If you read these books you will see there were difrent metods of beding yoused,but one thing in comon is that all recomend the stock be fimly butted up firmly with the action,by the examples of very acurate rifles i have one a Lithgow set up H rifle and the other H barelled range rifle with cork beding & a ruber gromet at the muzell,firm means tight,to remove the stock you have to jently tap the rear sight guard down,it is to tight to remove by hand

The curved section of the left had rail binding against the wood will limit the rearwards movement causing a gap, there are a few other spots that limit the amount the wood can be pressed back by the angled draws.
That curved section is the first place to check though.
You can remove wood very slowly and evenly there by sanding or a small coarse file, not too much because it should maintain contact on the first inch or so when all is tightened down. So long as you can maintain equal contact on the right as well anyway.

[wiljen]

I have asked BigEdp51 for an article version of his posts to add to castpics. If anyone else has ideas they would like to formalize into an article, please let me know.

[PAT303]

If you Ozmanics would stop drinking that rotgut Fosters beer for long enough to read your own countryman books you would become enlightened.

http://i122.photobucket.com/albums/o254/bigedp51/cover-a.jpg

On top of this the daughter of Jim Sweet has republished her Fathers book "Compeditive Rifle Shooting" first published in Sydney in 1946 which has a full chapter on "The Black Arts of Enfield Bedding".

http://i122.photobucket.com/albums/o254/bigedp51/1A-Cover.jpg

And as far as "a sliver of light showing between the forestock and receiver socket" I was told by a very experienced Australian shooter the draws area should be as tight as buggery" :roll: (I'm innocent and had to look that up and found out thats why we had the War of 1812, the British were "impressing" our sailors) :mrgreen:

This Australian range rifle below has screw adjustable draws for tightness where YOU want to see light and the light colored shims to prevent up and down movement and help keep a constant up pressure at the fore end tip.

http://i122.photobucket.com/albums/o254/bigedp51/blocks-adjustable.jpg

Now don't argue with me on bedding the Enfield rifle or I shoot you with my magnum "Barbie" :Fire:

http://i122.photobucket.com/albums/o254/bigedp51/BBQ-a.jpg

If you would get of your high horse for a moment and read my post you would have read that there was no one way to bed a Enfield rifle,I have/had Enfield rifles that had four different bedding styles and no one was better,there is a very good way to bed the Mk111 that worked 99% of the time but seeing your the self proclaimed expert I won't bother telling you what you already know. Pat

[Multigunner]

A correction to something I posted earlier.
I just checked Instructions to Armorers 1931 edition and it gives the max striker protrustion for the No.1 rifles as .042 with the low at .40, not ,050 as I'd said earlier. The No.3 rifle, which probably meant the P-14 has the minimum protrusion as .05 and max .055.
The .045-.050 pin protrusion specs are given in another source, I'll have to backtrack through my PDF files to determine which source gives the longer value.

Probably best to use the .042 protrusion unless there was a reason for the specification to be changed at a later date.

Checked the Instructions for Armorers for the No.4 rifle again, it gives a .040-.050 specification for firing pin protrusion.

The longer value in later manuals may be due to a difference in the primers used in later years.

[herbert buckland]

The curved section of the left had rail binding against the wood will limit the rearwards movement causing a gap, there are a few other spots that limit the amount the wood can be pressed back by the angled draws.
That curved section is the first place to check though.
You can remove wood very slowly and evenly there by sanding or a small coarse file, not too much because it should maintain contact on the first inch or so when all is tightened down. So long as you can maintain equal contact on the right as well anyway.If the stock could not be tightened by replacing the coper shimes the stock would be replaced by the armourers,these day you can not always do that and the easiest way to fix the problem is to glue a proper sized shim on the back of the stock ,the Indians used the plate on the back simular to the No 4s and it works very well ,i am sure ther are other methods that work that are not in armourers manuals

[Multigunner]

If the stock could not be tightened by replacing the coper shimes the stock would be replaced by the armourers,these day you can not always do that and the easiest way to fix the problem is to glue a proper sized shim on the back of the stock ,the Indians used the plate on the back simular to the No 4s and it works very well ,i am sure ther are other methods that work that are not in armourers manuals

There certainly are, but at this time I'm working with a new condition unissued fore end, so I want to settle it in with the least modification possible.

First No.4 fore end I had to bed was of very badly shrunken and oil perished birch, the rear of the fore end at the action strap was a real mess. I built it up with hardwood shims cut from pieces peeled from some Luan paneling scraps and glued on with JB Weld. The stirup was very loose the wood under it rotted away by oil soaking and hot climate. I cut the end off the brass cross pin built up the wood with shims and JB Weld then replaced the pin with a small dia self threading screw to draw it all tight.
Later I found the proper size brass rods at a hobby shop and use those if a stirup needs work.
Before doing any of that I had to clean the stock throughly with TSP and draw out remaing oil by hanging over a heater in the winter time, oil really flowed once the wood got hot, then cut away whatever wood couldn't be saved.
Sometimes perished fibers can be impregnanted with fiberglass resins and when hardened they look much as if they had not been near dissolved by the oil.

To give you an idea just how low end a birch stock is, I inletted pieces of popcycle sticks to repair chips and gouges, the popcycle sticks were the same grade of birch.
Finding a popcycle stick with grain that matched the damaged section was just a matter of sorting through a bagfull of sticks. A little care in the inletting and an invisible repair can be made.

I've seen a lot of Lithgows with the stirup but these were most likely Indian stock sets used in a refurb, they never had the copper plates at the draws the Lithgow fore ends were supposed to have.

[bigedp51]

If you would get of your high horse for a moment and read my post you would have read that there was no one way to bed a Enfield rifle,I have/had Enfield rifles that had four different bedding styles and no one was better,there is a very good way to bed the Mk111 that worked 99% of the time but seeing your the self proclaimed expert I won't bother telling you what you already know. Pat

I'll mark you down as one of the Australians without a sense of humor, a friend in Orstraya sent me the worlds smallest care package two weeks ago. And he didn't even ask me to get off my horse. :violin:

In a Enfield collectors forum there is only one way to bed the Enfield rifle and that is standard military bedding.

http://i122.photobucket.com/albums/o254/bigedp51/IMGP6529.jpg

Be careful around my horse and don't step in anything [smilie=s:

http://i122.photobucket.com/albums/o254/bigedp51/LancerNear.jpg

If I made you angry it was not my intent, I'm old school and learned the various Tobruk stocking up methods. :rolleyes:

http://i122.photobucket.com/albums/o254/bigedp51/Page06-a.jpg

[303Guy]

Canuck Bob, please forgive us for taking your thread a little off topic![smilie=1:

In fact, this thread has turned into a very interesting and informative thread on bedding the Lee Enfield. It's taking on the qualities of a sticky. Perhaps we should ask the moderators to split it into a 'Lee Enfield Bedding' thread and make that a sticky?

Great information!:drinks:

[PAT303]

I'll mark you down as one of the Australians without a sense of humor, a friend in Orstraya sent me the worlds smallest care package two weeks ago. And he didn't even ask me to get off my horse. :violin:

In a Enfield collectors forum there is only one way to bed the Enfield rifle and that is standard military bedding.

http://i122.photobucket.com/albums/o254/bigedp51/IMGP6529.jpg

Be careful around my horse and don't step in anything [smilie=s:

http://i122.photobucket.com/albums/o254/bigedp51/LancerNear.jpg

If I made you angry it was not my intent, I'm old school and learned the various Tobruk stocking up methods. :rolleyes:

http://i122.photobucket.com/albums/o254/bigedp51/Page06-a.jpg
Trust me I'm the most easy going person there is but there isn't a ''right'' way.There used to be ranges the length and breath of Oz but now our government doesn't trust us anymore but each of them had it own 'smith who worked the members rifles over and each had his own trick,they didn't care for collector value either,it was the score that counted.We have many many enfields that today are shot every weekend and I know of two 'smiths that only work on them and guess what,they bed them differently,like I said,it isn't black and white.Just for everyones information we don't drink Fosters,I've never even seen it for sale. Pat

[Multigunner]

Canuck Bob, please forgive us for taking your thread a little off topic![smilie=1:

In fact, this thread has turned into a very interesting and informative thread on bedding the Lee Enfield. It's taking on the qualities of a sticky. Perhaps we should ask the moderators to split it into a 'Lee Enfield Bedding' thread and make that a sticky?

Great information!:drinks:

If someone can lift images from some of the linked to PDF files and post those it would help. Of course you'd have to check the copyright status.
British government publications have what amounts to a permanent Crown Copyright, but its seldom enforceable in the case of military manuals, in other publications a book may no longer be copyright protected but the images remain the intelectual propery of the photographer or artist.

Information itself can not be copyright protected, only the individual's literary or artistic contribution.
For copyright protected literature limited quotations are allowable for instructive purposes.

The US limits long term copyright protection, with anything printed before 1910 fair game and most books printed in the WW1 era are also fair game, though not all.
In some instances a scan of a book printed before WW1 can be public domain, but a scan of a recent reprint of the same book is protected and can't be posted.
Some books that are public domain in the US are still under copyright in the UK.

[bigedp51]

If someone can lift images from some of the linked to PDF files and post those it would help. Of course you'd have to check the copyright status.
British government publications have what amounts to a permanent Crown Copyright, but its seldom enforceable in the case of military manuals, in other publications a book may no longer be copyright protected but the images remain the intelectual propery of the photographer or artist.

Information itself can not be copyright protected, only the individual's literary or artistic contribution.
For copyright protected literature limited quotations are allowable for instructive purposes.

The US limits long term copyright protection, with anything printed before 1910 fair game and most books printed in the WW1 era are also fair game, though not all.
In some instances a scan of a book printed before WW1 can be public domain, but a scan of a recent reprint of the same book is protected and can't be posted.
Some books that are public domain in the US are still under copyright in the UK.

Dear Ol' Buddy

The books and manuals you are referring to were scanned and converted to .pdf format by me, and YOU had nothing to do with it.

In order for something to be copyrighted the laws between two countries must be reciprocal regarding the information. The United States does not copyright its military manuals because our Constitution starts off "We the people" meaning our government belongs to the people including the printed military manuals. (Show me a single copyrighted American military manual)

The posted Canadian manuals at Milsurps are there because I wrote to the Canadian Government asking if I could post them in my manual stickies. Also please note that Milsurps.com is a Canadian website and the owner is NOT breaking any copyright laws.

Six years ago you couldn't find a single Enfield manual anywhere on the internet because someone who sells Enfield books at his website didn't want any competition. This person emailed Parallaxbills and Gunboards complaining that I was breaking Canadian copyright laws and I lost my entire manual sticky at Parallaxbills and half my sticky at Gunboards.

Then YOU show up posting a link to Jim Sweets book "Competitive Rifle Shooting" at Gunboards where I had a manual sticky. I had been asked to remove this book by the daughter of Jim Sweet because she extended the copyright and was going to put it back in print.

The problem Ol' Buddy was the link you posted at Gunboards (http://comcast.net/~ehorton/sweet.pdf) had my name in it and YOU just couldn't figure out your name wasn't Ed Horton and what was in my file storage locker at comcast.net did not belong to you. Then you made the brilliant excuse you were colorblind and couldn't see my name in the link.

So now "Ol' Buddy" that I have made it clear about why we are such "close friends" and that you have selective color blindness maybe the forum members here will understand things a little better.

So let me clear it up for you again, 95% of the books and manuals you see on the Internet today on the Enfield rifle were brought here by me after a long war. These same manuals were donated to the Italian website Euroarms during this war so I could post the links in my signature block and state that Canada had not declared war on Italy.

So again "Ol' Buddy" YOU had nothing to do with these books and manuals, you didn't pay to get them here, you didn't fight to keep them here nor did you scan them and convert them to .pdf format.

What you did do was read these books and manuals I provided and read the postings I and other people did at other websites and then try and pass this information off as your own. And now you have the audacity to talk about copyright protection after pulling that stunt at Gunboards and trying to stir up even more problems about the Enfield material I provided.

Get a life Multigunner AKA Alfred, AKA Gunnersam, AKA Temperflash you are writing checks and your account has been empty for a very long time.

Now show me anything you have donated about the Enfield rifle and fought to keep it here for other people to download and read free of charge.

http://i122.photobucket.com/albums/o254/bigedp51/snapshot2.png

[Canuck Bob]

A fine member of the forum was able to sell me once fired IVI brass for my rifle. It is in excelent condition. I am very happy to be usiing Canadian brass.