GRI 1951 No 1 Mk3 Surmounted with a Crown
- Thread starter *lawrence
- Start date
Be careful with that, before some nimrod goes about trying to convert his/her No1 sporter to a 308Win (7.62x51)
Yes, it does happen, people see something and don't look into how it was done.
India jumped through a lot of hoops to build their 2A and 2A1 rifles, so they would handle a steady diet of 7.62x51 Nato ammunition
They actually changed the metallurgy for the recievers/bolts, after testing showed the original No1 metallurgy wasn't up to the task and they couldn't just simply convert what they had on hand or were presently making.
Here's something else that may be of interest but a bit off topic.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cs9SqfOhvCM
Last edited:
One reason would be that they were building the rifles under British supervision and license until India gained independence in 1947.
Sometime after that date, the rifles were stamped RFI
Stolen from a post on Gunboards by [FONT="]Amatikulu[/FONT]
[FONT="]Gun Proof in India - An Historical Account." It was written by Mr. A. G. Harrison the former Proof Master at the Rifle Factory Proof House, Ishapore, India and was published in "The Gun Digest, 33rd Edition, 1979.[/FONT]
"From 1908 to 1950 all military bolt action rifles made at Ishapore were proof tested with a dry proof round followed by an oiled proof round. The proofcartridge was loaded to 24 tons (2240lbs = 1 ton) psi breech presure, or 25% higher than the service pressure.
In 1950 the material for rifle bodies (they made No.1 Mark 3* rifles; my addition) was altered from an EN steel to SWES 48 steel (not heat treated) except for the recoil shoulder and cam recess in the receiver. With this change the rifle receivers distorted when oiled proof cartridges were fired. This was discovered when hard and sometimes impossible bolt retraction was experienced. Large quantities of rifles were rejected. To avoid rejections the authorities ordered discontinuance of the oiled proof. Therefore from 1950 to the end of SMLE rifle production rifles made at Ishapore were proof tested with one dry proof only, although the specification called for both dry and oiled proof.
A bolt action rifle similar to the SMLE Mk. III*, modified to fire the 7.62NATO cartridge was produced at Ishapore, first in February 1965. Their receivers were made of SWES 48 steel, un-heat-treated, and with the NATO proof cartridge receivers were found to distort with the oiled or the dry proof round! The material was changed to an EN steel so now the rifles stand up better to dry and oiled proof."
Cottage Hill Bill
CGN Regular
- Location
- Pensacola, FL USA
The 2a and 2a1 were not made from different steel. At one time they went to a lower quality steel, the guns failed in service and they reverted to the original specification steel. That may be where this particular myth started. They were made from the same specification as No.1 MkIII* steel. Details below.
https://www.gunboards.com/threads/took-gupta-out-to-stretch-his-legs.1196384/page-2#post-10776031
https://www.gunboards.com/threads/took-gupta-out-to-stretch-his-legs.1196384/page-2#post-10776031
I did not mention 7.62, somebody else did. The rifle is .303
Exactly- my 1948 No. 1 already has the Ashoka instead of crown.
Regarding the 2A1 rifles, I suspect there's more to the story than that often posted Gun Digest reference. When I compare my 2A1's action body carefully with any No. 1 body I see differences in thickness at some key points. I think Ishapore had more than the required technical ability to modify the design to increase strength where needed. They would have known about the failed Australian efforts to rechamber standard Lithgow No. 1 rifles in 7.62x51N which resulted in cracked receivers.
milsurpo
