7.62mm DCRA LE No4 conversion thread

Gents, PM me if you know someone who has one but is shy or a non-CGN'er..I'll put' em as Anonymous DCRA # etc..
 
I have 098. All of the parts, except for the mag, which isn't marked and looks to be a Sterling clone and the trigger gaurd, which is milled, are Long Branch marked. The rear sight is a PH-5C. There aren't any marks on the butt socket other than a broad arrow with a faint 54 under it on the right side. Looks to have been made up on a new unmarked No4 MkI receiver as it has the bolt release latch. There aren't any marks on the left side of the receiver either. The left receiver flat has 5 holes that were filled and evidence of milling at the two locations. both areas were polished to clean up the work and reblued. No, the hole paterns don't match the pattern for the T rifle scope mounts. The 098 mark is preceded by an arrow pointing up and the bolt, which looks like a a #5 hollow knob type looks to have been British. The serial number is on the right upper corner of the receiver and on top of the bolt handle.

If you guys want pics, someone will have to post them for me as I am computer challenged and only manage to screw up each time I try to post any.
 
I have a DCRA 7.62 #4mk1* built on a 1943 Long Branch action. Number on barrel and action is 1199. Bad part is that someone cut off the rear sight ears so that they could mount a parkerhale 5A sight, it also has an enfield 7.62mm type mag. It shoots well but the action as not been relieved to properly fit the 7.62mm mag.
 
bearhunter - these rifles were target rifles. Not at all unusual for rifles to have been put together from odds and ends of parts. I had one I bought from a Sgt. in 1962. It had a '42 dated Brit. body, just about everything else was LB. Even if the rifle started off as a LB with all original parts, it was not unusual for parts to be exchanged, altered, fitted, in an effort to improve performance. Milled trigger guards were thought to be superior to the stamped ones, for example.
 
Thanks for the information guys. I was aware that they are a mixture of parts. But it didn't hurt to remind me one little bit. I intend to shoot this rifle this spring. I also have what I think to be a DCRA 303 as well. I just sent pics of both to Airborn69 to post for me. The 303 version is also on a NoI Mk4 action and also has a hollow bolt handle. The bolt and receiver have matching numbers. Oddly the number on the bolt has an AT prefix. The number on the receiver only has four digits.
 
bearhunter said:
I have 098. All of the parts, except for the mag, which isn't marked and looks to be a Sterling clone and the trigger gaurd, which is milled, are Long Branch marked. The rear sight is a PH-5C. There aren't any marks on the butt socket other than a broad arrow with a faint 54 under it on the right side. Looks to have been made up on a new unmarked No4 MkI receiver as it has the bolt release latch. There aren't any marks on the left side of the receiver either. The left receiver flat has 5 holes that were filled and evidence of milling at the two locations. both areas were polished to clean up the work and reblued. No, the hole paterns don't match the pattern for the T rifle scope mounts. The 098 mark is preceded by an arrow pointing up and the bolt, which looks like a a #5 hollow knob type looks to have been British. The serial number is on the right upper corner of the receiver and on top of the bolt handle.
Click to expand...

Lomdon_Small_Arms_Co_Ltd__LE_1_121.jpg

Lomdon_Small_Arms_Co_Ltd__LE_1_113.jpg
 
Lee Enfield said:
No, they were sent out with C.MkIII sliding ladder rear sights. In other words the "standard" Canadian No4 service sight.
Click to expand...

So you're telling me shooter's personalized them with what worked for them? Be it any number of sights (front & rear), numerous bedding techniques, restocking, 7.62 mags, slings, extractors and ejectors, etc etc. Who would have thought? RSAF Enfield even designed and produced their own version of a 7.62 mag for target shooters, heck they even allowed them to complete with these altered rifles, and yet here we are and people are calling it not right...

Where is the line for purists then? Seems like a bit of a double standard. Yes they were intended for target shooting, so target sights seems allowable. Yet Heaven forbid anyone take it a step further, even the Enfield factory seems to have over stepped it's bounds on this one. To think how many actual DCRA shooters back in the day "bubba'd" their own rifles. The horror!

I'd like to see everyone put back on the CMkIII's now!

:rolleyes::p
 
Last edited:
Got this DCRA rifle today.(big pic warning)

Finally brought this one home today.
1949 Long Branch DCRA #1156 7.62.
DCRA1156rightside-1.jpg

DCRA1156leftsideaction.jpg

DCRA1156bolt.jpg

DCRA1156C-broadarrow.jpg

Very cool "sold out of service" marking eh?
DCRA1156buttmarks.jpg

Bonus is the RCAF mark on left butt.
DCRA1156leftsidemag.jpg

DCRA1156sightup.jpg

I really like this one, can't wait to shoot it.
Cheers
Geoff
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom