Enfield Barrel Question

[Rack Grade]

Well, hello CGNers!

I bought a garden variety Enfield sporter.

When i examine the barrel i see very little in the way of rifling - lands & grooves. I see the spiral pattern but not any depth.

Yet, when I do the bullet test (stick a bullet into the muzzle to see how tight the fit is), it only goes halfway in. The bullet test indicates a less-worn barrel.

And so: my Enfield Newbie Question is: is the rifling in Enfield barrels shallow? And as such does the above sound normal?

Grateful for your knowledge here.

 

[Potashminer]

Not that it matters, but you either have an Enfield rifle or a Lee Enfield rifle - two very different machines. Among the centre fire 303 British Lee Enfields, there most commonly was the SMLE (No.1) and also the No. 4 and No. 5 - the P14 "Enfield" was named the No. 3 rifle in Britain - all the various Lee Enfield versions somewhat different to each other in some ways. When new, the grooves were circa .004" to .0065" deeper than the hole that was bored through the barrel. Could have been as few as two grooves, or as many as six grooves. Is up to you if you can "gauge" that thickness by inserting a bullet into the muzzle. Is also a lot of years of crap and fouling that can build up - is more common to see on a boy's .22 rifle, but can get the grooves almost full of lead fouling - looks almost like a smooth bore. I have had a 30 plus year old .22 that had never been cleaned - as per the owner that had bought it new, was many boxes of shells through it over the years - but the bore had never been cleaned out. I was getting "chunks" of lead come out of that bore - was a lot of rifling in there, after the crap was cleared out.

 

[Rack Grade]

Ahhhh. A good cleaning I will do that for sure and then look again. Thank you very much for the info!!!

She’s a No 4 Enfield.

 

[bearhunter]

Ahhhh. A good cleaning I will do that for sure and then look again. Thank you very much for the info!!!

She’s a No 4 Enfield.

No, she's a No4 MkI, No4 MkI*, No4 Mk I/3, No4 MkII LEE ENFIELD ;-)

The proper designation will be stamped or scribed on the Left flat side of the receiver, along with the factory and date of manufacture.

There will be a serial number and factory stamp on the left side of the butt socket as well unless it's been scrubbed.

 

[Potashminer]

Chances are good that you have a No. 4 Lee Enfield - I do not think there ever was such a thing called a No. 4 Enfield. "Enfield" commonly refers to an Armoury in Britain (a Royal Ordinance Factory near Enfield Locks) where rifling and other things were designed and made. Lee was a Canadian/American/ Scotsman who designed the action. He had nothing to do with the "Enfield" rifles - they were entirely designed at Enfield Armoury, although most were produced in USA. Lee Enfield rifles use Lee's design of action and Enfield's design of rifling - there was also, for example, Lee Metford rifles that used an earlier rifling profile.



The top rifle is a No. 4 Lee Enfield - the bottom one is an "Enfield" - is actually an M1917, but very few could tell difference to P14 at this distance or angle of view. Very different machines. I do not have any P14's assembled at the moment.

 

[hobophobe]

2 groove bore?

 

[Irons78]

Make sure to include a good copper fouling solvent in the cleaning regimen (Sweets 7.62 or ProShot IV, Hoppes Copper Remover etc.). I bet there’s a lot of deposit in those grooves.

 

[Potashminer]

2 groove bore?

Yes - two grooves - I have one installed on a Maltby receiver - is a "chopped down" sporter. The barrel might have been made by Long Branch (?)



I had hacksawed this barrel off, circa 20" from bolt face - I was using a hand operated muzzle crowning tool for first time - vice is more in focus than the barrel muzzle is - I hope you can make out the two grooves. That is the only picture of that barrel muzzle that is left here from then - Jan 2022.

 

[Rack Grade]

So, I figured it out.

I compared the barrel of this No 4 Lee Enfield Sporter to another I got a hold of. WOW what a difference. In the comparison rifle bore I see very sharp lands and grooves. With depth and dimension. In mine I see what is the last remaining remnants of what WAS a good bore with more than 2 grooves. It is very smooth, with almost like only an imprint of the grooves remaining. I don't think it will spin a bullet.

The short version of that is that my bore is nice and shiny, buy very worn.

I am sad for my little sporter. Well, I'll give her a try!


Thanks for the two groove pic above.

 

[Potashminer]

Do not give up too quickly on that barrel - I have never yet figured out how to correlate what I see in barrel in bore scope, with the groups on target. Have to fire it to know how it performs, I think. Is several dozen barrels I have been working with - much of them rusted or corroded - but do not think I have dealt with one that rifling has been "worn" down - I do not think that would be "normal" wear - something unusual would have to be used as projectile to wear on just the rifling and not also within the grooves. I have one notable barrel that I condemned - it was probably a WWI 30-06 at its start - was re-chambered to 308 Norma Mag at some point - "alligator skin" finish within that bore probably 6" or 8" up the rifling ahead of the chamber - I could not see any chunks had fallen out - but was right there to happen - as a result of that one barrel, I do not think "wear" is even and continuous for the length of the bore - I think the area immediately in front of the chamber gets eroded first - before that gets to the muzzle end - although I am not sure abut that.

Maybe your bore has grooves that are filled with crap - so - likely want to soak in some sort of penetrating fluid - plug muzzle end and stand it up - fill bore and let it soak for a couple days - give fluid a chance to get under the fouling in the grooves. After several days, get a cleaning rod and a snug fitting bore brush - or three brushes - apply much elbow grease and scrub hell out of it with full length back and forth strokes - I am not a fan of spinning a brush with a drill, although I see some on CGN that suggest that - I just think that the spinning brush has to erode against the sharp edges of the rifling, from the grooves. But, from your desciption, you really do not have a lot to loose with that one. If you can get a piece of 100% pure, soft lead - might want to try to push that through the bore to "slug" it - when you measure on the slug, will tell you what the minimum diameter is in there - the grooves in barrel will be ridges on the slug - sort of reversed from "real life" making groove size easy to measure. Of course, odd numbered grooves - like 5 grooves - is much more difficult and complicated to measure accurately - versus four grooves or six grooves. And, for some reason, British military guns seemed to like using five grooves - I do not know why.

 

[Snider shooter]

A friend bought a cheap #1 sporter and said he couldn’t get a group under 2 ft at 100. I told him the barrel was dirty or worn out. He offered it to me and I figured it was worth it just for parts. Rifling looked clean but well worn. Anyway I decided to do the bullet test. I grabbed a 180 gr 0.312 bullet out of the box and stuck it in the muzzle. I let go of it and it dropped down the barrel and fell out and hit the floor. Rifling near the chamber was the worst. I junked a couple barrels that I could push a bullet through with a rod but hadn’t seen one that I could drop a bullet down like that.
I have a couple rifles with pitted bores Vetterli and Mauser 71/84 that shot well so I would shot your rifle just to see how it shoots. Never know.

 

[mkrnel]

Chances are good that you have a No. 4 Lee Enfield - I do not think there ever was such a thing called a No. 4 Enfield. "Enfield" commonly refers to an Armoury in Britain (a Royal Ordinance Factory near Enfield Locks) where rifling and other things were designed and made. Lee was a Canadian/American/ Scotsman who designed the action. He had nothing to do with the "Enfield" rifles - they were entirely designed at Enfield Armoury, although most were produced in USA. Lee Enfield rifles use Lee's design of action and Enfield's design of rifling - there was also, for example, Lee Metford rifles that used an earlier rifling profile.

View attachment 754833

The top rifle is a No. 4 Lee Enfield - the bottom one is an "Enfield" - is actually an M1917, but very few could tell difference to P14 at this distance or angle of view. Very different machines. I do not have any P14's assembled at the moment.

The red highlight text is not really true, the Lee Enfield rifle was adapted from the Lee Metford rifle which was adapted from the Lee-Remington military rifle model of 1885. Remington made them under licence from Lee as he had no real manufacturing capability.

The Royal Arsenal at Enfield just took an existing design and tweaked it to to their preference but had to pay and credit Lee for the design.

Here is an example, the Bolt and action is very similar to what became the Lee-Metford.

 

[tiriaq]

A very effective way of removing heavy metal fouling is electrolytic cleaning. It is essentially a plating (or reverse plating?) process whereby the metal on the bore surface is transferred to an electrode that runs through the barrel.

 

[Lee Enfield]

I used to carry a .300 and .302 plug gauge.
For a while i only bought Rifles that showed resistance to the .300 gauge.

 

[gaff]

if your barrel has no rifling, it sounds like it might be a Metford barrel. any pictures of the rifle?