In theory, can a sporterized Lee-Enfield shoot accurately?

commissar_lubi

commissar_lubi

CGN Regular
Rating - 100%
19   0   0
Lee-Enfields being rather bedding sensitive rifles, how well do sporterised Enfields shoot? Would they not in theory be plagued with bad accuracy issues? On the other hand, they've been used for decades as hunting rifles, surely they can't all be horrible if they hold up in practical use.
 
both the No.1 Mk 3 sporters i currently have will shoot 2-3 inch 5 shot groups at 100 yds. thats with handloads, but ive done minimal load development too. might get em tighter, im not super worried about it as that more than accpetable for the very occasional hunting use they see. im curious to compare how one of them will shoot comparatively after i restore to full military configuration
 
Ive seen a few that have got the job done.....with regards to hunting that is. One has to define accurate.

Accurate enough to hit the vitals on an animal, sure.

MOA, no, not likely.
 
That's the surprising part really, I would have been tempted to think that as a result of cutting down the wood furniture and removing handguards (thus screwing up the rifle's bedding) accuracy would be reduced to hitting the broad side of a barn, i.e. even worse than the standard 3-4 moa military standard, but it seems like sporters actually hold up pretty decently.
 
They can be accurate, my sporter 43 No.4 LB with a 2 grove barrel shoots 1”-1.25” five shot groups @ 100y with both Federal blue box 180g sp and S&B 150g sp factory ammo if I do my part. It’s plenty accurate for a sporter enfield. Curious to see what it would do with hand loads.
 
maple_leaf_eh said:
Accuracy for a hunting rifle is measured in minutes of moose.
Click to expand...

Some Lee Enfield rifles are MOA rifles, as long as the bedding is good and they are fed ammo they like.

Before they are capable of good accuracy, there needs to be several factors that need to come together.

Some people believe the fore end pressure of around 6 pounds is an absolute, without question. Maybe, for most rifles in military configuration with full wood and metal to wood bedding. The six pounds of fore end pressure helps to push the recoil shoulders tightly into the ways, as long as they haven't been damaged by any of several conditions.

I would never glass bed the ways to a receiver on a full military specimen. However, I have glass bedded rifles that have been cut down with a lot of success.

One caveat, slug and measure the bore of your rifle before you even start. Large chambers can be overcome with neck resizing but nothing can compensate for a larger bore diameter.

Most of the bullets available today with metal jackets are either .311 to .312 diameter. You need a bore of appropriate diameter to start with. If your bore measures smaller than the required mean diameter, it can be a blessing or a curse. I had a cut down sporting No1 MkIII* that had been refurbed in 1942 and a new barrel was installed. It had a .3095 bore diameter. Whoever had customized the old girl had done a magnificent job. Hand carved and set Maple butt and fore end. It would shoot both .308 and .311 diameter bullets acceptably, into under 3 moa out past 200 yards. I kept it, glass bedded it, etc because it really was the job of a master stock carver. The glass bedding didn't improve a thing. Shooting .312 cast 165 grain bullets with a gas check worked.

When .310 diameter bullets, intended for M91 and M91/30 rifles became available, I tried everything from the 123 grain bullets intended for the 7.62x39 round to some 150 grain Norma offerings. That lovely old rifle became a dream to shoot because it was so accurate. It maintained consistent MOA groups, as long as it was fed .310 diameter bullets.

Glass bedding the ways of a cut down sporting No1 or No4 Lee Enfield isn't a sin. Same goes for one that has been commercially restocked or custom restocked. If it's done properly, it can make a lot of difference. Just like glass bedding any other firearm, it's got to be done properly.

On the other hand, I've had full military spec rifles that wouldn't shoot well until the pressure point was removed and the barrel was full floating.

TURF THE LIBERALS IN 2019

LIBERALS REALLY LIKE POOR PEOPLE, they're making more of them every day

If you can't vote CPC, stay at home in protest
 
I have a sporterized LB that shoots very well using Norma ammo, nickle size groups. using other ammo the group spreads to 5-6" at best.
 
englishman_ca said:
The last two iterations of the Lee Enfield sniper rifle were the L39 and L42, both of which had modified fore ends cut back somewhat similar to what could be called 'sporter style', and by all accounts, they are very accurate.
Click to expand...

Didn't the L42 get a heavier barrel which allowed them to be free floated?
 
bearhunter said:
Some Lee Enfield rifles are MOA rifles, as long as the bedding is good and they are fed ammo they like.

Before they are capable of good accuracy, there needs to be several factors that need to come together.

Some people believe the fore end pressure of around 6 pounds is an absolute, without question. Maybe, for most rifles in military configuration with full wood and metal to wood bedding. The six pounds of fore end pressure helps to push the recoil shoulders tightly into the ways, as long as they haven't been damaged by any of several conditions.

I would never glass bed the ways to a receiver on a full military specimen. However, I have glass bedded rifles that have been cut down with a lot of success.

One caveat, slug and measure the bore of your rifle before you even start. Large chambers can be overcome with neck resizing but nothing can compensate for a larger bore diameter.

Most of the bullets available today with metal jackets are either .311 to .312 diameter. You need a bore of appropriate diameter to start with. If your bore measures smaller than the required mean diameter, it can be a blessing or a curse. I had a cut down sporting No1 MkIII* that had been refurbed in 1942 and a new barrel was installed. It had a .3095 bore diameter. Whoever had customized the old girl had done a magnificent job. Hand carved and set Maple butt and fore end. It would shoot both .308 and .311 diameter bullets acceptably, into under 3 moa out past 200 yards. I kept it, glass bedded it, etc because it really was the job of a master stock carver. The glass bedding didn't improve a thing. Shooting .312 cast 165 grain bullets with a gas check worked.

When .310 diameter bullets, intended for M91 and M91/30 rifles became available, I tried everything from the 123 grain bullets intended for the 7.62x39 round to some 150 grain Norma offerings. That lovely old rifle became a dream to shoot because it was so accurate. It maintained consistent MOA groups, as long as it was fed .310 diameter bullets.

Glass bedding the ways of a cut down sporting No1 or No4 Lee Enfield isn't a sin. Same goes for one that has been commercially restocked or custom restocked. If it's done properly, it can make a lot of difference. Just like glass bedding any other firearm, it's got to be done properly.

On the other hand, I've had full military spec rifles that wouldn't shoot well until the pressure point was removed and the barrel was full floating.

TURF THE LIBERALS IN 2019

LIBERALS REALLY LIKE POOR PEOPLE, they're making more of them every day

If you can't vote CPC, stay at home in protest
Click to expand...

This is all true, making assumptions with out range time is a waste of time. 6 pounds frore end pressure, I know manual and experienced shooters prefer 3 to 5 pounds, some like center bedding. The no1 and no4 only share the draws or ways, besides that their two very different animals. I have owned many sporters no1 and no4, some shot very well others shot keyholes. The groove and bore dia are crucial, crown and length of the barrel all have a hand in accuracy. I have built rifles that are free float and shoot great. I had one no1 that had next to no rifling the first inch from the leade and shot fine. Had one no4 mixmaster special that wouldn't shoot, a cardboard shim under the barrel shoulder and it shot great.
Trial and terror
Be well
 
I worked over a friend's sporterized No4 with a high power scope and found that it would print MOA with handloads. The trigger pull was way too high so I swapped parts to reduce it to specified tolerances. He liked it the way it was,so I re-installed the original parts to get it back up to the 8 or 9 pound let off that he was used to.:eek: I can guarantee that it wouldn't have shot as well with that heavy trigger pull.

I've used a No5 JC with scope as a bush rifle over the years and found that it shoots 2.5-3 inch groups with handloads. Its gotten me a few truckloads of whitetails and mulies as well as a moose and a nice bear. I don't think I ever shot anything over 150 yds.
 
My sporter No4 shoots 2MOA give or take with hand loads. It's a hunting rifle not a precision rifle. Just because I occasionally shoot a 1MOA group doesn't make it a 1 MOA rifle but that's ok with me.
 
Take a read through the 1991 Canadian DND armourer's guide for the Lee Enfield No. 4. "Acceptable" was a 5 shot group that at least cut the lines of a box 1" wide by 1 1/2" tall at 25 yards. That sort of translates to a 5 shot group into a box 8" wide by 12" tall at 200 yards, not counting wind effects. That performance standard would very properly be called "minute of moose"... No sense believing that they were designed / built to do better than that, although some did and do, and some civilian folks got very good at refining the standard issue military rifle to do better.
 
Remember that even in the worst of the wartime rush, they were not let out of the factory if they grouped over 3 inches at 100. Generally, 2 inches was regarded as acceptable.

The 303 round was held to the FLATbased Mark VII bullet for many reasons, correct obturation being one of them. That is also why the (fairly quick) Cordite powder remained standard in British ammunition. Problems do arise with boat-tailed bullets because Enfield rifling is odd numbered and WIDE and DEEP. Stick with flatbase slugs. I load mine with Sierra Pro-Hunter 180s and have no troubles.

On a cut-down stock, a rest-point for the barrel will do a lot of good. It does not need to be 6 pounds, rather, just enough to keep the barrel from whipping around. You can even make one up with a couple wraps of masking tape.

TRIGGER CONTROL is a MUST. Use both steps: take up the slack, then SQUEEZE. Do not PULL, do not JERK, just SQUEEZE by tightening your hand. If the Trigger is adjusted correctly, that is all you will have to do.

SCREWS TIGHT but do not overtighten the Magpie Screw on a Number 1; use it to adjust vertical zero.

Slightly MILD loads are best. Try for 2250 ft/sec with a 180. I get that with just 37 grains of 4895. That is the actual by-test most accurate velocity for the 303 round with a 180 slug.

Enjoy!
 
I just sold a factory PH sporter (built on a No1Mk3 action) I had for a number of years to CGN's "Jay". He tried her out today with factory Winchester SuperX ammo, 180gr. He managed to cloverleaf a three shot group at 100 yards. So....... Some of these old gals sure can shoot. (and so can Jay apparently).

(and before everyone shouts "BS" or "yeah right", he has witnesses and the target to support my wild and crazy claim!!!!)
 
140y 5 shot group using a no.1mk3 with 2.5x scope and a barrel that was installed in 1935.
Factory mkV111 CDN ammo.
And Like Lou said, before the naysayers emerge this was witnessed : )


 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom