LE No 4 Bedding

I

I Dont Care About You

CGN Ultra frequent flyer
Rating - 100%
3   0   0
Is it worthwhile to bed a minty LE No4 Mk2? I'm not expecting miracles out of a bedding job but the rifle is at the smith having a scope mounted and it has occurred to have the bedding done while it is in professional hands.

I've been quoted $300, which isn't the end of the world costwise. I'm leaning towards just having it done. It'd be cheaper than having to send it out again sometime in the future.
 
Is a good question! I do not think militaries or armourers did so - there was a standard to meet and they did so. But I believe when heyday of target shooting with those rifles - 1950's, 1960's, etc. - was much "accurizing" work done with them - not really like a Mauser - sometimes was "ball burnishing" the bore, sometimes the "king screw" area support, the draws, or the seating for the trigger guard, the fit of the butt into the wrist socket. Also was stabilizing dowels inserted at right angles - through the wood stock - to stabilize the receiver from rolling. So, if you can find someone who knows how, is considerable evidence from 50 years ago that there was improvement over standard military bedding. But won't find much for improvement from what I have attempted - I suspect just standard fitting and scraping likely would be best bet? Mid barrel packing? Not standard military stuff at all.
 
The rifle is at Vulcan Refinishing and Nick seems to be pretty familiar with the LE No4. I told him to do the bedding. For the cost it makes sense to do it now rather than have to send the rifle out again in the future, when I decide I should have done the bedding in the first place.
 
I Dont Care About You said:
Is it worthwhile to bed a minty LE No4 Mk2? I'm not expecting miracles out of a bedding job but the rifle is at the smith having a scope mounted and it has occurred to have the bedding done while it is in professional hands.

I've been quoted $300, which isn't the end of the world costwise. I'm leaning towards just having it done. It'd be cheaper than having to send it out again sometime in the future.
Click to expand...

Probably not worthwhile unless the rifle has been set up with proper forestock tension and still shoots poorly with a known load. There are multiple ways to bed a No 4 so unless your smith is telling you he's centre bedding or merely adjusting the draws, it's not quite clear what you mean. It does sound like you made your mind up before posting however, so I'm not sure what you're actually asking?

Potashminer said:
Is a good question! I do not think militaries or armourers did so - there was a standard to meet and they did so. But I believe when heyday of target shooting with those rifles - 1950's, 1960's, etc. - was much "accurizing" work done with them - not really like a Mauser - sometimes was "ball burnishing" the bore, sometimes the "king screw" area support, the draws, or the seating for the trigger guard, the fit of the butt into the wrist socket. Also was stabilizing dowels inserted at right angles - through the wood stock - to stabilize the receiver from rolling. So, if you can find someone who knows how, is considerable evidence from 50 years ago that there was improvement over standard military bedding. But won't find much for improvement from what I have attempted - I suspect just standard fitting and scraping likely would be best bet? Mid barrel packing? Not standard military stuff at all.
Click to expand...

Ball burnishing is a very cool dead technology, developed in Australia I believe. It was only done to newly made barrels afaik. I'd like to see it come back, ball burnished bores clean up so nicely!
 
Depends on what type of shooting you want to do, how good a shot you are, what type of ammo you are going to use etc etc. Bedding may help but why put a scope and bed a minty No 4 Mk2? You may be ruining the collector value of the original rifle.

There is a reason that all the DCRA shooters moved away from the Enfield actions. They are just not as inherently accurate as more modern stuff. If you want an accurate tack driver buy something more modern that is inherently more accurate
 
BlackPowderBurner said:
Probably not worthwhile unless the rifle has been set up with proper forestock tension and still shoots poorly with a known load. There are multiple ways to bed a No 4 so unless your smith is telling you he's centre bedding or merely adjusting the draws, it's not quite clear what you mean. It does sound like you made your mind up before posting however, so I'm not sure what you're actually asking?
Click to expand...

I was waffling over bedding the rifle and talking to the smith at the same time this afternoon. I actually posted here before I made the decision to go ahead and have it bedded.

The smith said he would "glass bed" the action .... and I have no idea all of what that exactly means. I'm gonna leave it up to him as he's the expert.



55recce said:
Depends on what type of shooting you want to do, how good a shot you are, what type of ammo you are going to use etc etc. Bedding may help but why put a scope and bed a minty No 4 Mk2? You may be ruining the collector value of the original rifle.

There is a reason that all the DCRA shooters moved away from the Enfield actions. They are just not as inherently accurate as more modern stuff. If you want an accurate tack driver buy something more modern that is inherently more accurate
Click to expand...

I'm not interested in collector value of a rifle I paid $1000 for. IF it were something of value, the collector I bought it from would have asked way more for it.

I want the most accuracy / consistency possible out of a LE without pulling my hair out tweaking the thing. It is meant to be a fun, knock around rifle that can produce reasonable groups within the parameters of what it is ... a 70 yo military rifle. I will prob hunt with it too ... just because.

I have a number of very accurate rifles and long range rifles to play with. But none of them are 70 yo sniper rifles ... or the closest thing to it without spending an absolute fortune. What is the point of it all if we can't own numerous different rifles just for the fun of it?
 
Bedding any LE is a black art, full of rumour and superstition, along with a few sacrifices made to various supreme beings and evil spirits. The basics are that the trigger guard and magazine well be flat and level. The action should be square, level and hard bearing at the wrist and the draws. The barrel should bedded at the Knox form, the Knox form pad having been narrowed, and just behind the midband and at the muzzle, the muzzle needs 4 lbs of upward pressure. Or, you can just set it up clean and square, with the pressure at the muzzle, and it will shoot just fine. We aren't our grandfather's, they shot irons at 1000 yards, they were tougher than us
 
enefgee said:
Bedding any LE is a black art, full of rumour and superstition, along with a few sacrifices made to various supreme beings and evil spirits.
Click to expand...

LOL, then def something best left to an experienced practitioner of the dark arts. :)


We aren't our grandfather's, they shot irons at 1000 yards, they were tougher than us
Click to expand...

Probably true. I'm not against irons but my eyes wouldn't let me shoot irons out that far. I need optics to have any hope of hitting a target at distance.
 
Why anyone would mount a scope on a "minty'' No4 MkII and cut its value by 60+% is beyond me but if the ways of the forestock aren't compressed at this point, it's very unlikely that you are going to compress them in a manner that will effect accuracy in your lifetime, unless you're one of those that just has to disassemble the rifle completely for no real reason other than to fiddle. You don't seem to be that sort.

I've shot a lot of minty No4 MkII rifles, everything from Brit made to POF made on the equipment they purchased from the Brits.

All of them shot better than I could hold, with loads they liked.

I've noticed that the No4 MkII rifles seem to have chambers that are very close to mean spec, rather than purposely cut oversize and their headspace is usually on the tight side of mean. Because of this, as long as everything else is good they were all good shooters.
 
bearhunter said:
Why anyone would mount a scope on a "minty'' No4 MkII and cut its value by 60+% is beyond me but if the ways of the forestock aren't compressed at this point, it's very unlikely that you are going to compress them in a manner that will effect accuracy in your lifetime, unless you're one of those that just has to disassemble the rifle completely for no real reason other than to fiddle. You don't seem to be that sort.
Click to expand...

I only paid $1000 for the rifle. Somehow I doubt that adding a $1000 scope to it is gonna render the rifle worth $400. There is a repro No4 T currently listed on ####### for $2800 and CSC has a repro No4 T priced at $3700. Now, I didn't do this to make money, I did it cause I want a LE to shoot and I like the look and function of the T.

Browse ####### and you will find all manner of No4 rifles priced around $1500 - $2000. Mine is way nicer than most of those AND it will have $1000 worth of No32 scope mounted on it. I'm not really convinced that will destroy its value in comparison to most of what is currently listed for sale.

WRT disassembling the rifle to screw with it .... I'm not doing that. I've got plenty of modern rifles I can disassemble willy nilly. The No4 is gonna get left alone, especially after I pay a professional to sort it out.
 
I Dont Care About You said:
Is it worthwhile to bed a minty LE No4 Mk2? I'm not expecting miracles out of a bedding job but the rifle is at the smith having a scope mounted and it has occurred to have the bedding done while it is in professional hands.

I've been quoted $300, which isn't the end of the world costwise. I'm leaning towards just having it done. It'd be cheaper than having to send it out again sometime in the future.
Click to expand...

No. Shoot it first. After tightening the butt, guard and band screws.
 
I Dont Care About You said:
I only paid $1000 for the rifle. Somehow I doubt that adding a $1000 scope to it is gonna render the rifle worth $400. There is a repro No4 T currently listed on ####### for $2800 and CSC has a repro No4 T priced at $3700. Now, I didn't do this to make money, I did it cause I want a LE to shoot and I like the look and function of the T.

Browse ####### and you will find all manner of No4 rifles priced around $1500 - $2000. Mine is way nicer than most of those AND it will have $1000 worth of No32 scope mounted on it. I'm not really convinced that will destroy its value in comparison to most of what is currently listed for sale.

WRT disassembling the rifle to screw with it .... I'm not doing that. I've got plenty of modern rifles I can disassemble willy nilly. The No4 is gonna get left alone, especially after I pay a professional to sort it out.
Click to expand...

When you only give out half the info, it's difficult to make a call.

I have seen nimrods take NOS No4 MkII rifles out of their wrappings, cut down the wood/barrel, throw away the sights and have an afer market scope mounted. Just did a trigger job on one last week.

I have seen the asking prices on such bubbaed rifles and I most certainly wouldn't pay that much for one without the scope/bracket attached. Once those holes have been drilled and the pads attached, all collector value is gone and it becomes a "parts" rifle.

I'm not dissing you for doing this, if it scratches and itch. I've done similar things myself. I can't count the number of milsurps I've cut down to turn into sporters, but back then, they were very cheap and they were actually worth more after being cut down, etc.

By the time you get that rifle together it will likely be very nice and hopefully it will shoot well.
 
bearhunter said:
When you only give out half the info, it's difficult to make a call.

I have seen nimrods take NOS No4 MkII rifles out of their wrappings, cut down the wood/barrel, throw away the sights and have an afer market scope mounted. Just did a trigger job on one last week.

I have seen the asking prices on such bubbaed rifles and I most certainly wouldn't pay that much for one without the scope/bracket attached. Once those holes have been drilled and the pads attached, all collector value is gone and it becomes a "parts" rifle.

I'm not dissing you for doing this, if it scratches and itch. I've done similar things myself. I can't count the number of milsurps I've cut down to turn into sporters, but back then, they were very cheap and they were actually worth more after being cut down, etc.

By the time you get that rifle together it will likely be very nice and hopefully it will shoot well.
Click to expand...

I wasn't taking it personally. ;)

It should be nice and hopefully it will shoot reasonably well ... within the expected parameters of a 70yo 303 battle rifle. :)

I have ZERO interest in a sporterized LE. I'd NEVER do that to an old Milsurp.



hobophobe said:
I don't think you'll devalue it with the proper mounts and a no32 scope. If it was some old weaver bases etc I wouldn't....
Click to expand...

Me neither. The "no gunsmithing" mounts that use conventional weaver rings look like crap and one suspects they aren't very rigid.
 
Butcherbill said:
I’ve got an Adley No smith mount on a sporterized LB No.4 and it’s a rigid as any drilled and tapped mount, not all mounts are created equal.
Click to expand...

The other problem w the no smith mounts that also require the addition of rings, is the scope ends up being very tall. The No32 mount is so low, the rear sight has to be modified to prevent it contacting the scope.
 
I Dont Care About You said:
The other problem w the no smith mounts that also require the addition of rings, is the scope ends up being very tall. The No32 mount is so low, the rear sight has to be modified to prevent it contacting the scope.
Click to expand...

Yup but you still need to install a cheek riser on the butt stock to use the sight, soooooo???
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom