Lee Enfield Jungle Carbine Accuracy?

[rempel429]

I do have to say between my EAL and my no5 I do prefer my EAl, the recoil pad does wonders compared to the hard rubber of the no5, that said though I’d never get rid of either, my EAL does group better but it’s probably been carried more then it’s been shot,
But I don’t worry so much about the no5 getting a little beat up in the woods, you would never do wrong by getting a good one

 

[B]

I have no problem hitting a 6" gong offhand at 150m. Never really tried any farther than that. It's an heirloom of sorts so I don't use it much. I'd really say stories of its inaccuracy are generally due to other issues.

 

[PSE]

Not the most accurate rifle out there. My No 5 is about 5 MOA @ 100 yd with 5 rounds (180 gr SP). Shoot only 3 rounds if you want the best MOA, as group size really opens up with 5 rounds (barrel heating and warping along with a light springy steel action is probably the cause).

Would be a good rifle for short range bush hunting (100 yd and less). Think about the Burmese jungle here where it was valued by British counterinsurgency troops. (I would have much rather used this then say a sten gun)

That being said - It's a great light short rifle to pack around in heavy cover. The open combat sight is generous and works well in low light. It's hell for stout and extremely reliable. 10 rounds on tap in the mag is nice.

It's too bad it isn't a little more accurate/precise but I think its good points outweigh the bad so I'll keep mine.

 

[milsurpo]

Personally I suspect the No. 5 may be more susceptible to bedding problems than the No. 4 rifle. Having a fully floating barrel right to the tip of the forend means it lacks that 3rd bearing point of the No. 4 and relies on perfect fit at the draws/buttsocket to hold everything in alignment. My own No. 5 is an ex-Indian rifle that's seen much use but after patching the draws and getting the bedding of the forend absolutely perfect it suddenly was able to shoot 5 shot groups as good as any No. 4 I own. If you have any LE that is shooting poorly always check the fit of the forend as there's a great many out there that are in bad shape. My No. 5 had been shot by someone with the forend loose and only the "Ishapore screw" saved the forend from destruction.

milsurpo

 

[gaff]

Personally I suspect the No. 5 may be more susceptible to bedding problems than the No. 4 rifle. Having a fully floating barrel right to the tip of the forend means it lacks that 3rd bearing point of the No. 4 and relies on perfect fit at the draws/buttsocket to hold everything in alignment. My own No. 5 is an ex-Indian rifle that's seen much use but after patching the draws and getting the bedding of the forend absolutely perfect it suddenly was able to shoot 5 shot groups as good as any No. 4 I own. If you have any LE that is shooting poorly always check the fit of the forend as there's a great many out there that are in bad shape. My No. 5 had been shot by someone with the forend loose and only the "Ishapore screw" saved the forend from destruction.

milsurpo

This plus the fact that the carbine barrel has a much smaller diameter, and shorter barrel will compound any issues.

 

[fat tony]

Rumour has it that the wandering zero "issue" or complaints rather, were an invention of the top brass looking to sully the reputation of what was considered by the troops to be a fine little rifle. Let's face it, by the end of the War the Brits were looking (like most nations) to drop bolt action battle rifles and move into semi-automatics - and while the troops were quite happy with their equipment (other than the No.4 bayonets) if you can start rumours that there are inherent issues with the equipment it can help persuade politicians to approve spending obscene amounts of money on weapon development/procurement programs.

In my limited reading of the Malay war experiences of the UK troops the majority of the battles with the enemy began & ended in a very short period of time often the whole thing being over in seconds. You may ask yourself whether the wandering zero even if true (never experienced it), would be relevant for use in civil society. Even the term: 'wandering zero' makes no sense. Gramattically it means the sight settings are changing randomly by themselves - does not compute. I think this is one of the few wars in which UK regulars used them in anger. The one I had was capable of better accuracy than I could hold. The best I ever did was a 'three round group' benched at 100m ~ 2 ". If the #5 you get is not worn out I would be hard pressed to suggest a better rifle for harsh conditions bush hunting. Get one of the ones with the steel forend tip which is the vast majority of them out there anyways. The steel forend tips are there for a good reason.