Lee enfield weaver TO-1 mount

retoxtony

retoxtony

Regular
Rating - 100%
35   0   0
Location
Saskatchewan
I have my grandfathers old sportered Lee Enfield here that was drilled and tapped and has a old Weaver TO1 on it. I’m wondering if anyone’s knows of a mount that uses the same hole spacing as the weaver but uses a full size mount instead of the tip off/rimfire size of the TO1. I’ve been all over the net and can’t get a straight answer.

Not sure if this is the proper place for this question, so if anyone thinks I’d get a better response in a different sub forum let me know.
 
I won't be a lot of help, but the T0-1 came ready to be drilled and tapped on both the No.1 and the No. 4 Lee Enfield - I think a shim was required at the rear for the No. 1. Two holes at the front, then often just the offset hole at the rear? Or does your configuration use the centered hole at the rear?
 
Pretty sure the rifle is a no1 mk3 but I have very little knowledge of Lee Enfield markings. This mount has 2 holes in the front then the rear has 2 holes that are about 45 degrees from each other. Only one of these is being used and it’s the hole directly in line with the front screws. And yes it does have a shim in the rear.

Potashminer said:
I won't be a lot of help, but the T0-1 came ready to be drilled and tapped on both the No.1 and the No. 4 Lee Enfield - I think a shim was required at the rear for the No. 1. Two holes at the front, then often just the offset hole at the rear? Or does your configuration use the centered hole at the rear?
Click to expand...
 
Ganderite said:
I have a couple rifles with that mount. I have had no trouble finding 1" rings and 30mm rings that fit that 3/8 base. Looks good.
Click to expand...

What he said; that was a pretty common base for these rifles, and there are a number of different rings in 1" and 30mm out there for them, even see thrus.
 
I've been using a No 5 LE with the TO-1 with a number of different scopes for almost 60 years. The base works fine. I don't care for the Weaver strap rings, so substituted a pair of Redfield 1 inch rings for tip-off mount years ago.
 
I figured the base would work fine, except for the fact that mine is broken. Looks like old grandad got a little carried away and overtightened a ring to the mount at some point. A short section is missing from where the ring makes contact on one side. I was just thinking if I had to replace the weaver mount anyway, maybe I could find a better option. But I’ll just order another Weaver and be done with it.

Thanks
 
Sort of a "trick" with them - no matter how tight you tighten those 3/8" clamps, the unit will want to slide forward under recoil with that base. Rifle recoils sharply - scope and rings want to stay still - effect is as if scope moves forward. Note the very front end of the base's rail is bent up - that is a recoil stop - so make sure that your front ring is tight up to it when you install - is going to want to end up there anyways. Position of rear ring is less critical - it seems design is for that front edge of the front ring to handle the recoil. Might save you from thinking the ring clamps have to be tightened as tight as your Grandad may have thought they needed...
It has been a while, but I think the foregoing, or some of it, is mentioned on the installation instructions that come with the base.
 
As above - just looking at Amazon.ca - 3/8" rings seem to be $13.99 and up - probably get what you pay for - I had been using the Weaver rings, but last three were the Warne rings - they seem to be just fine, but quite a bit more to buy, than $13.99...
 
I never had a problem with the base. I had three of them here at one time. I just bought the proper rings and never had any trouble with full power loads or my cast reloads. I sold two of them and the one I have left I know I have over 2000 cast loads fired with the same mount, rings and scope.
 
I did a few things to make the TO-1 more capable.

1) I used rings that had sharp clamping edges. I recall using one brand (Burris, I think...) that had a rounded leading edge - it managed to ride over front stop. This led to step 2)

2) I drilled holes in the base and installed socket head cap screws c/w nuts to function as stops for both the front and rear rings.
 
Having this exact same problem with my no1 mk3. No matter how tightly clamped it slide forward and off the mount. I have problems with eye relief if I put the rings against the stop. Am thinking about just tacking on a recoil stop for both front and rear rings where the eye relief is decent.
 
"tacking on a recoil stop" - that base is aluminum, I think. Going to have to know, or to be, an above average welder to be able to "tack" an aluminum stop in place, but you are on the right track - 3/8" dovetails just do not seem to "clamp" tight enough to withstand even the 303 British recoil, without a "stop" to butt up against. Maybe want to "steal" an idea from Parker Hale and others - they had a stud down through the bottom part of the ring, into a divot in most of their scope bases. Clamp was to hold the ring "down" - the stud was to resist the recoil.

Might be as simple as undoing the rings from the scope - mounting front ring against the recoil stop where it is supposed to be, then re-installing your scope. I know some scopes do not have much place to attach rings, so might not work for some scopes... I do know the system works excellent with a straight tube scope like the older Weaver K2.5 and K3 scopes.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom