In Ian Skinnertons Australian Enfield variations there is a chapter on how they perfected the conversion of the No.1 to 7.62. The problem was the cost to convert the rifles was more than 50% of a new LA1A rifle. The conversion required using EN grade steel and improved heat treating. The Australians gave the conversion plans to India and they made the Ishapore 2A-2A1s with the higher grade steels.
"BUT" do not forget the British wanted a stronger action before WWI and had started testing with the P-14 rifle. The British military to this day still use two oiled proof cartridges, but also remember if the No.1 Enfield rifles headspace increased .003 or more after proofing it failed proof testing.
The Enfield rifles original design with its replaceable bolt heads allowed the rifles to be made from cheaper and softer steels. And the No.4 was designed with more modern steels with faster production methods.
And don't forget the Remington 788 with rear locking lugs was made in .308 and still was not as strong as the Remington 700 with front locking lugs.
Don't get me wrong, the Enfield rifle was my favorite milsurp rifle and used by many, many countries. But it was a outdated design that was kept in service by the British and Commonwealth Nations for monetary reasons and not its strength.
Remington made our Model 1917 the British P14 converted to 30-06, after the war this rifle became the model 30 and evolved into the Remington 700 and a very strong action.
