Most accurate Enfield

Some claimed the 5 groove bores were better but IIRC it was never proven to be the case in real life. Aside from that I don't think one maker was lauded over the others as the most accurate. Others in the know please correct me if I am wrong.
 
My 6 groove Longbranch is pretty accurate, but most experts say there is no measurable advantage in having a two, four, five or six groove bore.
I believe it depends on each individual rifle, and most importantly the condition it is in.
 
You may want to qualify as most accurate with factory ammo or most accurate with a whole bunch of bore slugging and load tweaking ;-)
 
ENFIELD1911 said:
A little off track but ok. Out of the creat with all the same ammo
Click to expand...

Not if it's a poor lot of ammo.

I have gone through several crates of different ammo. Everything from pre WWI surplus to 80s manufactured FN and Greek.

A few years back I had access to a couple of crates of Turk surplus. I put it through four rifles I knew weren't particularly fussy about ammo and shot everything put through them into 2 inches or less. The Martini and 1950 Long Branch are particularly accurate. The Turk surplus wouldn't shoot well in any of those rifles. It was all very pretty and bright but just wouldn't shoot well. I thought maybe velocities were to divergent but that wasn't the case. They all shot within 50fps. I even checked bullet diameters and weight all were acceptable. Then what I should have checked first, run out. It was acceptable as well. Nothing I could measure or see to indicate why this stuff was not accurate. It was built by the Turks to be used in every type of Lee Enfield/Enfield/Martini in their arsenals.

Now the Greek ammo and the South African ammo is lovely stuff and at worst, it is acceptable in every rifle I have shot it in. Some batches of UK and North American surplus are dreams and others are as bad or worse than the Turkish stuff. I had one batch, about 50 crates on a pallet that were all dated 1944 out of the US and they were loaded with .308 diameter projectiles. When I sold that stuff I told people about the bullet diameters but I never had anyone come back to me and complain.

Each rifle is an entity unto itself. If all is well such as purple suggested in the ways or barrel channels, butt stock tight, not filled with cosmoline, excellent bore that is close to the median specs they should be able to shoot acceptably. Like every other firearm out there, every once in a while all the stars align perfectly on your birthday and you find a Lee Enfield that doesn't care what you feed it as long as it is consistent, it will shoot nice tight groups.

Military surplus rifles are built to certain tolerances that will be subject to change depending upon the stresses of production at any given time will also effect how accurate any particular rifle will be. I have had new in wrap Long Lees, No 1s, No 4s and No 5s as well as P14s in just about every mark with bore dimensions that vary from .309 to a particularly large .318 in an Australian Lithgow No1.

The big thing is comparing a military surplus rifle to a modern commercial rifle for accuracy is like comparing bananas to crab apples. It is my understanding that No4 rifles were required to shoot groups of four inches or less at 100 yards with issued ammunition. Up until a decade or so ago, most commercially manufactured ammo was still built to similar specs as the ammo made in WWII. Maybe a bit tighter but not much.
 
I had a pair of Enfield Envoy target rifles, heavy hammered barrel, iron AJ Parker sights, 7.62mm. When I did my part, both would hold a 1 minute elevation at 1000 yards.
 
BMcCarron said:
I had a pair of Enfield Envoy target rifles, heavy hammered barrel, iron AJ Parker sights, 7.62mm. When I did my part, both would hold a 1 minute elevation at 1000 yards.
Click to expand...

Please don't think I am doubting you.

I would like to see such shooting first hand. I have seen it on more than one occasion but very rarely. Any rifle that is consistently capable of 1moa at a thousand yards is special and so is the person behind it. Coming from such a flexible action it is doubly so.

Why didn't you keep those rifles??? Good shooting anyway.
 
They could figure out a sniper quality rifle at the factory ( any) that showed exceptional accuracy , while being sighted in / test fired , set aside then sent for sniperization :cool:
 
The LE #4 and #1 actually shot smaller MOA groups at long range than at short or medium. When still on 303 the #1 was used for long and the #4 was used for two to six. When on 7.62 with commercial actions allowed we cut the socket off the back of #4's and put them in a one piece stock and they compensated the best at 900. I shot many elevations under one MOA at longs with 7.62 and the #4 just don't try it in the rain, a drop of water makes everything worse. I am not old enough to have been on 303 in competition.
Forgot to say (the purpose of this post) that this is known as compensation and the rear lockers like the #1 and #4 seemed to do it the best. Front lockers vibrate differently and don't do it.
 
If we are talking ALL Enfields, I think my Enfiled Model 8 MKI 22 trianer might be a contender.
Best so far, with match iron sights, is 5 inside a dime and 9/10 inside a nickle at 50 yds.
 
ENFIELD1911 said:
Which brand of No4 Mk1 were generally used for the T conversion?
Click to expand...

Some of the earliest Savages were selected for conversion. I had a chance to buy 0C0303 and MISSED OUT! The Long Branches which were selected for conversion, by virtue of their superior accuracy, turned out to be too hard to be drilled and tapped. The majority of British rifles were from BSA Shirley, followed by ROF Maltby and a few Enfields.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom