After finding out that the SMLE # 4 and #5 spend cartridges do not use the extractor screw at all to extract spend cartridges, but instead use the thumb charger cutout and extractor claw/spring for ejection of spend cases, I have been wondering if the earlier models of the Lee-Enfield rifles uses this unique form for extraction of spend cases ?
Question to tiriaq
- Thread starter snowhunter
- Start date
The ejector screw is only to make ejection more positive. In battle you are supposed the work the bolt "smartly". In the unlikely event, the cartidge isn;t ejected by the end of the bolt travel, the ejector screw is there to ensure it gets tossed and doesn't jam the action.
THe .303 rim is close in diameter to the head of the bolt. As soon as the bolt opens, the extractor pushes the rim sideways, and it will make contact with the left wall of the receiver. The left wall of the receiver is relieved progressively deeper toward the rear, to allow the casehead to continue to move to the left, slightly off the boltface. As the extractor draws the case from the chamber, and as the bolt is opened, the case is dragging against the left wall of the receiver. This drag may be sufficient to cause the case to pivot around the ejector hook, and fall free from the receiver. The relief cut in the left wall of the receiver gets progressively deeper, until it reaches the ejector screw. Because of the relief cut, the ejector screw is able to make positive contact with the case rim, and positive ejection results. When the bolt is opened in a snappy manner, the case is positively ejected when it makes contact with the ejector screw. Note that the ejector screw is not threaded to its tip - this prevents the threads from being dammaged during the ejection cycle.
The smaller diameter of the 7.62 case requires a retrofitted ejector; the case is not forced far enough to the left for ejection to occur in the same way as .303. 5.56 conversions are even worse. If the bolt is flatfaced, the case won't even make it all the way out of the chamber before falling off the ejector.
The smaller diameter of the 7.62 case requires a retrofitted ejector; the case is not forced far enough to the left for ejection to occur in the same way as .303. 5.56 conversions are even worse. If the bolt is flatfaced, the case won't even make it all the way out of the chamber before falling off the ejector.
Enfields like being treated rough. Don't be gentle otherwise you will end up with case ejection issues interupting your next shot.
They are a hard mistress.
It is possible that you need to tighten your ejection screw so that it is more pronounced. If its too long it will jam your bolt as it rides the shaft.
No ###ual conotations implied lads.
They are a hard mistress.
It is possible that you need to tighten your ejection screw so that it is more pronounced. If its too long it will jam your bolt as it rides the shaft.
No ###ual conotations implied lads.
What I have learned by observing the cycling of the bolt of the SMLE #4 and #5, is that the spend cases never uses the extractor screw, they are always thrown out to the right by the extractor claw and spring when the rim of the spend case reaches the charger cutout.
By forcing the spend cartridge to "hang on" all the back to the extractor screw often resulted in a jam when the splend cartridge would jus "flop" 180 degree's in front of the bolt.
Only when extracting a loaded cartridge from either #4 or #5 would the exrtractor screw come into its use, and would without jamming extract any live round from the chamber.
Therefore, the SMLe #4 and #5 are unique in having two extractor system in place, one for spend cartridges and one of loaded cartridges ?
I was therefore also wondering if older models of the SMLE, made before the days of charger clips, had a semilar cutout in order to extract spend cartridges ?
By forcing the spend cartridge to "hang on" all the back to the extractor screw often resulted in a jam when the splend cartridge would jus "flop" 180 degree's in front of the bolt.
Only when extracting a loaded cartridge from either #4 or #5 would the exrtractor screw come into its use, and would without jamming extract any live round from the chamber.
Therefore, the SMLe #4 and #5 are unique in having two extractor system in place, one for spend cartridges and one of loaded cartridges ?
I was therefore also wondering if older models of the SMLE, made before the days of charger clips, had a semilar cutout in order to extract spend cartridges ?
I just looked at pictures of an old Lee-Medford rifle, and it had a machined and enlarged cutout towards the ejector screw, which means that what I thought was a "thumb charger cutout" on the SMLE #4 and #5 actualy is part of the unique spend case ejection sytem of the James Paris Lee rifles ?
Therefore, It would also be difficult to use a different rim diameter on any Lee-Enfield actions, other than the 303 british ?
How does the 7.62 NATO conversion of the SMLE # 4 eject spend cases ?
Therefore, It would also be difficult to use a different rim diameter on any Lee-Enfield actions, other than the 303 british ?
How does the 7.62 NATO conversion of the SMLE # 4 eject spend cases ?
I looked at a number of Lee Enfields ranging from No. 4s back to a Lee Metford dated 1892. All had the tapering relief cut which begins just to the rear of the barrel and gradually deepens as it runs back just past the ejector screw. The thumbcut for charger loading just creases the top of this relief cut. I suspect that any involvement of the thumb cut with ejection is coincidental. Charger loading appeared shortly after 1900, and no change was made in the basic arrangement of the left wall of the receiver for ejection purposes from first manufacture, until the Lee Enfield was taken out of production.
The Lee Enfield ejection system is dependent on the diameter of the rim, and the extractor forcing the casehead to the left. Smaller cases like the 7.62 don't tend to eject cleanly without a different ejector. The Sterling conversion uses an ejector set through the receiver wall; the L42 uses an ejector on the left rear magazine feed lip. Some have reported adequate ejection without any change to the ejector in 7.62mm conversions. Perhaps there is enough case offset and friction drag to achieve ejection.
The Australian 5.56 conversions use a plunger ejector in combination with a collar on the boltface.
The Lee Enfield ejection system is dependent on the diameter of the rim, and the extractor forcing the casehead to the left. Smaller cases like the 7.62 don't tend to eject cleanly without a different ejector. The Sterling conversion uses an ejector set through the receiver wall; the L42 uses an ejector on the left rear magazine feed lip. Some have reported adequate ejection without any change to the ejector in 7.62mm conversions. Perhaps there is enough case offset and friction drag to achieve ejection.
The Australian 5.56 conversions use a plunger ejector in combination with a collar on the boltface.
Yes, I was also thinking that the the use of a plunger ,would be nesessary when converting the Lee-Enfield action to use smaller diameter rim cartridges. However, I can also imagine that the force of the present ejector hook/spring are strong enough to eject most cartridges.
I look forward to examine the ejection system of a 7.62 NATO convertion of the Lee-Enfield rifle
I look forward to examine the ejection system of a 7.62 NATO convertion of the Lee-Enfield rifle
There are the three 7.62 conversions sometimes seen: Sterlings, with an additional hole in the sidewall, and a spring loaded ejector, L42s with their unique magazine, and DCRA/CAL conversions which were intended for use single shot, so ejection was not an issue. I have never studied an Indian 7.62 rifle, and do not know how they are adapted.
Two other conversions are the .45ACP DeLisle, which has a spring loaded plunger mounted through the receiver, and the Charlton .303 automatic rifle, which also has an springloaded ejector added, with corresponding alterations to the bolthead.
Two other conversions are the .45ACP DeLisle, which has a spring loaded plunger mounted through the receiver, and the Charlton .303 automatic rifle, which also has an springloaded ejector added, with corresponding alterations to the bolthead.
The De Lisle actually uses a flat spring that has a right angle bend to eject cases. The original ejector screw hole is simply enlarged and a new hole is drilled/threaded in the receiver to mount the flat spring.
The rim of the 303 british cartridge is .530, and the Lee-Enfield action is totally build around the dimensions of the 303 british cartridge, which make it very hard to be used for any convertion to other types of cartridges.
The only identical cartridge rim diameter I could find was the 300 to 458 Winchester belted magnum cartridges, which could be wildcatted shorter to be accepted in the Lee-Enfield action. When the rim of those belted and spend magnum cartridges reached the cutout of the left raceway of the SMLE #4, they just wanted to eject, just like the .530 rimmed, 303 british cartridge.
I also found that the .600 rimmed 45-70 cartridge and the .510 rimmed 444 Marlin cases "ignored" the cutout along the raceway of the SMLE, and first ejected when they reached the ejector screw. Also, the 444 Marlin cartridge rim appears to be on the small side in order to function reliable in a Lee-Enfield action.
The diameter of the Lee-Enfield #4 bolthead is .580.
The only identical cartridge rim diameter I could find was the 300 to 458 Winchester belted magnum cartridges, which could be wildcatted shorter to be accepted in the Lee-Enfield action. When the rim of those belted and spend magnum cartridges reached the cutout of the left raceway of the SMLE #4, they just wanted to eject, just like the .530 rimmed, 303 british cartridge.
I also found that the .600 rimmed 45-70 cartridge and the .510 rimmed 444 Marlin cases "ignored" the cutout along the raceway of the SMLE, and first ejected when they reached the ejector screw. Also, the 444 Marlin cartridge rim appears to be on the small side in order to function reliable in a Lee-Enfield action.
The diameter of the Lee-Enfield #4 bolthead is .580.
