"Soft metal" for Lee-Enfield barrels ?

S

snowhunter

CGN frequent flyer
Rating - 0%
0   0   0
I spoke resently with an gunsmith, who claimed that all Lee-Enfield barrels were made of what he called "soft metal", which he claimed was the main reasons for why there was so many headspace problems with Lee-Enfield rifles.

Any truths to this ? I always thought that the reasons for the generous chambers in many Lee-Enfield rifles was deliberate, in order for these guns proper function in adverse and muddy, battle conditions ?
 
He is wrong about the cause of the headspace issues. It could be said that he's right about "soft metal" since soft is a relative term, but Lee Enfields were made of steel that is not softer than typical for guns of that time. You are right about the deliberately generous chambers.
 
"...He doesn't know what he is talking about..." Exactly. Nearly all headspace issues with Lee-Enfields are caused by the bolt head having been changed without using guages. Or the rifles being assembled out of parts bins with zero QC.
 
Indeed, some L-E's did have barrels made from softer steel, but it is absurd to think that soft barrels would cause headspace issues in a rear locking action. The Brits used a wide variety of steels in SMLE barrels, some were mild steel, some better stuff. Probably why they had so much trouble with cordite erosion. I was reading a long winded thread on another forum that quoted some old records showing that many earlier L-E's had their barrels burst. Not the action, just the barrels.
 
The steel in the receivers MIGHT stretch after an excessively high round count. But after 40,000 or 50,000 rounds almost anything could be expected. Another reason for the variety of lengths of bolt head is a pragmatic solution to manufacturing tolerances.

The British had a real crisis on their hands at the beginning of WWII through to the late war period. The Germans managed to bomb the known plants almost out of business. The war department instituted centralized production planning and control. All raw materials had to be registered, and scarce supplies were carefully doled out. Every little machine shop with a lathe and furniture leg subcontractor with a duplicator was marshalled / ordered / blackmailed into the war effort. Inspectors issued drawings and demanded compliance. For example, Slazenger stopped making tennis rackets to make No.4 foreends. The British No.4 arsenals were almost the same as modern Just-In-Time assembly plants. So, when the rifle contains parts from twenty little scattered plants, it is not surprising to encounter quite broad variances in final dimensions.
 
Last edited:
The “headspace” issues on the Enfield is caused by shooting American made SAAMI cases in military chambers, commercial .303 ammunition is downloaded to less than 43,000 CUP and the cases are NOT made to the same standards as military ammunition.

American ammunition manufactures use five different grades of brass to make cases from, I think but can’t prove it that our .303 cases are made from the same grade brass as the 30-30 and 30-40 Krag, meaning the 30-06, .308, etc are made from the next higher grade brass to withstand the higher pressures.
 
Got to disagree. not the barrel, not the brass, but the bolt lugs setting back in the reciever which is why they made different length bolt heads.
However if the headspace is close with military ammo, the thinner rimmed American cases could cause a problem. Have found Remington is better than Winchester brass. and Greek HXP is the best brass, (if you can find it)

one more thing, I just wonder what IDIOT came up with SAMMI specs? Just how many NEW rifles have been chambered to .303???
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom