Which is more accurate #4 or #5
- Thread starter got to go
- Start date
- Location
- Pile of Bones, SK
I think most people would say the No4, but individual rifles would vary.
The overall shape of the rifle matters most. But, as V.R. states, the No4 has a head start. It's longer, recoil is less severe (thus helping the shooter that I am achieve less horrible accuracy when attempting to hit paper at 100 yards). I'd even say that the fact that the front and rear sights are more distant from one another on the No4 may technically have something to do with better accuracy.
The look and feel is quite different between both.
That said, a good marksman will be able to hit a target with both, unless they are shot out.
If you are bitten by the milsurp bug we all know you'll get both
Lou
The look and feel is quite different between both.
That said, a good marksman will be able to hit a target with both, unless they are shot out.
If you are bitten by the milsurp bug we all know you'll get both
Lou
The overall shape of the rifle matters most. But, as V.R. states, the No4 has a head start. It's longer, recoil is less severe (thus helping the shooter that I am achieve less horrible accuracy when attempting to hit paper at 100 yards). I'd even say that the fact that the front and rear sights are more distant from one another on the No4 may technically have something to do with better accuracy.
The look and feel is quite different between both.
That said, a good marksman will be able to hit a target with both, unless they are shot out.
If you are bitten by the milsurp bug we all know you'll get both
Lou
Very good answer Lou! That's why we pay you the big bucks!
I'll add, absolutely the No 4 will beat a No 5 in accuracy, all else being equal.
Last edited:
The No.4 has a longer barrel and in my mind that is a huge advantage. It's like comparing pistol to rifle accuracy (well not quite that extreme of difference, but the principle is the same).
In the end though, it's mostly up to the shooter and the amount of rifling left in the barrel.
In the end though, it's mostly up to the shooter and the amount of rifling left in the barrel.
It's not a myth, Laidler covered this repeatedly on Jouster forum. Some JC's have it, some don't. But you never hear of a No 4 having it...
Jack
- Location
- Manitoulin Island
#4 for accuracy, #5 for slogging after deer in the thick. Always wondered about the story of troops not wanting to trade in their #1Mk3 for a #4. Theoretically, the #4 SHOULD be more accurate because of the sight radius and no tendency to shoot high in a hurry with open sights.
Longer barrels are more accurate because the bullet is in contact with the rifling longer before exiting the barrel, which establishes the spin, keeping the bullet traveling straighter for longer. That's why long range shooting rifles typically have 24" barrels or thereabout.
The JC will shoot fine too though as long as it doesn't have the zero problem. My friend has one that shoots just fine up to 200 yards. I don't think you should expect sub moa or anything like that, but 303s are good shooters as long as the rifling is good and the shooter too.
People used to win 1000 yard competitions with them in fact.
The JC will shoot fine too though as long as it doesn't have the zero problem. My friend has one that shoots just fine up to 200 yards. I don't think you should expect sub moa or anything like that, but 303s are good shooters as long as the rifling is good and the shooter too.
People used to win 1000 yard competitions with them in fact.
I have no problem smacking the gong @ 200m with both my no. 5s. I like the look and size of the no.5, but the recoil is merciless without a slip-on pad!
Ps. The blade bayonet for the jc is waay cooler for charging at paper!
Ps. The blade bayonet for the jc is waay cooler for charging at paper!
Last edited:
True, but those long sword bayonets from the No.1 Mk.IIIs have got to be coolest of the cool.
Laidler's not a scientist, just the longest serving armourer in the British Army.
fat tony
CGN Ultra frequent flyer
The #5 has lightening cuts in the rcvr and barrel knox form, makes you wonder if they made the lightening cuts after or before heat treating, maybe the internal stresses have finally worked themselves out since the rifles have been around for so long - I heard that Rolls Royce used to let their engine block castings sit for one year to let the stress normalize.
Mig, I'll try to find what Mr Laidler typed about the wandering zer0, gotta be somewhere in my files.
Cantom, first one who finds it wins 4.7 Lee Enfield points.
