Lee-Enfield No.4 7.62 Conversions: Sterling vs L8
ฝัง
- เผยแพร่เมื่อ 4 ม.ค. 2023
- A while back I made this video about my full-fat Sterling No.4 Lee-Enfield conversion to 7.62 NATO: • Sterling 7.62 NATO Lee...
Well, the Enfield L8 conversions are a little different. But why though? Here we've got an L39A1 doing stand-in duty, and we'll explain it with reference to Sterling's patent...
Here's a vid on the L39A1 that's in the video: • Official Enfield-Made ...
Utreon: utreon.com/c/blokeontherange
Patreon: / blokeontherange
Teespring: teespring.com/stores/bloke-on...
Instagram: / blokeontherange
Facebook: / blokeontherange - วิทยาศาสตร์และเทคโนโลยี
Finally this channel gets back to its proper purpose, namely discussing all things Enfield.
Perfect timing. I'm picking up my first Lee Enfield tomorrow, and this is just the kind of nerdery I needed to get me salivating.
Gotta get that pre-acquisition dopamine rush to placate your lust for more kit. Yay materialism!
I have a lend/lease enfield and it's by far the smoothest bolt action I've ever felt
"So now we get to the really interesting portion"......"let us nerd out.." This is why we're here Mike, it's all magnificent! Keep it up!
... and near the end "nerdgasm"!!! LMAO
Yeah it's all good stuff if you love Enfields
Yes!
I did thoroughly enjoy the nerding out over patents, it was quite interesting how that language in the patent clamps down hard on what could infringe.
bloke, you’re a nerd in all the right places. Prost, Mate!
Good grief that was a hell of a bodge job on that magazine! Marginally better than just having at it with a hacksaw but not far off :)
Nice seeing the little details, they're often what makes all the difference.
Excellent video as always, keep them coming 😁
Nerdgasms are always welcome! I don't now or ever expect to own any Enfield rifles, but I am totally fascinated by them.
I've had a No.4 Mk1 for many years. 15 or so. A late 1945 Faz. While cleaning all the cosmoline off it l found a brand new South African barrel!
One of my favorite rifles. The only thing that would make it better would be 7.62 NATO chambering. But mostly because ammo availability.
Another advantage of the 7.62 ammunition is a flatter trajectory. At 300 yards it's something like half that of a .303
“Cause - Newton”. Yes indeed!
Brilliant! Thank you for the class!
I've got an L8 A2 that someone had a go at No FAUXT'ing at some point in it's past - scope mount holes in the wrong places....... but, it's a great shooter and it looks great - from 10 feet away :-)
Additional comment, locked up in the basement with your rifles. 308 NATO Enfields, excellent choice.
I loved the thirty-calibre lawyer story.
Next time I have my L42 out I’m going to have to take a look at its back sight now.
Excellent review. More Enfield stuff please! Like reloading comments, commercial available (using that term loosely).
Thanks! Reloading is unfortunately an iffy topic for TH-cam, not devoid of risks..
Well, not as nerdy as I was expecting, it all tied together at the end.
It's only too nerdy when even needs find it boring!
The Sterling magazine seems to have a very similar profile to the 7.62x51 Ishapore Enfields.
That was a cool video. Wrapped up a number of loose ends, like the bad blood for Sterling, the mentions of court cases and the like--the logic behind firearms history can get glossed over if the author does not dig into the minutae.
I used to play with my grandparents lee metcalf as a child and a martini Henry. 22 target rifle with a diopter rear sight
My Enfield nerd side is now satisfied 😊
Welcome return of nerdery
Those are my definition of the perfect looking old rifles . I'd do anything to know how they feel... I have never even held an old rifle... And I want to soooo badly...
I have only held a few 22s. Nothing bigger
7.62 conversions? Every day we stray further from God's light.
And once expelled from the garden can enjoy the hell out of every bite of that apple - 🦊
Don't get me wrong, I've shot a .303 Enfield once and it's a solid rifle, emphasis on "once". Because finding large quantities of reliable surplus .303 ammunition for anything short of a fortune is like finding a gun savvy boomer who isn't a Fudd. It exists, but good luck finding it. Even my brass-grubber uncle who reloads most of his ammunition for those surplus rifles struggles to find the brass, primer and bullets to reload for his Enfield.
@@no-legjohnny3691 Perhaps it's easier in Canada then.
@@jeroylenkins1745 Oh no kidding, considering Canada had the Enfield as their main service weapon till 1947, and the Canadian Rangers still use it today. In the United States, however, that's a completely different situation.
@@no-legjohnny3691 the winners stick together - whether finding ammunition, or non - Fuds of any generation. Time spent investing in both, whether a full ammo bunker, or Forgotten Weapon compatriots is worth the investment
Very esoteric nerdery indeed.
Out with the plastic; in with the wood. Hehehe...
I love the idea of a .308 Enfield, I'd thought the MOD had developed a.kit to convert number. 4's to 7.62. Being a shooter instead of a collector, I'd prefer the peep sights of the #4 to the open notch of the Ishapore. Ah, well...
There's a peep sight made for the ishapore that will fit in the rear sight area and does improve shooting accuracy.
MB, I'm not going to mention what _I_ paid for a USMC '03 front sight cover for my Sedgeley .USMC barreled 1903. 'Cauz not an Gumby stan't in't stream wit brinks.
Where can I find these parts or rifles??? I’m aware of the Ishapore 2A1, but beyond that, I can’t find these anywhere.
Yaay!
Enfield nerdery - hurrah!
Finding a gap in a patent into which you can slip a Rizla and lever it open is always good fun - aha no this doesn't infringe your patent because your patent says this!
Possibly Sterling got a bit too descriptive in their patent, leaving rather more than a Rizla-thick gap for Enfield to exploit; but I suppose they wouldn't be able to secure a broader patent either - "converting a rifle from rimmed to rimless ammunition with different case dimensions" for example is not their invention.
Great video not too nerdy! I thought the rear sights were not adjusted to meters as it was thought yards and meters were close enough as well?
They're more than close enough for government work at realistic engagement ranges indeed.
Unsurprisingly many older ranges just had the signage changed , moving those firing points might cost money !
At about 14:55 you are talking about the difference in the datum line between 303 rear sights and 7.62 rear sight. I’m wondering what the distance between the different datum lines are? I have a 7.62 enfield with a 303 rear. Thinking i could mark where the 7.62 line would be.
It's the difference between 200y minus 2 clicks and 400y.
Wonderful video, my wife says stop biting your nails girls mmm
At 04:42, what is the purpose of that loop/ring that the top gun has that the bottom one does not? (Or at least I don't see it in this shot angle.) It is between the mag hole and the screw.
For attaching a canvas action cover that buttons over the action to keep the mud out.
So do we know how the datum line adjustment was calculated? More broadly, how are ladder sight markings calculated in general? Everyone talks about the range ticks, but I don’t see any talk about the mathematics behind them.
The ballistic curve of .303 MkVII was known in great detail before the No4 rifle was created. Thus the minutes of elevation rise for each range are known, and this angle is scaled down to match the sight base of the rifle. Hence on a No4 with a 28 1/2" sight base, the elevation change from 200 to 1300 yards is represented by about 13/16" height on the Mk1 rearsight (exactly the same as on a Parker Hale 5C target sight graduated for 303). The range hatches in between are calculated the same way. On a Mk1 sight, the screw pitch and six clicks per turn mean that each "click" represents about 0.87 minutes, so you can either use the sight hatch marks, or simply count off the clicks to match a change in range. E.g. 300 yards to 400 yards is 3 1/2 minutes elevation change for 303, or approximately 4 clicks on the rearsight.
How do you tighten the front sight assembly to the barrel on a smle no4 mk1?
The front sight band is pinned on and the protector just clamps around it.
So...which system was better? Neither?
As a relative non nerd to that level, I found that all very interesting. I especially was interested in the 'robbery and theft' perpetrated against Sterling with the sub machine gun production! Astonishing and so tragic they were not better protected at that point.
Thanks for another great topic covered.
The Sterling charger guide is much better and the mags feed a touch smoother, but other than that it's six-of-one, half-a-dozen-of-the-other...
@@BlokeontheRange Thanks! My only Lee Enfield here in the UK is an early deactivated one hanging on the wall of my office! Maybe one day I will pick up a 7.62mm conversion live fire as I have two unused 7.62mm slots on my ticket!
Deep into the weeds, then it's the patent.
Is L8 just a nomenclature pun, calling it a LATE-model Enfield?
Oh and Sterling wouldn't like Enfield because Enfield was a government arsenal like Springfield.
Have you done any testing with a ishapore 2a enfield ? Reason why I ask is because I am restoring one here us stateside. Wanted to ask your opinion on them if they are good quality is that steel strong then a number 4 mark 1 reciever?
I've seen a number and they're varying build quality, as is the same with all the Indian rifles. I've not got one of my own though.
@@BlokeontheRange thank you, well will complete it and see I honestly can't wait to have the last parts over. Been wanting a smle for the 7.62, now do you think these rifle can handle 308 pressure or should I just use steel case 7.62 for lower pressures ?
"steel case 7.62 for lower pressures" is an entirely new one on me... I've actually never seen a test as to whether the steel on the 2A's is better than normal SMLE steel, so couldn't comment.
@@BlokeontheRange i see, for some reason I thought you would of had a video on a 308 smle from ishapore my mistake and sorry for the confusion. I go to you videos alot for the enfield knowledge and do enjoy them. Favorite is still the 7.62 x 39 enfield lol. Looks odd to me but man it seems like a beautiful good to shoot.
About that Parker-Hale conversion mag- what’s the Brit term for Bubba’ed?
We've adopted the American term now!!! XD
cack handed ?
Bodge job?
I really wish the 7.62 No.4's were more prolific in the States.
The light barrel ones aren't prolific anywhere. The heavy-barrel gunsmith-made target rifle conversions are numerous and cheap in the UK, however.
@@BlokeontheRange I think I saw a prototype or trials one for sale here during the pandemic. My only basis for that was the wood grain on the buttstock was identical from an old photo I saw and the rifle was in 7.62.
Absolutely LOVE my no4 mk1*, really wish it was in a common caliber like this. 303 is just too expensive for my taste
Ishapore mags will run in a No 4 with very little blacksmithing to the rifle and or the mag. There are alos "after-market mags alleged to fit the original Indian rifles. The two I examined were dimensionally pretty good, BUT the spring is ALL WRONG, being HEAVY like a FAL / L1A1 spring. This makes filling a chore and feeding distinctly unpleasant. A quick fondle of a real L42 mag or an original No 4 mag gives an indication of how little spring pressure is needed to lift ten cartridges of either .303 or 7.62 NATO, and at "bolt-action" speeds. HEAVY mag springs are needed to keep up with gas-operated cycling speeds.
Anyone who has tried to use Ruger Mini-14 or 30 mags in a bolt-action conversion will have noticed this. The secret is to "wind" new springs of the came FORM, but from a lighter gauge piece of "music wire" (obtainable from all good "hobby shops" who sell it to people building flying model aircraft, etc.
I run a home-brew "L-41 and a bit" in "sniper" matches. It started life as a "range-rifle in 303, then got "upgraded to 7.62 NATO and was then left mouldering in a cupboard, during which time its barrel "died". Hence its current stainless replacement. About the only things L-42 about it are the magazine and the extractor, and the general layout.
Picatinny rail on top, because who in their right mind would try to precisely replicate the original optic and mount system?
The "spare" mag is from an Ishapore 2A1 with just a few minor adjustments with an Eze-Lap stick to make it "click in" without resort to brute force. I milled the "relief cuts" into the interior of the body so the Kosher mag would also fit without damaging it..
Interestingly, the "proper" mag is sans the spot-welded "ejector" thingy. It still ejects, but I have not done the mud-test, yet, nor do I feel the need to do so at the moment.. That "welded-on" bit is probably hard steel to prevent wear and distortion from service "use". the mag bodies are basically mild steel and un-hardened, to prevent cracking and possibly because pressure forming the mag body from a "fancy" steel would be detrimental to the forming dies and require more steps to stress-relieve it, both after forming and after welding.
I’m not sure I have ever seen a proper converse in the US. Truthfully, Lee-Enfields are so expensive in the country now they’re out of my price range.
Oooooooh, interesting. I wonder if there are spare mags for either of these available and will they fit my Ishapore 2A1, coz you know. That mag is kinda ugly.
The mags are unicorns and cost well over £100 these days. And probably wouldn't fit anyway.
@@BlokeontheRange thanks. I'll just make do I suppose. The 2A1 mag works fine i'm just being picky
So that's the story behind that sight.
I absolutely kicked myself and squee'd when I realised!
I had an Indian one.
These seem like somewhat of an armorer's nightmare
Huzzah
they still didnt just give soldiers 10 round magazines?
100 rounds on chargers was still far lighter than 10 fully loaded mags for this rifle.
And cheaper, and faster to reload cos nobody's yeeting empty mags in that era.
@@BlokeontheRange Soldiers can't yeet empty ones now to be fair.
Please no shorts (they polute my stream ! ) .
I bought an Indian Lee-enfield that was produced in 7.62. I wanted a Lee-enfield but I didn't want to introduce another ammo type into my collection since I've stockpiled ammo for the rifles I have, 7.62 x 39 and 7.62 X 51. The Indians produced many fine quality firearms on British standards.
The bolt is smooth as silk and cock on opening is such a great concept.
Screwing over an arms company by making it themselves...how french of the brits to do so.^^
Interesting thanks. However a SMLE is only a SMLE in .303.
No SMLE's in this video ;)
@jon1801 however fudd, you have a tiny little package if you think you need to be an internet smart guy who incorrectly corrects people on TH-cam comment sections.
Is it a short rifle fed by a box magazine?
@@zoiders What about rebarreling a shot-out P17 to 7,62 the cartridge base might just adapt to the extractor quite readily?
I will bitchute ,oddysee . unsub youtube ,good bye .