7.62x54 SMLE???

J

jmsvickers

Private
Full Member
Minuteman
Jul 30, 2011
27
0
35
#1
Hey fellas I have an abused SMLE No. 4 rifle and the BBl is toast (matter of fact all I have is the barreled action no stock bolt etc.)I was looking at super cheap 54r ammo and started looking up the differences in the cases. The 54r has a higher case capacity and higher pressure ratings. Plus .303 ammo isn't nearly as readily available as it once was not horrible like my .32 special but much less common than 54r is.
I suppose my questions are;
1. Will the larger rim diam. cause to significant a problem that this project would be stupid expensive?
2. Is the 54r realy that much cheaper/better/more available that I should/shouldn't go through with it?
3. Am I just drunk posting again?
I am looking at is at the standpoint that the majority of the differences would be taken up in the re-barreling of the action however the rim and the lack of a decent gunsmith have me debating on whether or not to seek out this possible project.
i feel as though I could get a new barrel clean the action and make a nice cheap unique shooter for less than the cost of a new savage/700/70 with its primary purpose being range work and possibly a bit of hunting.

Thoughts?
(oh and I have been drinking tonight so go easy...
blush.gif
)
 
#3
Re: 7.62x54 SMLE???

I would just be ever so slightly concerned about a potential increase in pressure - maybe some of the older, wiser souls here could opine as to whether or not they thought that would be an issue for the action long-term.
 
#4
Re: 7.62x54 SMLE???

Well, according to the link you posted, the .303 runs equal to slightly higher pressure "(Cartridges of the World) .303 Chamber Pressures; 45,000-48,000 PSI "54R" Chamber Pressures; 45,000 PSI"
 
#5
Re: 7.62x54 SMLE???

I think some drunk typing has something to do with the mix up in pressures
smile.gif
. If you wanna do it, I say go for it. I've got an old Carcano im rebarreling to 7.62x39. Most think I'm crazy, but i like the idea of cheap readily available ammo in a short fast handling gun (im using a Cavalry Carbine as a base gun).
 
#6
Re: 7.62x54 SMLE???

Just be aware that the 7.62 versions of the SMLE differed from the standard .303 rifles in that they were built on receivers using a higher grade of steel than those on the .303.

Here's another list of pressures: http://kwk.us/pressures.html

Would probably suggest you look at this without your beer googles on and talk to a qualified gunsmith with experience of Enfield receivers/conversions
wink.gif
 
#7
Re: 7.62x54 SMLE???

Thanks Tactical .22, Badshot308 and Barsaboy for all of the info pertaining to chamber pressure it looks to be close. And that article about the conversion certainly helped out my drive for this! Although it sounded as though they only reamed the chamber, and didn't do a complete barrel swap? or was it just the way I read it? Also I don't entirely understand how they fixed the throat erosion with just a "re-chamber" especially considering the .303 is a longer cartridge than the 54r.
And lastly I have alleviated the issue of beer goggles however I live in the gun retarded north (Maryland) where gunsmiths are rarer than Big Foot droppings, could you (or anyone) recommend any such gunsmith's BasraBoy?

Oh and Thunderin300 what type of Carcano? I have one in 7.35 and ammo for that is kinda hard to find and to swap one to 7.62 x 39 sounds awesome! gota do a lil review (with pics of course
wink.gif
) and tell us how it does!

Thanks again for the help everyone!
grin.gif
 
#8
Re: 7.62x54 SMLE???

It's the second one down..

http://world.guns.ru/rifle/repeating-rifle/it/carcano-m91-e.html

It's a 6.5, which they make ammo for, however the most decently priced ammo is the wrong diameter (.264 instead of the .267 the Italians bored it at.)

The stock got refinished, and I modified a KRG bolt knob for faster bolt running. pics will be up once its all back together and up and running.
 
#10
Re: 7.62x54 SMLE???

Thanks Barsaboy! Ill give him a shout and see what he says
grin.gif
! Are conversions popular on your side? or are there not enough owners to really make a mark?
And Thunderin300 sound like a cool project dont know if you hunt but it sounds like a sweet pig/deer gun and just a fun plinker! I don't know too much about the Carcano but the action on mine reminds me of a mosin (aka rough) I don't really wana do anything to mine but one day 7.35 is going to be a non-available cartridge and if I can do this 54r conversion then I might look into a similar project. Sorry my mind is racing with possibility's!
 
#11
Re: 7.62x54 SMLE???

I do hunt. I have a weaver side mount goin on it and it will be topped with a 4X shotgun scope. The barrel will be prolly around 16-18". with the short stock it will be a neat fast handling Michigan brush hunting gun.
 
#12
Re: 7.62x54 SMLE???

In my experience it is rare here to see Enfield conversions...but I am sure they exist. Possibly because it is easier to find .303 ammo for them here, and possibly because they are kind of a national icon for shooters.

To be honest...I can't remember the last time I saw a sporterised/converted Enfield!

But there are plenty of smiths around who work on Enfields who could no doubt talk to you about pros and cons of calibre changes.

The Mauser action seems to be/have been more popular for conversion and sporter use for reasons I'm sure you are aware of.
 
#13
Re: 7.62x54 SMLE???

I have a feeling SMLE bolt is weaker than MN bolt, although no doubt, it is the fastest bolt I ever worked with, and an additional gut feeling that SMLE receiver is weaker than MN receiver, both by design and quality of metal used. Combining these two feelings together, I would not do such conversion. Also, SMLE magazine is really tricky in comparison with completely idiot proof MN magazine, which, in combination with interceptor, is totally reliable for feeding rimmed cartridges. SMLE magazine is not, unless you really pay attention... I also like straight SMLE in .303 British, particularly feeding it with that kick ass WWII ammo which are loaded with cordite and has bullets with that pressed paper (or whatever it is) in the bullet nose cavity. What I'm saying is that unless you just want to do it because you can, I see no benefit of any kind doing it. Disclaimer: I'm a real big fan of both MN and SMLE, and related original cartridges.
 
#14
Re: 7.62x54 SMLE???

i think it's a great idea - I love the Enfield action, but the ammo is hard to come by cheaply. I hate the Mosin Nagant action, but the ammo is really easy tome by cheaply. I'd love to do a 20"ish "Scout Rifle" conversion like this...

I wonder if Special Interest Arms would do it?
 
#15
Re: 7.62x54 SMLE???

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Tactical .22</div><div class="ubbcode-body">i think it's a great idea - I love the Enfield action, but the ammo is hard to come by cheaply. I hate the Mosin Nagant action, but the ammo is really easy tome by cheaply. I'd love to do a 20"ish "Scout Rifle" conversion like this... </div></div>

this is exactly what I would want a nice rugged compact handi rifle type of thing.

Why do you say that the Enfield action is weaker? I thought if anything the similarity in the two cartridges as far as pressure and weight of projectiles, and the fact that Russia <span style="font-weight: bold">probably</span> wasnt as strict in QC as England would lead me to believe the opposite. However I am by no means an expert on Russia and this is only based on what little I do know of the country. I do know that the MN has a massive locking lug compared to the SMLE but despite what she says bigger ins't always better
wink.gif
 
#16
Re: 7.62x54 SMLE???

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: jmsvickers</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Tactical .22</div><div class="ubbcode-body">i think it's a great idea - I love the Enfield action, but the ammo is hard to come by cheaply. I hate the Mosin Nagant action, but the ammo is really easy tome by cheaply. I'd love to do a 20"ish "Scout Rifle" conversion like this... </div></div>

this is exactly what I would want a nice rugged compact handi rifle type of thing.

Why do you say that the Enfield action is weaker? I thought if anything the similarity in the two cartridges as far as pressure and weight of projectiles, and the fact that Russia <span style="font-weight: bold">probably</span> wasnt as strict in QC as England would lead me to believe the opposite. However I am by no means an expert on Russia and this is only based on what little I do know of the country. I do know that the MN has a massive locking lug compared to the SMLE but despite what she says bigger ins't always better
wink.gif
</div></div>

It would be a mistake to assume that England always had better production QC or steel quality than Russia, when it we'talking military production. All you got to do is to machine both receivers and see the structure of the metal. It does require some knowlegde of metal and machining, but if you happen to have this knowledge, it becomes very obvious. At least 1942 SMLE I've customized did have a real weird looking steel used for the receiver. MN receivers I've milled and drilled were always consistent, likely between HRc 27 and 30.

SMLE has two rear locking lugs, large and small, with the combined cross section which is much less than MN bolt total cross section of 3 locking lugs (2 massive front ones and one "safety" lug in the rear), so it is also obvious which bolt is likely to be stronger.


 
#17
Re: 7.62x54 SMLE???

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: kortik</div><div class="ubbcode-body">It would be a mistake to assume that England always had better production QC or steel quality than Russia, when it we'talking military production. </div></div>

+1 I'm no metallurgist or machinist and have never owned an MN (yet!) but, speaking from personal experience the steel on Enfield receivers can be inconsistent in their quality/hardness...even on single receivers...for example between front and rear areas.
 
#18
Re: 7.62x54 SMLE???

That's all well and good. The Mosin action IS built like a tank. It's also a slow pain in the butt.
The only practical purposes I have for bolt action rifles, due largely to the many excellent semi-auto actions available today, are in the form of either dedicated precision rigs or light, handy, fast carbines. For the former category, I am fast reaching the consensus that I have very little need for a precision centerfire bolt action rifle that is anything other that a long action/magnum with significantly superior ballistics to the very accurate and useful semiauto rifles out there. This means that the Mosin Nagant, Lee-Enfield, and virtually all other Milsurps have very little practical value for me in a traditional bolt-action sense. (I'm not saying I don't appreciate them all as incredible historical pieces, or that I don't enjoy shooting them for fun, mind you). One area where I do see potential practical value for modified milsurps is as scout/hunting rifles, especially where, for what ever reason, semiautos are ill-suited, illegal, or inconvenient, which leads me to the second category - light, handy, fast carbines.
Anyone who has ever held an orginal Mosin or Enfield knows that, "light, handy, fast, and carbine" do not accurately describe either rifle (but, then again, neither does the word "precision"). If you were to sporterize, shorten, and lighten a Mosin, it would still be a slow, clunky action. If, however, you were to sporterize, shorten, and lighten an Enfield - probably one of the fastest bolt actions ever designed, and certainly the fastest milsurp, you would have a very handy setup.
I personally feel that the Enfield action makes the best Scout rifle, but that's just me. I'm not ashamed to say that Enfields are my favorite milsurps, and Mosins are my least favorite.
 
#19
Re: 7.62x54 SMLE???

Is the question, "which is stronger?" or "is the Enfiled strong enough?" I think the answers to both are obvious. The difference in pressures between milsurp .303 and milsurp 7.62x54R appears to be negligible, and I don't ever recall hearing numerous stories of Enfields blowing up or experiencing other catastrophic failure...
 
#20
Re: 7.62x54 SMLE???

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Tactical .22</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Is the question, "which is stronger?" or "is the Enfiled strong enough?" I <span style="color: #CC0000">think</span> the answers to both are obvious. The difference in pressures between milsurp .303 and milsurp 7.62x54R <span style="color: #CC0000">appears</span> to be negligible, and <span style="color: #CC0000">I don't ever recall</span> hearing numerous stories of Enfields blowing up or experiencing other catastrophic failure... </div></div>

No offense tactical .22, none of those highlighted words indicate a secure knowledge base.

There are reasons why the original issued 7.62 Enfield variants had new receivers made of higher grade steel which would be worth heeding.

Will be interested to hear of the results of the OP's project.
 
#21
Re: 7.62x54 SMLE???

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Tactical .22</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Is the question, "which is stronger?" or "is the Enfiled strong enough?" I think the answers to both are obvious. The difference in pressures between milsurp .303 and milsurp 7.62x54R appears to be negligible, and I don't ever recall hearing numerous stories of Enfields blowing up or experiencing other catastrophic failure... </div></div>

It's simple like a loaf of bread. It's called - <span style="font-weight: bold">design safety factor</span>. Even if pressures/loads are close, MN appears to have higher safety factor built into MN design than SMLE. For example, SMLE can handle 2 times the "nominal" pressure, and MN can handle 3 times the "nominal" pressure. Not sure about absolute accuracy of statement I just made, but it demonstrates why one design can be mechanically stronger than the other, even if both are designed to handle somewhat similar pressures/loads. Having practical mechanical design experience both in the USSR (before 1991) and in the U.S. (after 1991), I can tell you that traditionally, the russian enginering practice is based on use of at least 1.5 times bigger safety factor than it is typically done in the U.S. U.S. engineering, I guess, is somewhat closer related to engineering done in U.K. than it is related to the engineering in Russia. I'm not saying that having greater safety factor makes for a better design in general, just trying to explain why MN receiver and bolt may be considered "stronger". On the other hand, sometimes the use of higher safety factor is beneficial, cause in mass production quality of materials can not be always 100% controlled, so having a bit of additional safety to compensate for various deviations in material properties would not hurt.

 
#22
Re: 7.62x54 SMLE???

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: BasraBoy</div><div class="ubbcode-body">
...
There are reasons why the original issued 7.62 Enfield variants had new receivers made of higher grade steel which would be worth heeding.
...
</div></div>

Thank you for backing me up on this one, this is exactly what I've seen as "weird" while milling the left side of SMLE receiver for scope mount - some area of the milled surface had relatively bright and shiny finish and the other area had relatively dull and ugly finish. Same setup, same cutting feed and speed. Chips were also different. But didn't see this kind of stuff while milling the MN receivers...

Some machinists would take it as a sign of considerable inconsistency in metal quality, although it is not always applicable to, say, machining on the lathe, when cutting speed varies with diameter of the work piece.
 
#23
Re: 7.62x54 SMLE???

A large portion of Indian built 7.62 Enfields where converted standard .303 rifles not the 7.62 specific actions. Canadian DCRA 7.62 No.4 rifles where also converted from .303 rifles. No problems with ether of these. Ether action should handle the 7.6x54 just fine.
 
#24
Re: 7.62x54 SMLE???

My final thought on possible conversion to 7.62x54R - it may actually be an interesting idea, as far as I can see, and would produce very fast operating bolt action rifle, very suitable for scope mounting and with proven bedding technique to be used for enhanced accuracy. SMLE also has a great safety setup. But only IF such conversion also includes the use of highly reliable MN type magazine with cartridge interceptor, which works great for rimmed cartridges. In my personal opinion, SMLE magazine has weak construction in general, somewhat junky magazine spring and follower, and magazine feeding lips can be easily damaged, and if cartridge rims are not 100% situated in required manner, then "Houston, we've got a problem". No such issues with MN magazine. While MN trigger is not the marvel of sophisticated design, I can make just about ANY MN trigger to be nice, smooth and perfect 1.5-2.5 lbs. In fact, I have a custom MN with the trigger pull of 1 lb., adjustable from 6 ounces to 4 lbs. But I was never able to do this with SMLE trigger because the way it is designed, or may be because I could not figure out how to modify original SMLE trigger to such relatively light force of pull. Other than that, SMLE is an amazing piece of great engineering, and I was able to shoot it much faster (just above 1 sec. rate per shot, no aim) than any other bolt action rifle, old or new. This is truly amazing how quick the bolt can be cycled.
 
#25
Re: 7.62x54 SMLE???

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: BobC</div><div class="ubbcode-body">A large portion of Indian built 7.62 Enfields where converted standard .303 rifles not the 7.62 specific actions. </div></div>
This is a common myth. All Ishapore 2A and 2A1 rifles were built for 7.62 NATO from the start.
 
#26
Re: 7.62x54 SMLE???

Bob, the receiver that alerted me to the "mysteries" of steel hardening on Enfields was the '44 LB I used on my No4T project. Paul told me it was soft as butter at the rear and hard as...well....as hard as steel at the front.

And +1 on the 7.62 Ishapore rifles....my reading (including Skennerton) says all built up on new, higher quality receivers.

Would be interested to know about the later Enfield "precision rifles" like the L42.....
 
#27
Re: 7.62x54 SMLE???

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: BasraBoy</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Would be interested to know about the later Enfield "precision rifles" like the L42..... </div></div>
It's my understanding that they (or at least some) were actually converted from .303 rifles. Without digging deeper, I'm not sure exactly how they were done and what, if any, precautions were taken to offset any pressure differences.
 
#28
Re: 7.62x54 SMLE???

Laidler's "No4T, An Armourer's Perspective" has a chapter or two on the L42...yes, they were converted - work included new barrels,fore-end/handguard,, modified foresight block, new magazine, new extractor and modification to the body/action which included a re-proof test to 19 tons psi (normal .303 proof was to 16 toms psi). What he does not disclose was the rate of failures (if any) during re-proof.
 
#30
Re: 7.62x54 SMLE???

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Is the question, "which is stronger?" or "is the Enfiled strong enough?" The answers to both are obvious. The difference in pressures between milsurp .303 and milsurp 7.62x54R is negligible, and I have never heard stories of Enfields blowing up .</div></div>

There, is that better?
wink.gif
 
#31
Re: 7.62x54 SMLE???

Having shot the 91/30 with WWII spamcan ammo, I can tell you it's pretty inconsistant (teardown charge weights vary by over a grain), and it leaves (corrosive) grunge in the bore that begins to rival the bottom of a charcoal grill. Fortunately T/C muzzleloader bore cleaning foam seems to make short work of getting that out.

It this point I suspect it would be cheaper (and probably wiser, too) to simply buy a select grade Mosin-Nagant 91/30 and be done with it.

I had an Ishapore 2A .308, and while it had some cool factor, it didn't shoot well enough to warrant using anything but berdan primed NATO battlepack ammo. With 175gr handloads, it wouldn't hold within the entire target frame at 1000yd, and the prone recoil was flatout murder. Even the 91/30 is reputed to do better.

Service rifles have their niche. IMHO that niche does not justify making heroic conversions simply to allow using more available cheap ammo.

Greg
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

N
Fixed Magazines
Replies
1
Views
106
Supersubes
Supersubes
KYAggie
20” steel 300WSM barrel weight & profile question
Replies
15
Views
552
KYAggie
KYAggie
T
RPR failing to extract SK LRM but flawless with SK RM
Replies
2
Views
176
Txsguy68
T
Mg427
Firearms Vudoo V22s single shot, Randy Owen Stock, Muller Works 8 gr barrel with extras
Replies
2
Views
286
Mg427
Mg427
R
Hunting for a repo M40 walnut stock (my Beaver156 repo stock got slightly damaged)
Replies
14
Views
1K
Random Guy
R
Top Bottom
Back
Home
Forums
Merch
Alerts