Enfield No 4 Mk 1 ?

[rudolph]

First off, hello. New to the forum, have been lurking lately and decided to join. I have always been intrigued by the long range shot and enjoy shooting whenever I get a chance. I do not currently have any of the better long range calibers but was wondering about the effectiveness of the British .303. Is this a viable round for 600 yds or further? I am most likely going to get a better suited caliber down the road, just don't know when I will get around to all the paperwork needed in Jersey.

Rudolph

 

[trpr154]

Re: Enfield No 4 Mk 1 ?

I own a Enfield No 4 Mk 1. It's a Savage, American built for the british government in WWII. From what I know about the .303, It's very similar to the .308 winchester. Thats the good news, the bad news is that I have never seen any high quality long range bullets made for the .303. I've also never seen any high quality loaded ammo avaliable for the .303. The Enfield is a great military bolt rifle, but even with a quality scope mount. I don't think you have a viable 600 yard rifle. The round will travel that far, but I don't think the accuracy will be there.

 

[oneshot onekill]

Re: Enfield No 4 Mk 1 ?

There's absolutely no reason you can't get good results from that round out to 600yds, if the rifle hasn't been shot-out, and you handload for it. Accuracy varies from rifle to rifle but I've seen .303's that shoot as well as any rifle made.

 

[asbestosglove]

Re: Enfield No 4 Mk 1 ?

If you are serious about the Enfield, you should invest in a copy of "The High Power Shooting Primer" published by Precision Shooting magazine. It has a series of articles on what makes a No. 4 shoot and the science of shooting it. Around $35. Quite interesting reading.

AG in NC

 

[Metalhead0483]

Re: Enfield No 4 Mk 1 ?

I've owned several enfields. My current one is a Pakistani (don't laugh, it works) No4 Mk1. It'll do about 2 1/2" off the bag at 100 yds with irons. I see no reason why you couldn't make it into a 600 yard rifle with optics and handloads, provided the rifle isn't worn out (like so many of the enfields you see around are). Don't expect custom rifle accuracy out of it, but it should work quite well as a low budget DMR-type weapon...

 

[McCrazy]

Re: Enfield No 4 Mk 1 ?

First off- welcome to the Hide. I hope you have a pleasant time here. Any info you could ever want about shooting and more is on this site.

Personally I have always been attracted to the No. 4 Series Enfields. Currently I have 3: a No.4 MkI that I shoot; and 2 un-issued No.4 MkIIs in cosmoline mummy-wrap.

My shooter gets me at best 2moa groups with Remington ammo. A article I read on the No4 MkI(T) which was the sniper version of this rifle only achieved 1-1.5moa. For long range shooting the Enfield is not the best choice is what I'm saying.

As for your question about the .303 bullet itself being a good round to 600 yards and beyond, it is not a popular caliber for LR shooting and there are probably several good reasons for it. That being said it will definitely reach that far if that is all you are concerned with.

1. I have never seen match ammo for the .303 caliber. It may exist and I'm sure some people reload match ammo for their .303 pet projects, but I've personally never seen it. The brass will be of lower quality, and bullet selection will be less diverse than the more popular rounds also.

2. While you could probably get a custom barrel made for it to achieve better accuracy, why not just get a custom barrel in a more popular LR chambering.

I would have to say that while a noble thought, you would probably be handicapping yourself by trying to make this cartridge work for you.

If you must shoot an Enfield for LR because you have a burning desire for it, I would recommend getting one that is chambered in .308 Winchester. Quite a few were made and it would give you a much better start as far as being able to get acceptable performance at extended distances.

 

[Metalhead0483]

Re: Enfield No 4 Mk 1 ?

Sierra makes Matchkings in .303 (174 grain). I've never used them since I've never felt the need to push my enfields out past 100 yards or so, but they are out there. I usually reload my .303's with Hornaday 174 grn FMJs which aren't match bullets, but they do shoot quite well.

 

[BasraBoy]

Re: Enfield No 4 Mk 1 ?

I have an LSA 1915 MkIII SMLE shooting the Mark VI 215gr RN round.

I have to get these made to order by Kynamco in the UK - specialists in old ammo

http://www.new-kynoch.apt-sites.com/index.htm

But I would not call it "accurate" by TR standards. Also ME on the 215gr is around 2060 - possibly OK for pre-1914 volley fire but I think it could be struggling under other circumstances at LR. It was replaced by the Mk VII 174gr round as it lacked stopping power...

I've seen guys shooting No4's out to 1000yds with scopes but couldn't vouch for their accuracy at that range. I'd see no reason why they are not a perfectly capable rifle at up to 600yds for service rifle type events

There is another UK ammo company HPS Targetmaster that is doing well in various competitions at the moment and make a selection of machine and hand-loaded

http://www.hps-tr.com/ammo.asp

They do a 174 SMK product and they are looking for distribution in the US - already available in Canada.

 

[turbosa22c]

Re: Enfield No 4 Mk 1 ?

heres a youtube vid at 420
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=13qjwNGY2iU&feature=channel_page

idont have any experiance with the 303, but its on my list of rifles that i would like to own, i currently have a ishapore enfield 2A in 7.62x51. just got it, didnt have a chance to shoot it .

 

[Metalhead0483]

Re: Enfield No 4 Mk 1 ?

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: turbosa22c</div><div class="ubbcode-body">heres a youtube vid at 420
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=13qjwNGY2iU&feature=channel_page

idont have any experiance with the 303, but its on my list of rifles that i would like to own, i currently have a ishapore enfield 2A in 7.62x51. just got it, didnt have a chance to shoot it . </div></div>

Just don't shoot factory .308 win through it. I like mine well enough.

 

[BasraBoy]

Re: Enfield No 4 Mk 1 ?

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Metalhead0483</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: turbosa22c</div><div class="ubbcode-body">heres a youtube vid at 420
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=13qjwNGY2iU&feature=channel_page

idont have any experiance with the 303, but its on my list of rifles that i would like to own, i currently have a ishapore enfield 2A in 7.62x51. just got it, didnt have a chance to shoot it . </div></div>

Just don't shoot factory .308 win through it. I like mine well enough.</div></div>

Provided it was originally proofed for 7.62 and is NOT a .303 rebarrel as the original .303 action will not take the pressures.

 

[rudolph]

Re: Enfield No 4 Mk 1 ?

Wow, that was a lot of responses very quickly. I thought that may be the case. Thanks for all the responses, I don't really want to dump money into that project and will hold out for a rifle with more inherent accuracy. I will continue to enjoy shooting this one at shorter distances.

Thanks again

Rudolph

 

[Greg Langelius *]

Re: Enfield No 4 Mk 1 ?

I had an Ishie (Ishapur Arsenal) No 2 MKIII (2A) built for .308/7.62NATO right from the start. Would hold about 4MOA at 1000yd with Fed Gold Medal 175's. Kicked like a horse from the prone.

I think you'll be able to identify quality .311-.312 match bullets in suitible weights (Sierra for one), but getting hands on them at the moment might be something of a chore.

Greg

 

[Red_SC]

Re: Enfield No 4 Mk 1 ?

My uncle killed 3 deer over 300 yards with his this year, as well as several under that distance, with no misses or wounded animals. They can shoot fairly accurately, and if that's all I had I'd sure shoot it. As mentioned, try the Sierra 174's, they're in stock at Midway. Also the two piece stock isn't as forgiving as a standard stock, make sure you're completely consistent with your placement on the bags, and do some reading if you decide to bed it, they have their own bedding method.

 

[our gang]

Re: Enfield No 4 Mk 1 ?

Suggest you buy a copy of WITH BRITISH SNIPERS TO THE REICH. It will give you some excellent insight into just what a well set up Enfield can do.
Still the best bolt action battle rifle ever made. Remember the Huns in WW I thought the Brits were armed with machine guns because the rate of fire was so high.

http://www.amazon.com/British-Snipers-Reich-C-Shore/dp/1853672920

 

[9H_Cracka]

Re: Enfield No 4 Mk 1 ?

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: trpr154</div><div class="ubbcode-body"> Thats the good news, the bad news is that I have never seen any high quality long range bullets made for the .303. I've also never seen any high quality loaded ammo avaliable for the .303. </div></div>

Try the Sierra Match King, 174 gr. Got a box of them myself. Part # 2315.

http://sierrabullets.com/index.cfm?section=bullets&page=bc&stock_num=2315&bullettype=0

 

[scullti]

Re: Enfield No 4 Mk 1 ?

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Mr. Humble</div><div class="ubbcode-body">
Still the best bolt action battle rifle ever made. Remember the Huns in WW I thought the Brits were armed with machine guns because the rate of fire was so high.

</div></div>

I think that's a little bit of a bold statement. Admittedly the enfield is the best if you're talking about rate of fire, but I would say that the mauser had the most solid, accurate action of all the battle rifles. You can't really say one rifle is absolutely "the best."

 

[our gang]

Re: Enfield No 4 Mk 1 ?

A bolt action battle rifle should fast to operate, dead reliable, have large magazine capacity, easy to use sights and shoot at least 3 MOA.

The Enfield is far faster (short bolt throw), always works, hold twice as many rounds as a Mauser, the "peep" sight is far superior and any good one will do 3 MOA.

I love Mausers and would never covet a high grade sporter built on a MK 4 BUT for killing people in real world combat, it beats the Mauser or 03' hands down.

Here's some accurate observations:
Lee Enfield SMLE - No.1 MkIII*, No.4, No.5 Jungle Carbine
The final battle rifle of the British Empire, and probably one of the best bolt action rifle designs ever devised. I own a few of them, and never wish to part with them. They have probably the smoothest action in a military rifle. One can easily get off 10 aimed shots in 15 seconds with reasonable accuracy, especially with the slightly heavier No3.

 

[scullti]

Re: Enfield No 4 Mk 1 ?

You made plenty of valid points. I guess strictly as a battle rifle for front line infantry in bolt action the enfield would be the best choice. For a sniper rifle of that era though, I would choose the k98 mauser every time. Its long range performance and overall accuracy was pretty hard to beat. That's why so many target rifles after the war were built around k98 actions.

The k98 action is also built like a tank and dead reliable. I wouldn't say that the enfield is better in this respect, but very comparable.

I'm not trying to be argumentative, I just feel the need to stick up for the k98 mauser because it's a top notch rifle that is a lot of fun for me to shoot.

 

[our gang]

Re: Enfield No 4 Mk 1 ?

Agree K98 is a great rifle. I love the postwar FN commercial sporters.

 

[BasraBoy]

Re: Enfield No 4 Mk 1 ?

I have a byf41 and a 1915 SMLE. The Mauser is a great rifle but the action is nowhere near as smooth or as fast as the Enfield which is a joy to use.

OK, the Enfield may not handle chamber pressures comparable to the Mauser or have achieved the widespread "acceptance" as a standard action for customising and OEM uses...but it served with distinction and was a fine battle rifle.

 

[Monkeyman]

Re: Enfield No 4 Mk 1 ?

I bit of historical research might assist you with your decision.

The sniper version of the MkIII or SMLE used in WW1 is not very accurate. The barrel is skinny and clamped with wood and steel in too many places to be consistent, simply a scope-fitted service rifle.

The sniper version of the No4 (called the T) is better assembled and has a heavier barrel than the Smelly but still has the stock/metal problems, barely a 1MOA gun with sometimes shifting zero.

In all civilian competitions that required the use of military rifles and cartridges the P14 (British .303 version of US-Manufactured, British-designed M1917) outshot the Lee-Enfields and were used into the 70s for that reason, although I've never seen a 7.62 conversion.

The .308 version of the No4 developed for sniping in the 60s was the L42, the civilian version of the same gun without scope mounts (from the No4T) is the Envoy. Both had a heavy hammer-forged .308 barrel, shortened forend and freefloated barrel. Some of these will shoot 1/2MOA but that is rare.

The final evolution of the Lee Enfield rifle is the Enforcer which was built by Parker Hale on the request of the London Metropolitan Police after exhaustive tests showed the L42 accuracy to be erratic. The Enforcer has a custom action and all parts specially built by PH. This was never a military gun, the L42 served until replacement by the L85 and L42s served in Gulf war one.

To make a 600yd gun you'll need to use allot of custom parts but they are still available in the UK, check the Bisley Range website.

 

[scullti]

Re: Enfield No 4 Mk 1 ?

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: BasraBoy</div><div class="ubbcode-body">
OK, the Enfield may not handle chamber pressures comparable to the Mauser or have achieved the widespread "acceptance" as a standard action for customising and OEM uses...but it served with distinction and was a fine battle rifle.
</div></div>

Didn't mean to step on too many toes when bringing up the k98, and never meant to say that the enfield was anything less than a great design. All I wanted to point out is that each of the WWII rifles had their strengths (except maybe an arisaka).

 

[our gang]

Re: Enfield No 4 Mk 1 ?

Actually the Arisaka was the strongest bolt action (See P.O. Ackley) and the 6.5 action was every bit as smooth as a 98. I built one in my "ute" with a Flaig's Ace Barrel, Herter's factory second stock, Timney trigger and a Weaver K 10 in 22-250. It was a tack driver with far too hot loads pushing Herters Wasp Waist Sonic bullets and accounted for a lot of chucks and crows.
Flaigs, Herters, Weaver? who the H were they? Ya gotta be old!

 

[scullti]

Re: Enfield No 4 Mk 1 ?

Really? I always thought arisakas were crap. Probably because the design itself was good but the quality of manufacturing was junk, considering all the bombs we were dropping on their factories. I've read stories of the Japanese using explosive tipped bow and arrows towards the end of the war when their supplies were virtually nonexistent.

Okay, now that I've sufficiently drawn this thread completely off topic, I'll let you get back to the original discussion

.

 

[BasraBoy]

Re: Enfield No 4 Mk 1 ?

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: ghilliedup</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: BasraBoy</div><div class="ubbcode-body">
OK, the Enfield may not handle chamber pressures comparable to the Mauser or have achieved the widespread "acceptance" as a standard action for customising and OEM uses...but it served with distinction and was a fine battle rifle.
</div></div>

Didn't mean to step on too many toes when bringing up the k98, and never meant to say that the enfield was anything less than a great design. All I wanted to point out is that each of the WWII rifles had their strengths (except maybe an arisaka).</div></div>

ghilliedup, no problem...my toes are intact ) I'm a fan of both.

 

[our gang]

Re: Enfield No 4 Mk 1 ?

May I suggest you buy the 2 book set by P.O. Ackley on handloading? It contains extensive blow up tests of all WW II bolt guns. Guess who won, BY A LOT?

Late war guns were crap (as were Mausers) but my 6.5 action was made in 1937 and had the same prewar quality as a Mauser from those days.

 

[GaCop]

Re: Enfield No 4 Mk 1 ?

I used to load for a No4 Mk IT sniper. I was using a 3X9 scope in a repro mount. I loaded Sierra 174 grain match bullets in brass fired in the T's chamber and then neck sized there after. That rifle would consistently shoot 3/4" at 100 yards and 1.650" at 200 yards.