Lee-Enfield No.4 Action Extreme Stress Test
Вставка
- Опубліковано 10 вер 2024
- Thanks to:
The Yeaveley Estate - yeaveley-estat...
The Wirksworth Gunroom - / @thewirksworthgunroom
Patreon: / blokeontherange
Teespring: teespring.com/...
Facebook: / blokeontherange
So we deliberately overstressed a Lee-Enfield No.4 rifle, with .300 WinMag cartridges, both dry and oiled. What happened?
Keywords
303
winchester magnum
kaboom
Birdsong from Sartorial Pictures here: • Dawn Chorus Spring 201...
"We've forgotten the mallet" - someone who hasn't taken a Mosin Nagant to the firing range before.
Timothy Soen I never take a mallet. I figure my boot heel will work well enough....
That's what trees and wood posts are for!
A mosin would be an awfully big mallet for opening an Enfield bolt.
@@CaeruleanWren a mallet that can also serve, in a pinch, as a rifle.
You got that right. One of my M-Ns is almost beyond hammer correcting.
Now, whenever someone says "the Lee-Enfield action is weak, blah blah blah.."
And since that rifle has served for such a long time, the material fatigue argument goes out of the window too.
Mauser and Springfield lover heads explode
@@masonhaggerty186 It is definitely weaker than a Mauser-style action. Still considerably stronger than it needs to be for the round it was designed for, though.
Mauser, Springfield, Lee-Enfield, Ross, Lebel: divine names from the dim mists of History with stories both famous and infamous. Stories both true, and bollocks, is where Bloke on the Range comes in.
@@jic1 it fails so much safer though.
I think you will find that is a fatigue failure, still a fine weapon.
I read Hatcher's Notebook where he warns against greasing or oiling cartridges. This is the first demonstration of that I have seen. Pretty wild that the flawed bolt served so well.
The warning that Hatcher makes is about grease not allowing the case next to expand to release the bullet. The practice of "daubing" bullets was common in those days to reduce fouling the rifling but grease around the neck prevents the case neck from expanding and was the cause of a few failures of of the Springfield rifle during the early days. The bolt thrust increase is certainly an issue also but wasn't the main issue. A greased case will allow the pressure to follow Pascal's law of pressure in a pressure vessel that pressure is always equal in all directions.
@@thomasjefferson1457 glad to see someone who has read the book. You are correct but I think the chapter under emphasized the risk from lubing cartridges.
@@dbmail545 I think you may be right. I was wondering where in the UK you are. I'm not sure of the gun laws but thought that they had outlawed virtually everything over there. How are you able to own a gun like that. The SMLE was a popular rifle over here back in the 50's as it was sold as surplus after the war for next to nothing. I saw them for 10 dollars all the time back them and 15 dollars for virtually new condition. .303 Brit ammo was everywhere and super inexpensive. The "jungle carbine" was the most desirable of all the models and worth a fortune today if all original.
@@thomasjefferson1457 I'm in the increasingly unfree United States. Mostly I shoot 5.56 or 5.45 which are very easy on the shooter and the gun. A co-worker of mine many years ago had the NRA republication which I talked him out of. I believe that anyone who has read Julian Hatcher can write for any firearms magazine.
@@dbmail545 Putting a drop of lubricant on the top round of a loaded magazine is a common practice or perhaps mispractice with the smith and wesson model 41 .22 cal target pistol. It is designed most say including smith and wesson to use the CCI standard velocity 40 grain lead bullet load. Some will not function with that load and others want to to use cheaper aguila standard velocity.
Lubing a loaded round with oil increases the velocity of recoiling slide. It will batter a gun. Some target shooter put vast numbers of round through a gun over the course 30 or more years of actively competing and it is better to use the proper ammunition on one's gun. MSRP - $1,369.00
During an ammo crisis I may use the federal automatch that while high velocity is less than the velocity of typical high velocity in my opinion. I have not actually chronographed any. I also use a buffer in my gun and I maybe should be replace it now.
I remember way back in the day iv8888 did an arisaka and mosin stress test. Glad you guys did an enfield.
The fact that a Enfield can extract and eject ⏏ a rimless cartridge with a bit of slick just shows how amazing the service rifle acually is!
This definitely deserves a revisit
"What has been done to this is it has been reamed... it has been given a..."
"A (???) ream,"
"... good reaming"
"-thoroughly reamed,"
"Thoroughly reamed."
cheeky!
Those go for considerably more in the states, even in that "ugly" stste. They were mostly done professionally and the Parker-Hale models are very nice. To build a rifle like that today would cost several thousand dollars if done by any decent gunsmith. I would much have an Enfield or Mauser action than any new Rem 700 or the like. He is correct about the sights. They were usually all steel and very tightly fitted. Try finding some of the Parker-Hale target sights for the P14/P17 or the Mauser cocking piece aperture sight. They are English old world craftsmanship at it's finest. I still watch the entire hour long Bisley documentary from years ago so I'm a bit biased to those old rifles.
I think this is a perfect example why things are made stronger than they need to be even if they're not made properly they're more than strong enough
That is exactly why.
If a bolt is below spec and fails in the field it puts at risk the investment the crown and government have put into training the soldier
Factor of safety its called.
Hey Bloke, that wasn't a material flaw, that is a fatigue crack. That lug would've eventually failed under normal firing conditions, the higher stresses produced from the .300 Win Mag just accelerated the failure.
It really does look like fatigue all the way. Cut off the other lug, should be a crack there as well.
@@mattiasostklint7764 should be able to do a non-destructive test to find a crack.
@@coreys2686 X-rays. They are used to detect fatigue and microfisures in metals. Apparently inspectors and engineers use portable x-ray units to scan steel members of bridges for faults. Should be applicable to firearms as well.
@@ckl9390 no kidding. That's one of the techniques they use in NDT. That and using electric arcing systems (I haven't thought about those things in about 20 years)
Wow, it's almost as though the action was designed to fail safely
Funny that
my god, are you saying the world's biggest empire (at the time) knew how to supply its armies??
@@slaughterround643 and or James Lee knew what he was on.
(didn't he only work on the magazine?)
@Lilac Tortoise um.... okay....... okay.
Consult the Book of Armaments!
Armaments, chapter two, verses nine to twenty-one.
And Saint Attila raised the hand grenade up on high, saying, "O Lord, bless this Thy hand grenade that, with it, Thou mayest blow Thine enemies to tiny bits in Thy mercy."
And the Lord did grin, and the people did feast upon the lambs and sloths and carp and anchovies and orangutans and breakfast cereals and fruit bats and large chu--
Ebi Wright skip a bit brother
And the LORD spake, saying, "First shalt thou take out the Holy Pin, then shalt thou count to three, no more, no less. Three shall be the number thou shalt count, and the number of the counting shall be three. Four shalt thou not count, neither count thou two, excepting that thou then proceed to three. Five is right out. Once the number three, being the third number, be reached, then lobbest thou thy Holy Hand Grenade of Antioch towards thy foe, who, being naughty in My sight, shall snuff it.
1959Edsel while ive always loved this scene, the line 'five is right out' has ne (😂😂) choking with laughter every time. Tears etc.
Someone had an r/wooosh moment didnt they
1, 2, 5
This is fantastic! It's amazing to see how strong the Enfield action is!
I wonder if the crack would have shown up if the action was converted and proofed here in Australia? When they were tested over here, a proof round was fired then the action was magnetically flux tested for cracks. Not sure if the same crack testing was done in UK when proofed for 7.62mm.
There are ways of detecting flaws of that sort as you mention. I wonder just how common such flaws were. With the 303 service round and even 7.62x51 nato loads the flaw would have never been an issue.
Im quite impressed. I have a small collection of #4s..a dozen or so, one of which is chambered in 45-70. Ive had no unusual problems with any of them. The large wartime chambers tend to leave the web of the brass badly stretched in repeated reloadings, even with neck sizing only, but even with the odd case head seperation over the years...no issues noted.
That was awesome! I really love the number 4. Such a good bolt gun!
I trust that my 3 Mark 4 #2s will never fail. I am building a custom Enfield action from scratch. My custom will be fitted specifically for the 30-30 Win. It will be my all purpose rifle shooting bullets from 100gr. to 170gr. Because I will use pointed bullets tge ballistics will certainly be improved. I can hardly wait to have a "Mini-Lee Enfield" battle carbine. I suspect a custom magazine will give me a 12 round capacity.
Jeebus! One hell of an experiment. Another tick for old school british overengineering - looking after Tommy Atkins since 1872😁
Since before then.
@@skepticalbadger I think you may be right - what sort of timeline are you thinking? For me its the Martinis and onward..
Makes you approach the engineering required to make delayed blowback rifles work properly, given that in those the case has to start moving (albeit slowly) right at the moment of firing.
fluted chamber
North of Watford? As a Kentish man told me, "Anything north of the Thames is 'The North'!"
Anything south of Watford is France.
Thanks bloke, great to see what these actions can handle.
Maybe that was a Friday close to the end of day bolt? Maybe it was a Monday morning I’m still hungover from last night bolt? 😂. Thanks!
If you can see the individual grain size of the fractured steel, you have a very poor heat treat. With steel you should normalize the work piece. I.e. bring the piece up to critical temperature (non magnetic) then let it cool naturally, preferably out of the wind. After doing this at least two times you should harden the piece then draw the temper. This piece has been heated far more than is good for the steel. It was heated almost to burning. Burnt steel had no use besides bouncing off the head of the idiot who burned it in the first place.It's only luck that this didn't fail while being shot in combat or some other such use.
Well, it was built during wartime with bombs dropping nearby on occasion, so you can likely excuse a few shortcuts being taken.
However, this should have been caught during the conversion to 7.62. A simple magnafluc or dye penetrant would have caught it.
The three of you have won UA-cam, if not all of the Internet, today. Lee Enfield in .300 Win Mag? Yes please.
The only problem with a 300 WM Smellie...its a single shot only. Sigh...but that would be an awesome rifle!!
@@GunnerAsch1 Don't give up on the dream; we can find a longer magazine, we can make this work.
Before watch…. I like the quick guitar intro! …. don't mind me! ...please, go on.
After "The Book of Small Arms" I expected to hear 'Here, endeth the lesson!'
Hi, great video! I'm 99.99% sure the failure was not due to a material defect at the time of manufacture. I feel it might help if you look up the topic of material fatigue, and especially "stress concentration factor" with regards to steel fatigue, and how a steel component might fail after a number of loading cycles, despite there being no material defect at the time of manufacture.
Humbly I would suggest the failure is likely a combination of the following;
Design - did not consider fatigue mitigating features such as minimum radii in sharp corners or whether the method of manufacture might unintentionally introduce stress concentration due to rough/pitted/scratched surface, post-machining.
Quality issue - almost too much to expand on, but factors such as correct heat treatment, correct material specification, etc etc..
The key point to understand with fatigue is; every load cycle damages the component, the larger the load, the more damage this introduces, almost exponentially with load. The utterly perverse thing about this is, sending the rifle to a proof house might suddenly accelerate the damage to a point where it passes proof, but at the same time the very next shot will break it.
I am so damn tired of youtube unsubbing me from this and other channels.
Greatest bolt gun evah
It failed but that would not have injured the shooter. A proud statement to the action.
I saw the exact same failure on a No4 7.62 conversion while I was shooting the Canadian Target Rifle Championships. A light rain had started and a shooter didn’t keep his ammo and or action dry. The bolt dad a spiral crack jus around the locking lug area and was immediately out of action. I don’t know if the rear lug failed or not nor do I know if there was another flaw in the bolt. But it failed in exactly the same way. I believe the rifle had been converted at Long Branch arsenal, so it was properly done.
That is a rather substantial and impressive failure. Never really occurred to me that the bolt body itself would break, more so that pieces just shear off.
Artifact from the hammering
Radical thought here, proofing only makes sense with a cast metal structure, the reason being that with cast metals any failure due to a fault will either happen on proof or never fail at all. This is because there is no ductile element to the failure of a cast component, failure is complete and traumatic. Proofing was originally brought in for cast, muzzle loading guns and firearms when it makes sense, whether cast iron, bronze or brass. To proof a forged metal weapon is illogical because if there is a minor flaw, proof firing may make it worse without causing failure. Subsequent normal firings may then gradually increase the flaw until failure.
The only way to have true confidence in a modern weapon is through good design, consistent manufacture to high standards for each one and extensive testing of a large sample to prove the design and subsequent random testing from each batch of weapons made. Any weapon tested should never be used. The existence of a proof mark, in my mind, is no cause for confidence at all, rather the reverse.
That's pretty much my view on the utility of proofing. And having been to one of the UK proof houses, nothing filled me with confidence with what they're doing there... But that's another story entirely...
But the issue is that a proof test is a semidestrictive test, and could open up a small flaw that wouldn't have occurred without proofing. With old-school casting/forging of barrels, a material flaw should be big enough to cause catastrophic failure. There's always limit cases of course though (the interesting stuff happens at the margins :) )
I think y’all are on to something. Just about any centerfire firearm is going to eventually fail it seems. If you read the posts from Henderson defense on ar15.com where they discuss failures of their mostly machine guns at their rental range in Las Vegas. Almost everything breaks. Glocks. AKs. ARs. Some stuff breaks after Shockingly few rounds. Some after 100,000+. And all of this is with proper ammo and gunsmiths to watch over. The failures are of nearly all description.
It’s important to remember that the types of steels used in these things plus the heat treatment. They in no way behave like say steel on bridges and buildings (ductile). Never mind the loading is entirely different (static vs shock).
Plus it’s not like they had finite element software back in the day to engineer these things. I suspect a lot of it was testing and experience. I’d love to know how they calculated (if at all) “oh the bolt lugs should be this big. Or how thick the barrel at the chamber. Or how thick the receiver wall.
Seems to me firing proofs just counts as basically prematurely aging the rifle. Figure if it’s going to last 10,000 normal rounds. It might last 8000 plus a proof.
I have to disagree with the thought that cast iron is not susceptible to fatigue failures. As it inherently has a lot of flaws because it was not compacted like forged parts or plate material, the graphite will add a LOT of stress concentrations (eg lamellar graphite) and like composite materials, it has delamination issues between graphite and the rest of the iron. Cracks can and will grow in cast irons, with stresses well below yield, just like in most metals.
Proof testing is not a fatigue test, that is clear. I see it as an lowered ultimate stress test, basically to prevent the gun from blowing up right away and it is done with loads over the yield and operating stresses. And it probably will nock down the fatigue life a bit. But it is the next best thing and a balance between economic factors and safety of the gun. There is at least a chance that you can detect cracks before the gun blows up from fatigue issues, but there is no chance if the gun blows up on its first round fired.
Until the 50's or so, most aircraft were only tested to ultimate loads, so for example you just bent a wing once to see if it could hold the calculated ultimate load a single time without braking. As the aircraft was only expected to see loads up to yield stress, you basically accounted for fatigue by applying a load factor (ultimate divided by yield) and you got to test the aircraft above its expected envelope for singular events like very hard landings and the like. If course, nowadays fatigue is better understood and there are whole departments in aircraft companies focusing only on fatigue and it dictates a lot of the design of aircrafts.
@kev french
If I may ask, how do you case harden it? Just out of engineers curiosity ;-)
I am not excatly convinced that forging offers that many advantages in material properties compared to milling from a plate with proper specs . The Metallic Materials Properties Development and Standardization (MMPDS) which is basically THE material standard in aerospace, does not give different strength or fatigue curves for forged and milled parts.
This was a real special! `Thank you guys!
Interesting proof test. I have a WWII No. 4 Mk 1 in original military configuration and another sporterized version. Considering the mfg fault in the bolt, No 4 did rather well.
I greatly appreciated the discussion of the rimmed versus rimless cartridges with the extraction groove relative to strength. Maybe the Russians were right in keeping their Rimmed 7.62x54 round. Be interesting to try out your testing with the mosin nagant with various loads including magnum chamberings. Might be a problem getting the stock extractor to work with the smaller rim size of the most modern magnum rounds. I know many of the of older black power guns are quite capable of containing massive over loads. Trap door spring rifle based on the allen conversion is considered to be much weaker than the Martini-Henry and yet will hold together for at least once for massive overload with smokeless power.
Greatly enjoyed your video.
My understanding is that the rimmed 7.62x54r was kept for MG's because it fed well from a belt and extracted very positively.
Rolling block and falling block are annoyingly strong
@@MyLonewolf25 On the rolling block, it depends on the steel and specific model. the later models consider strong enough for the 7x57. The earlier models are said to be restricted to black powder loads.
@@loquat4440 Correct. There are many rolling blocks chambered in modern cartridges such as 3006, x54R and so on. The 1901 and later Remingtons were 50kspi actions.
The Mosin is a ridiculously strong action. If you look at what needs to fail for an injury to happen, it would take a massive amount of pressure.
I have a Mosin chambered in 375 H&H that has given years of excellent hunting, it's on my channel here.
Clark Magnusen (a well known destroyer of rifles) built one in 7mm Rem Mag successfully.
The mosin will handle anything up through 500 Jeffery, which I have built. That rifle's failure was the extractor (had to knock every round out of the chamber with a cleaning rod), but there was never a question of action strength.
What if you put another bolt in it?
You'll never guess what we're planning :)
If they put another bolt in it would work just fine.
I want your hat, Bloke. Also, awesome vid. I really didn't think the Enfield would have lasted that long with the 300.
After the 10 dry rounds, given that there was no change on the gauge I reckon it would have gone on forever if we'd kept that up.
@@BlokeontheRange considering the flaw it stood up to the lubricated ammo surprisingly well
@@BlokeontheRangeI imagine it would have. Learn something new every video.
How many other guns are out there sporting minor flaws undetected due to overengineering? Is it a rarity that you just so happened to get to see, or a common pattern all around?
We just don't know unless they actually blow up and show the flaw in the break like this one did.
@@BlokeontheRange would it show up if you x-rayed the bolt?
@@norwegianwiking It might, if angled right. Magnaflux testing would certainly show it.
norwegianwiking
Yes it would show up a progressive fatigue fracture which was the dark discoloured bit.
There's many scary things beneath the pretty surfaces as I found out with my ex wife....(ah wine talking - she wasn't that pretty)
@@BlokeontheRange I think that I heard you say "Small" lug. So if this mechanism fails does it mean that there is still a stronger one which would protect the shooter?
These No4 conversions are worth decent money in Australia but try and send one over and see how many hoops you need to jump through along the way....
Which is why there's no arbitrage trade in them :)
@@BlokeontheRange if I send you my .303 No4 magazine and a few pounds, could you send it back but with a funny Enfield stamp on it, an ejector and a feed ramp that may help it feed .308 a bit better please? ;)
I will soon have 3 unicorn 7.62 mags + extractors. Acquired by buying 3 rifles with them already fitted!
One heck of a job you have, Bloke!
(Job? Hobby? ...Jobby?)
Not worth much here really.So many of them around for couple hundred bucks if you know where to look,original 303's are climbing in price but still way cheaper than overseas.My Lithgow no1mk3* cost me about 600usd(im the first registered owner!) and my no4mk1 about 500usd, both 9/10 rifles all matched.The SMLE still has armoury paint on barrel under timber.I purchased them a few years ago, prices have risen a bit but not hugely,you really have to know where to purchase,local used gun websites are NOT the place to find them either, those are all way over priced.
So a factory flaw.. The question becomes how many other Number 4s from that same factory have the same not previously noticed flaw in the bolt lug?
Not sure how common it was but I remember the No4 being taken out of cadet service in the UK - I think in the 90s - after a lug sheared on couple of rifles. When I was in the cadets in the 70s our school had about 30 No4s and one year at camp in Sennybridge one of the rifles had one of the locking lugs shear. No one was hurt and it wasn't even noticed until the rifle was cleaned.
Thank you for sharing that information and demonstration. Good show.
An interesting test.
That does seem "ambitious" rebarreling a No.4 in .300 Win Mag, but as you pointed out: it would have most likely passed proof with dry ammunition and probably could have been used without issue for many years afterwards (just like it did in .303 and in 7.62/.308) with that flawed bolt.
Two Englishmen go out in the midday sun with a bizarre plan to destroy a nice No.4 rifle to find out what pressure it could handle. They succeed in the destruction using a cartridge it was never designed for with about 20% more pressure pre oiling than 303. Over pressure will find the weakest point, it must eventually. In the end we did not get the answer to how strong is a No.4 (pressure wise)BUT they did have fun and they weren't out shooting road signs.
Try the same test with a P14 ;)
I've seen those in 458 win mag!
What a horrific notion
Dont think its in the bloke on the range ammo budget.. nore do i think they got that long..
@@BigATB The .458 win mag is no higher pressure than the .30-06. The bore size of a cartridge has nothing to do with the pressure it generates. There are plenty of large bore low pressure cartridges. The .45-70 in light loads runs around 25000psi. There are also small bore cartridges that run up to 65000psi. The P14 is just a modified Mauser 98, and the Mauser 98 is an amazingly strong action.
@@outspokengenius it’s definitely not a modified Mauser 98. It was its own distinct design. It has similarities but it’s definitely not a Gew….
Meh, weld the lug back on and go again...
Excellent presentation. Thank you.
Well done. A fascinating demo.
What.... the receiver ring didn’t explode???!!!! But, the internetz said so!
there are about 3 thumb nail beach marks that are caused by constant loading and unloading over a long period much like the material testing we carried out at the university over 30 years
suppose you could rebarrle that to 6mm Musgrave
The flawed lug made me think of the concern over 'low-number' Springfield '03s and the questionable heat treat. Though there are many warnings about weak receivers, actual failures have been few and far between. In fact, low-number rifles continued in service (including combat) up into early WWII.
I had a four digit thru my hands - WW1 WW2 rebarreled after WW2 and CMP then to me and to my customer - he asked the question - and decided to fire light loads - I would not have bothered other than for the value of the rifle !
That was awesome.
And yet some armies spec oiled cartridges for their weapon systems, i.e. Swede AG-42, Japanese 6.5x50 in the Type-11... The AG-42 manual even states "During longer firing pauses the chamber should be cleaned with the tool and lubed with # 042 lubricant". I have an AG-42 that I handload for, and leave just a touch of resizing lube remaining on the rounds. have fired "dry' rounds too, with no ill effects. Also if I am remembering correctly, I read in a British arms manual concerning military proofing, that using an oiled cartridge of whatever type was part of the official process.
As for practical strength concerning rear-locking bolt rifles, I owned a French MAS-36 of wartime manufacture, and I'd hate to think what it would take to destroy that massive action... Makes my No4 MkII look like downright sickly.
I see someone had their phone switched on while recording this!
(interference around 9-10 minute mark)
I don't believe that was a manufacturing fault in the bolt, it is a fatigue crack and the 300winmag only accelerated the failure. I am not suggesting the enfield wasn't a fine weapon.
All Enfield's here in the United States are very expensive. They have tripled in price over the last few years same with the ammunition.
20 years ago you buy one for $50
@@johnstacy7902 And then the shop owner would throw in another complete Enfield and a couple boxes of .303, just to clear up some space.
you can get privi for $`12 a box on line.
True, ive seen some guys on youtube showing of SMLE's they have purchased over there for crazy money,6,7 or even 800 USD.Now im not saying a GOOD SMLE is not worth that, these were mismatched rough as guts,only a couple hundred Aussie dollerdoos here.One of the very fee advantages of being an Aussie firearm enthusiast.
@@TheRealColBosch Thats why I have more than a dozen...lol
BOTR , Nice Video , one of My concerns was that you never checked at any point if you had a stuck or proud Firing pin , as that could be a potential disaster racking that bolt forward hard , without it being locked , When I bought both My No 4 mk 1 and my 7mm Chilean Mauser , I pulled the bullet out of A round and emptied the powder and racked that case just to make sure , then fired them both held out at arms length , As I didn't know either guns history
You wouldn’t have a stuck firing pin in the Lee action. The pin is cammed well out of the bolthead as soon as the handle is lifted.
Well... that was unexpected.
While the oiled cartridges looked like they would have been really unpleasant to shoot, I didn't expect the action to give way.
It didn't look much worse than firing a rifle grenade and the FAL locking system is significantly less substantial than that of the No.4. Assuming all recruits did the same drills since the rifle was new, 535 rifle grenades (both training and live ones) would have been fired with it by the time I got my grubby mits on it and it still worked fine. I therefore was quite surprised to see the No.4 fail.
Introduce an old crystalline fault to the equation and such assumptions go right out of the window, of course. The fact it proofed and functioned for as long as it did, is a testament to having engineering margins.
It is a testament to the design that a critically flawed specimen successfully served in multiple roles for about a century and still exceeded expectations before breaking. Also, did the receiver get damaged at all from the failure? Could another bolt be slapped in and the gun still work? And the bolt failing safely is another testament to the design.
Indeed, we were kinda amazed. A new bolt, correctly fitted, and that receiver is still good to go cos there was no damage to it.
All you need is a new bolt wouldn’t be a hard repair at all.
in australia we also xrayed actions for faults before proof mark
Beautiful English countryside with singing birds. I wonder what failed in the manufacturing and QA process to csuse this defect. Ohh I can the German Mauser crowd all ready.
The grain structure on that bolt looks like sugar or salt and pepper which is very indicative of large grain sizes which means it has not been hardened properly. The grain should look like a dark grey colour not like sugar. I’d like to know which factory produced that bolt because I’m not surprised they was a defect with grain structure like that. It’s hard to tell if it had it from new or from wear and tear but because it’s at a pressure point I’d say it’s from wear and tear. You can see that the crack stopped working it’s way down for some time which is probably when it’s been racked after WW2 and stood unused for a long time and then began again as the lighter colour is obviously indicates newer cracking after it’s been sold surplus and started cracking again with use. Makes you wonder doesn’t it ??? WOW ! THATS SCARY MAN. I’m gonna get my bolt dye indicator tested now for cracks. I’ve got a friend who is a NDT specialist.
Good design is making a machine that safely does the job it was intended for with the least materiels, so you have proven the Lee Enfield was a very good design with a generous safely margin and even if abused will fail without badly injuring the shooter. To me this only adds to the LEs reputation.
That is not a manufacturing flaw. You can that is typical a fatigue failure. The probable initiation was during its life as a Win-Mag.
Wut? Its entire life as a winmag is captured on video here and consists of 10 dry and 5 wet shots.
Not going to repeat my engineering material course here. Yes it does look like fatigue, however it was there long before the Winmag fired.
Sorry, must have missed that part where you did the conversion. But, that FTR job was really, really sloppy, if that fatigue crack slipped past them.
more deer been shot with these rifles than any other in New Zealand bar none great old rifle use em if you can get em
I wonder if magnafluxing would have revealed that flaw.
Might be worth doing if you have an Enfield.
Wonder if fluted chambers would have the same effect as the oil. Thus requiering a stronger action. I assume the same for pre waxed cartridges.
Interesting note is that the Swedish armed forces did, what I think was utrasonic tests, on all of their m96 actioned rifles and discovered micro cracks on a good persentage of the bolt lugs. Non of wich was visable to the naked eye.
Thanks for an awsome wideo
I wondered about modern analytical methods too. But they would take quite a while on each gun and be rather expensive unless you were dealing with something irreplaceable.
Certainly reassuring for us shooting those old .303s...... One wonders how long that action would have stood up with a good bolt...
Well now you have to do it again.
I would replace the bolt, re-headspace it, and go again!
So what you're saying is that it's okay to run steel case .308 through my Ishapore 2A1?
Sorry I've just reviewed the footage at 22:42, I don't see a "massive rust defect" - the discoloured area creeps out from the lug, the area has striations on on it. I'd say that this had weakened to to fatigue. Fatigue failure to completion may take Perhaps in the order of several thousand cycles. The fatigue failure mechanism may well have been initiated as you say by a latent defect such as a non radiused ninty degree section or a sharp cut left by a machine tool. The dark are is not rust its fatigue. This rifle was destined to fail eventually after a ridiculous amount of time (don't they all?). It has suffered fatigue to to a initial crack initiation. This is not the fatigue of bending a paper clip to destruction but cyclic fatigue under the yield stress of the metal. What you have done is taken a rifle bolt (suffering from metallurgical fatigue (say man with slow terminal cancer) and quickened the demise by catastrophic failure due to the last lubricated cartridges (hitting poor cancer man over head with sledge hammer or multiple blows from your fellow conspirators rubber mallet)
I expect this rifle would have performed flawlessly for decades into the future with moderate use. This is my theory and I'm open to critic metallurgists.
There's rust in the defect. "massive rust defect" is not a phrase we used.
Call it rust if you want.
I'll refrain from commenting.
When you see the thing in real life there's black bits, which are not rust, and brown bits, which are clearly rust.
Oi! You got a permit loicense for those oiled cartridges??
This shows it to be quite inferior to the mauser, mosin, and arisaka, in terms of strength.
The Mauser and Mosin in particular are known for their use with magnum rounds.
Cartridges like 375 H&H, and 500 Jeffery.
I have a video of a mosin chambered for 375 H&H on my channel, and that rifle has proven wonderful for hunting. It's been fired with oiled cartridges (like yours, a proof test), and continues to function.
It's also fired a box of 500 Jeffery, although that is not a useable cartridge in this action due to extraction and ejection issues.
The mauser is very well known for cartridges like the 500 Jeffery and 425 Westley Richards also.
Totally irrelevant. The Lee action was intended for the .303 cartridge, period. It was more than strong enough for its intended use.
20:54 what says that bolt wasn’t replaced, say, right before the last time the rifle changed hands?
Bolt is matching numbered to the receiver IIRC.
now if you break the 2nd rifle in the same spot.......
THAT is crazy to think about
love the lee action.... want to buy one to round out my ww2 "main rifles" collection
id still buy one, even if all of them had that same flaw
strong enough for average 303
Just get another bolt and fit it up roughly. It would be good practice and you dont need to take another barrel off.
jeff christman T’is in fact the plan for round 2 at some point in the future.
It will be fitted precisely by having the locking surfaces lapped to each other. No point in doing the test with the risk of only 1 lug being in contact.
@@BlokeontheRange sorry, spamming you, but are specs that tight you cant just drag and drop?
It's more that the specs are loose cos you've got 4 things that have to line up properly. If they don't, you've only got 1 lug bearing. If it's the small one, you'll probably be done in a few shots of 300WM.
@@BlokeontheRange ya I'm pretty sure midwayusa had a video on how to do it. But that was for accuracy. It's good that you cut the chamber tight tho because now you shouldn't have any headspace problems after fitting the lugs. Was that intentional?
MY GOD MAN! Your beards been stolen
I'd give you $50 for that rifle in a heartbeat. Well, I would have, anyway. Export laws are just insane.
I have seen a No 1** chambered in 8 mm Mauser in military service.
The Turks converted loads of MLE's and SMLE's to 8x57. And there were all sorts of big game chamberings like .375 Flanged Nitro Express.
@@BlokeontheRange When i was growing up in the '60s no one was game to take a No1 past .303/270 because the action was too weak. we had .303-22, ,hornet,25,243,270.
And yet BSA offered the 375 chambering as a factory offering www.enfield-rifles.com/uploads/244/BSA_catalog_2.jpg
@@BlokeontheRange #readthemanual should be your tagline
My sporter came with no mag, a broken rear stock and a missing front sight post.
Bit surprised that Non Destructive Testing isn't used in addition to the proof testing.
As a machinist I find this very interesting and it also makes me wonder what the testing method was at production. What methods were even available at that time? I know I dye penatrent test would have found that. Also are the bolts stress relieved?
I wonder how long it could have taken the dry 300 win mag. It almost makes me want to put one of these together to find out.
Probably indefinitely if it didn't have the flaw.
I don't for a minute buy the idea that the .303 is less prone to blown out cases because it's rimmed, rimless cases have very thick webs around the base and a bolt would have to move a long way to expose the thin part of the case wall.
Back when I did my firearms safety training, (in Canada), my instructor drove home the point when shooting L.E. be sure not to use any of the MKVIII or Z head stamp "machine gun" surplus ammo, as they won't take the pressure. Guess this video discredits that rumor.
The nitrocellulose propellant in the MkVIII ammunition tended to burn the leade (Throat) of the LE barrel, and the boat tailed projectile had less engagement area in the rifling than the flat based MkVII. During WWII it was only fired from LEs and Brens as an emergency measure, because it permanently reduced accuracy.
I suspect that recruits were told that it was dangerous to use because self preservation is a powerful motivator.
@@webtoedmanyou got that wrong, it was cordite that burned the barrels over time. The nitrocellulose propellant burned cooler, that’s why it was introduced for machine gun use. The boat tail bullet was the reason for not using it in rifles, as they didn’t seal well in the bore, so caused rapid wear.
I'm wondering if the length of bolt between the lugs and the case is actually helping soften the blow from the cartridge? Everything compresses to some extent under load, so that length in front of the lugs is acting like a very stiff spring. And as anyone who's tried drifting something in/out of a tight interference fit will attest, even the slightest give in the load path will soak up all your effort and make it much harder to get things moving. I guess the same applies to lugs and over loads.
Colonel Hatcher in his Hatchers Notebook explains that he did tests in the USA armoury in the early 20th Century on .30-03 cartridges that had been greased. The metallic bullet coating was causing plating in the barrels. Target shooters solved that problem by dipping the cartridge end into grease, resulting in the chamber becoming coated in grease. Examples occured of receivers and bolts failing. Colonel Hatcher discovered that the case was no longer gripping the wall and allowing excess pressure onto the bolt face. So this is not a new discovery but over 100 years old and well researched. The moral is, don't use oiled or greased cartridges and clean the chamber before firing. Though the Enfield had a flawed lug it still had sufficient strength for normal use and was not a danger. It might also have had less than optimal heat treatment, etc. All proved still with normal use.
petergosden1 Nowhere did we claim to have discovered the consequences of greased cases...
Seems more likely the neck would have trouble releasing the bullet therefore spiking pressure.
In the vids case, I wonder if it's not necessarily lack of grip, but hydraulic pressure increasing bolt thrust.
The OP mangled what Hatcher was describing, and even got the calibre wrong... What Hatcher described as happening was that they discovered that tin plated bullets created less metallic fouling. But the tin pressure-welded to the inside of the neck of the case, giving higher start pressures and hence higher peak pressures. What competitive shooters had been doing was dipping bullets in grease to prevent metallic fouling, and instructions went out NOT to do this with the tin-plated bullets under any circumstances. But people did it anyway. Thereby creating massively increased bolt thrust due to the combination of higher chamber pressure from the pressure-welding of the bullet into the case mouth, and reduced case friction due to grease in the chamber.
In our case, all we're doing is increasing bolt thrust. I will prove this one day when I have a piezo chamber pressure measurement system, probably using the Tikka T3x Arctic.
Isn't the Parker-Hale sight alone worth more than the rifle then?
Yes. In fact I had to borrow the sights off another rifle to put on this for the tests, just so we could align it safely. Without the target sights and in a ropey set of furniture with a 7.62mm barrel and 303 magazine there isn't much call for these. A complete original TR covnersion is a similar price to a good standard No.4
Good to know if I ever get a 45-70 conversion
The sight is more valuable than the rifle itself.
Should have gotten 200 grain solid copper rds. Would have caused a failure much quicker, more than likely. 145 grain is a extremely light bullet for a .300 win mag.
Can the bolt and receiver stand up to military 7.62 NATO loads? I know .308 Win is higher-pressure than the military loading, but I've read even for 7.62 NATO the receivers need to be re-heat-treated. Seems like BS to me, but I wouldn't know...
Wow, that's the first time I've ever seen anyone say they read that the receivers needed to be re-heat-treated - where did you read that nonsense? 10's of thousands of conversions both civilian and military prove otherwise... And ".308 Win is higher pressure than the military loading" is a classic case of writers comparing a max pressure spec to a service pressure spec... Neither CIP nor SAAMI differentiate: 7.62 NATO is simply a particular subset of .308 Win loadings.
@@BlokeontheRange I think this was either on Milsurps or Gunboards. Either way, it sounded like BS, and I'm happy to have seen it confirmed!
The chamber is NOT absurdly tight, as you put it, because that case head-spaces on the belt. Why would you expect it to do anything but work as normal?? 🤷♂️ You’re just firing another standard cartridge! Oiled or not. Those actions are very strong. The over hardened bolt failed, but did not leave the rifle, because the other main long lug held up as it’s supposed to.
If that was a N°4 Mk1/2 (F) FTR then it may well have had a new bolt fitted, identified by a spherical 'knob' (without the flat ) so that was supposed to have been made of a higher grade of steel.
can someone explain how the bolt is defective? noob gun person here
The join between the lug and the bolt body is heavily compromised by corrosion.
Color is a poor indicator of material or manufacturing related problems, I am unaware of color as a meaningful measure for material testing. It could be a flaw or it could be nothing. Neat video
Visible rust indicates rust ;)
Cut down,sporterised or the term i prefer,ruined! I was a bit scared for the rifle when i first saw the title,then i saw it and was relieved!
Love my Lee Enfields,mySavage no4m1 2groove shoots well under 2moa with me behind the trigger using a peep,better shooter or a scope would tighten it up further, a mate has a never issued no4mk2 Fazerkaly(sic)5 groove that was ruined and has a scope,even with it poorly stocked up it shoots 1.5moa with any ammo ive fed it, thats all old mils spec or current factory rounds,never shot any hand loads through that rifle. They seem rather underrated in many parts of the world,they don't seem to suffer as badly here in Aus as theres so many in bizzaro wildcats that there's a healthy level of respect for them from most who hav a clue,do get the occasional "rear locking actions are weak and inaccurate" but it invariably comes from somebody who has zero practical experience with Lee Enfields.Ive shot some pretty hot loads (180gr at around 2900fps)through my no4 with no problems whatsoever.They weren't intended to be that hot, older version of quickload was way out with that particular powder,could have been reloader 15 but i honestly forget.
would love to see no go gauge. I have both go & no go and have always wondered about this.