7.62mm Rifle L8: The Last Gasp of the Service Lee Enfield
Вставка
- Опубліковано 12 гру 2021
- / forgottenweapons
www.floatplane.com/channel/Fo...
Cool Forgotten Weapons merch! shop.forgottenweapons.com
After the British adopted the FAL as the L1A1 rifle, there was still an interest in converting stocks of existing No4 Enfield rifles to the new 7.62x51mm cartridge for reserve and training use. A conversion system was developed using a new barrel, bolt, and magazine - although the Sterling company was doing much the same thing at the same time and intellectual property lawsuits would close the project for nearly 10 years. By the time the lawsuits cleared up, it had become clear that the rifles were neither particularly successful nor particularly necessary anymore. The problem the British has was one of accuracy - the 7.62mm version just wasn't sufficiently accurate. A thousand were sold to Sierra Leone, and a few more used in New Zealand and by cadet organizations in the UK, but the project was basically a failure.
Contact:
Forgotten Weapons
6281 N. Oracle 36270
Tucson, AZ 85740
In the beginning (about 60 years ago), I was confused about British rifle designations. After decades of using, collecting and shooting them I became even more confused. Now.......after becoming addicted to Forgotten Weapons and watching Ian turn up more, and more, and more variations......I AM REALLY CONFUSED!🌴🍀
I wish you many more healthy years of shooting good sir!
Amen. Just when I think I have it I do not! Love these rifles.
Lee Enfield rifles are like quantum mechanics. If you think you understand it... you don't!
Happens when you think something is supposed to make sense! That’s a headache, been there, done that!
Continuous improvement in action! After every major conflict using the Lee-Enfield, changes were made based upon lessons learned. That would be after the Boer War, WWI and WWII. In my opinion, the best bolt-action military rifle ever made is a 1950's era Long Branch Lee Enfield.
A bolt action service rifle in 1965. Yeah I'd say that's pretty L8
Badum tsssss
*wheeze*
it's funny how L8 sounds like "Late" in SMS lingo. quite fitting for that rifle.
Yes, it was truly the "late smelly" in both senses. It was pretty much the last version and, because of patent issues, it was pretty much dead as a service rifle by the time it became available. [Excepting the sniper version, of course.]
Better L8 than never?
A L8 1 would be a proper designation
Talk about forward thinking lol
M8 dis rifle B l8, innit?
Just when you thought there were no more official Lee Enfield models then they go and find another one.
Another five ?
I'm pretty sure people in 200 years will keep finding obsolete energy cell Lee Enfield conversions
They still make new versions - these are, however, no longer adopted - poor orphans
@@noremorsewoodworking2258 The No. 4 patents date to the early 1940's and have long since expired. This makes it cheap for manufacturers to make new ones for the civilian market. I can test from personal experience that the No. 4 in .303 is an excellent deer rifle.
Maybe the Indian conversion come next
I like the idea of testing the yards to meters sights to see how true that was.
Gonna need that one and a .303 and a nice long range with a spotter. I'd love to see it.
@@jansenart0 sounds like a job for henry and josh
You could get a pretty decent idea just with a ballistic calculator. I don't have time right now but i might try later.
A meter is 9% longer than a yard (39.39 inch vs 36 inch), and M80 Ball has 12% higher muzzle velocity (2800 FPS vs 2500 FPS), so really the new cartridge on the meter scale is only 3% faster than the old cartridge on the yard scale. All else being equal, that’s definitely within the realm of “close enough for government work”
@@mrb692 Typical Yanks answer! LOL. One meter is 100cm, while a yard is 91.44cm ;-)
Lee Enfields are numerous up here in Canada. The Longbranch factory was built in 1940 and built No. 4 rifles and Sten sub machine guns. It was located in a suburb of Tornto. I have a lovely 1945 No.4 Mark1*.
long branch gang represent
I had a nice retired veteran re-finish and re-sight one for me, I'm convinced it's the pinnacle of wooden milsurp boltys
The 2014-2021 survival game The Long Dark actually takes note of this and has it so that Lee Enfields are the only rifles you can find in the game.
@@theknitby What? No Cooeys in the game:)?
@@silverjohn6037 Sadly no shotguns, the only guns in the game are the S&W Model 27 and the Enfield
they are common but still sell for 1500$ a piece (non-sporter)
To confirm whether or not the sights actually do work if read in meters instead of yards sounds like a job for Henry over at 9-Hole Reviews
Great idea!
Everything that needs practical verification sounds like a job for Henry over at 9-Hole Reviews :P
He is by far my favourite Chinese rooftop Korean! :P
Anders Juel Jensen for the LA riots he’d only need a 22LR bolt gun open sights and make call shots in bad guys ear canals lol.
I did a back of the envelope math, and that “yard to meter” thing is relatively close. A meter is 9% longer than a yard (39.39 inch vs 36 inch), and M80 Ball has 12% higher muzzle velocity (2800 FPS vs 2500 FPS), so really the new cartridge on the meter scale is only 3% faster than the old cartridge on the yard scale. All else being equal, that’s definitely within the realm of “close enough for government work”
Yep, and reasonably speaking, your average soldier isn't gonna be shooting at targets over 800 meters out. That far out any hit is gonna be due to luck more than precisely accurized sights. The original RFI 2A rifle actually used old No. 1 Mk. 3 sight ladders as is. The 2A1 was the variant that introduced a new sight ladder that ended at 1000 meters. I'd be curious to know if the Indians actually "proved" the new ladder, though, or if they just copied the markings from the old one and stopped at 1000.
And really, at that point? Good luck using them, consistently hitting at 800 meters with iron sights would be a challenge even for the more eagle eyed
@@Rixoli I have hit and killed a deer at 900 metres.
Rixoli just so you know, go look up F-Class open sight competition. They shoot out to 900m or 1000 yds with a rifle and sling in the prone position. And they score right up there with the scoped rifles. It’s incredible.
@@14goldmedals There’s a reason F class is a bit of an esoteric shooting competition and not something done by every grunt with a rifle. Pretty sure the national matches and competitions at Bisley topped out at 600 yards.
Ironhead2008 isn’t saying hits to 800 with irons is impossible but that it’s well above the maximum range anyone who would have been issued one of these would be expected to shoot to.
When I was a range officer with the RAFVR(T) teaching cadets, the MoD changed the shooting points from Yards to Metres. So the 100 yard shooting point became the 100 metre point.... The distance never changed, just the sign😂🤣😂🤣
thats cool.. so HMAF
Close enough for government work!
Sounds about right for the military.
:-D
so british
"ah sod it, no-one will notice the difference and who gives a toss anyway, it is not like the soviets will sue us
Here in South Africa there was another iteration of the 7.62.
It was used for Bisley.
It's basically the same as the one you showed in this video but with some differences:
1. It has a massively thick barrel. Close to an inch at the end if I remember correctly.
2. It has a rear peep sight with very fine adjustment screws.
3. The front sight is a tube tipe and the actual sight is a small circular plate, either with a pin or a hole. The plate is fixed into the tube by a tube like screw.
The one with the hole will align exactly with the hole of the rear peep sight.
Thanks for the great video.
those are the best target sights, I can't remember the name off hand but I love the set I have on my p17 american Enfield. I prefer the front sight insert with super fine crosshairs.
I want to say they're referred to as a lyman globe front sight here in the US.
@@justindunlap1235 was going to say that.
That sounds like an unusually thick barrel? Was there a reason for this? Surely not for overheating?
@@beetooex I think they’ve misremembered the thickness if not that’s one heavy fucking rifle.
Enfields are really really fun to shoot the bolt action is just 😗 fast and smooth
This gun needs to go to 9 holes reviews to see if those sights are accurate! That would be neat if it were true.
The first thing I thought too!
Henry will enjoy the rifle.
If I recall, a lot of the 7.62 Lee Enfields that ended up on the civvy market were either Sterling conversions or gunsmith-made copies thereof. The L39/L42 was a lot more popular in the civilian target shooting market.
Have great memories of using the .303 back in the 70's as a young Cadet! As well as the rifle conversion, the Bren was also converted from .303 to 7.62 x 51mm was a dream to shoot!
Likewise (at Purfleet ranges). Probably why I've now got a duff right shoulder! :-)
The 25m range at the sadly missed RAF Manston, and Milton long ranges near Gravesend Sea School (also a sadly-missed Merchant Navy training school) as a 402 (ATC) Sqn cadet in the early 1980s for me. We also shot the L1A1 SL Rifle at both shooting ranges as well. Being RAF issue SLRs, they still had undamaged wooden furniture, which no SLR had when I joined the Royal Engineers in 1984. The L85 series rifles are arguably more accurate and definitely easier to shoot and handle, but just haven't got the class of the older weapons. Ditto the L4A3 LMG compared to the light role GPMG, LSW and Minimi LMG.
As an army cadet in the UK in the late 00s, I learned to shoot with a 22. Lee Enfield and it was great fun! Seems like there's always another Lee Enfield variant to discover
The font on the book on the lower shelf is so memorable "small arms of the world". I'm sure my dad had the same book on his shelf when I was growing up in the 1980's
If that's the JHB Smith book you're writing about, I've still got my copy of the early 1980s 12th edition: more practical information in it than the otherwise brilliant Jane's book. Plus the first couple of editions of the excellent companion books 'Small Arms Today', detailling which weapons every country in the world's military used in the '80s.
I had some of those books, Ian Hogg, I think? Still around here someplace. I memorized that book as a kid, but I'm a total weirdo, I guess.
Had a chance a few months ago to purchase an Ishapore 2a1, but by the time I was ready, it was sold out and delisted. I’m still heartbroken because it’s literally the last piece needed for my collection. 😢
with the amount of video's that Jonathan has done on the Lee enfield and it's predecesors, and now this video, i feel like i know more about this rifle then i do about my airsoft guns
Shame they never made a good one for skirmish
Jonathan?
@@howardchambers9679 Jonathan Ferguson, Keeper of firearms and artillery at the Royal arms museum. he does an series on gamespot and on the museum's channel itself. he is really good.
To be fair, lot more history with these than airsoft as a whole.
@@Stoicswimfish ok, thats fair
If you see an L8 up for sale, its 99% likely a fake. There are a number of genuine full Sterling conversions around (different ejector and magazine), but also a large number of 7.62mm No4s built up out of barrels made in Belgium, UK and Canada. Charnwood Ordnance specimens are by far the most common of the trade built rifles, and these are marked with a CO-xx-xxx format number.
The accuracy issue is down to the fact that the 7.62mm round generates a different barrel vibration to that of a 303, and this doesn't always work well with the No4's standard end-damped bedding. The 7.62mm barrels tend to need a centre bedding point in order to achieve their latent accuracy.
As an owner of an Ishapore 2A in 7.62 NATO I am intrigued by this Enfield iteration. Oh I want those rear sights....
I read this as "Enfield LS" initially and was very confused, but people LS swap everything these days.
Parker Hale made a nice and inexpensive 7.62mm target rifle based on the No.4 called the T4, we sold around 40 of them to civilians in 1988 when self loading rifles were banned in the UK
I have always read and been told how the enfield was not a very strong action and yet it's apparent it was strong enough for the 7.62 round. I think the ones made in India used better steel. I watched a video recently of a no 4 rechambered in .300 Win mag. using lubed ctgs. and was amazed at how long the action held.
It's less strong than a Mauser action, but it's much stronger than it needed to be to safely fire .303 British. I've never heard of a properly-maintained Lee Enfield blowing up with in-spec .303 or .308 ammunition.
@@k3D4rsi554maq What the hell are you doing?
14 Tonnes is strong enough someone was bull shitting you.
Bar room expert !
Internet myth. The Enfield action is very strong. When used with a rimmed round it was proven in testing to be far stronger than contemporary Mauser actions using rimless rounds (due to the issue of case head support). The official publication Textbook of Small Arms records that the No1 action could withstand sustained 30 ton proofs.
The Indian steel tale appears to be a garbled interpretation of the fact that they started using a different engineering naming convention for what was actually the same grade of steel. Indian 2A and 2A1 rifles share the same receiver and bolt components as the No1s they were also making at the same time (you can even see the identical machining marks on both types of receiver), and the first 2A rifles often had bolts and receivers that were clearly reused from older 303 rifles.
@@turbogerbil2935 thank you for clarifying
I would like to own such a rifle. I like .303 British, but nowadays 7.62 x 51 is more practical in terms of ammo availability.
Ishapore Enfield rifles are available, I have one and it's a decent shooter...
The surplus .303 was just blasting ammo, none of it could hold to much accuracy. Unlike the Swiss 7.5 ammo that was incredible in those K31s.
As a British army cadet in the 1970s the full bore rifle we were routinely exposed to was the LE No4 mk2 in .303 although when we were on a base at the same time as the TA (the Reserves) we got to play with what we knew as the SLR in 7.62mm (the FAL). By the 70s the reserve were pretty much being equipped with the same as the regulars and so the cadet force got most of the remaining war surplus, a surprising amount of it ‘new old stock’ and there was still a reasonable amount of unused ammo that we happily tried to rid the world of.
I think this is the first time I’ve heard of a 7.62 conversion of the Mk2.
Well done Ian on the pronunciation of Fazakerley.
Quite a lot of No4's were converted in small and home workshops, some with commercially available kits. They may well have become "fake's" at a later date with the aid of some etching.
Love and support from Italy, love your videos because they are so High quality and full of amazing interesting content!
I had no idea this even existed… god bless you Ian
This series has brought back many memories!
Back in the 1960s I was a member of the UK Air Training Corps and we had a number of rifles that had started out as SMLEs. First there were 4 that had been sleeved down to 0.22 and had the magazine disabled so they became a simple shot bolt action rifle. I suspect they were originally Mk5s.. because they were shorter than the "DP" SMLEs we used. The ballance was poor, because the barrel was so heavy but could be very accurate.
Then there were 10 or 12 drill rifles: the DP, or Drill Purpose rifle had the firing pin cut short and the bolt welded to make it impossible to change the bolt and there was a plug in the barrel. They had brass but plates and the later bolt removal system. We used them to learn and practice rifle drill. They were heavy...anyone who has mastered the sequence "Resting on Arms, Reversed will understand.
It’s weird seeing an Enfield with such beautiful bluing.
The Ishapore Enfield, as I understand it, was the last iteration of the original #1 Mk3 chambered for the 7.62x51. They did see fit to change the metalurgy and dimensions for the Nato round, thankfully as I have 2 of them. One is all original and the other has a synthetic stock from an add in Shotgun News. That's a while back, isn't it. Both are sweet shooters.
Keep up the good work, and thanks.
I used to fire the L39 service target rifle at competitions when I served HM. At Bisley we had the 1000 yards competition and I can assure you the 7.62 is a flatter trajectory than the 303. But, for below 700 I would say the old leaf sight in yards was erm... OK ish! The L39 was the Parker hale sighted service target rifle version of the Sniper Rifle with floating barrel etc.
It's always amazing to look at No4 rifles and compare the quality of manufacture and of fit & finish between post or pre war rifles like this one and wartime production rifles, particularly early war rifles.
Thank you Ian!
The yards to meters thing also came up with the Ishapore 2A and 2A1 rifles out of India in the 60s. The 2A used the original No.1 Mk3 rear sight and you just read it as meters instead of yards, and then a new rear sight was developed for the 7.62mm cartridge on the 2A1.
I'm guessing the change from yards to meters on the site leaf was deamed "good enough" for something that was basically always going to be a reserve rifle
One of my High School Buddies had a SMLE I fired a few times. Nice action. Very smooth.
.
That was an interesting report on the 7.62mm conversion of the No.4 rifle.
When I was target shooting in the late 70s/early 80s, the conventional "wisdom" in the rifle clubs at that time was that rear locking bolts gave better long range accuracy than forward locking bolts. This, according to the "wisdom" was due to the barrel vibrations. Have you heard this theory, Ian?
I can't say that I noticed any real difference myself, but the No. 4 rifle was certainly comfortable and a pleasure to shoot- definitely my favourite at all ranges, 300 yards to 1000 yards.
The rifle was a fairly basic conversion with a new barrel and Parker-Hale aperture sights. As most target shooting in the British NRA affiliated clubs was single shot, it retained the 303 Magazine and extractor.
I did later have a 7.62mm extractor fitted and also obtained a 7.62mm magazine which fitted without any machining of the receiver needed, so I was rather surprised when you mentioned this.
On the range for practice shooting, I did try the new mag and extractor and they worked perfectly.
I really miss full bore target shooting, but I now bruise very easily. I had quite a mark on my shoulder after just a few shots with an AK47 at Orlando.
Best wishes for Christmas/Holidays and looking forward to your channel in the New Year.
Remington 788.
"Why does the New Zealand Forestry service need rifles?"
"Nazgul on fell beast, Minister"
Don't get the "Nazgul" reference, but in the '60's-ish NZ recognised the back country had a huge deer over-population problem. The NZFS was told to sort it out and set up a deer culling programme with govt-employed hunters. They had to hand in a number of deer tails each month. The programme faded away as commercial venison recovery, then live deer capture (for fledgling deer farms) arrived. Interesting bit of NZ's history.
Either that, or Moa in the deep woods.
@@MrPossumeyes Nazgul, Lord of the Rings, which was filmed in New Zealand.
@@SVSky Aahhh, cheers man.👍
@@davidgillon2762 Good point. This rifle would be good for them and the extra rounds in the mag would give a safety margin during the rut.
I wonder if that date is not more significant for not producing more if these. 1960 was the last year for entry in to National Service for all British men, creating a pool of resverists. After 1961 the British armed services were fully professional, and there was no longer a need for these as a reserve rifle.
"After 1961 the British armed services were fully professional..." Huh? There are Territorial Army (reserve) units to this very day.
@@kevinlove4356 They're volunteers, not conscripts.
@@minuteman4199 True. But they are not professional soldiers.
True story: I was a reservist once myself. And one fine day my platoon was on an Army bus to pick up some kit. When we debussed, we were met by a regular force corporal who was to be a guide to show us where to go. This individual was somewhat obnoxious, and at one point referred to the regular forces as "real soldiers." Since I was at the back of the platoon, I had no qualms about yelling back, "At least we can hold down a real job." Needless to say, this individual was furious. But the platoon commander finally intervened and politely said words along the lines of, "When we get to where we are going, I would like to have a private chat with you." That had a calming effect.
@@kevinlove4356 Those serve at their own request, they are not required too. Under National Service every make was required to serve. In some cases those reserves (haven't been TA for years by the way)are better trained than members of other countries national services.
@@somersethuscarl2938 That may all be true, but it is irrelevant. Reservists are not professional soldiers. For example, I am a professional accountant. I am also a member of the Canadian Forces Supplementary Reserve. I am not a professional soldier.
Second example: My 14-year-old son is a member of the Royal Canadian Army Cadets. RCAC is a component of the Canadian Forces Reserves. But he is not a professional soldier.
Now this would be a cool rifle to have and add to my Enfield collection!
I cant believe that even in the very end, they didnt bother to make the magazine easily removeable. It feels like such an obvious choice to do, especially with the future FAL coming along and possibly making it compatible with that magazine...
Stripper-clips were used instead. The stripper-clips were used to load the magazine, which is arguably faster than changing the magazine.
@@libraeotequever3pointoh95 I know it was used with stripper clips, but that has its downsides especially when your fingers arent dexterous such as in cold weather or under stress.
Theres a lot of downsides to clip feeding, unless its the en-bloc clip.
IIRC in British service the FN FAL was the L1A1 aka SLR (Self-Loading Rifle) as it was stopped at semi-auto unlike the FAL. There were stories of Paras taking fully automatic FALs off of Argentinians during the Falklands War. I believe Bloke has a lovely vid of an SLR in action on a range in Italy.
The rear sight leaf that was shown has double marks for each range setting...the smaller hash that one sees above the main hash is the setting for meters.
Hi Ian, have you ever seen a late model sniper rifle variant, "sporterised" by Parker Hale and known to us as the "Chest Rifle" because it was stored in a wooden chest. Designated the L42A1.
ua-cam.com/video/6tFEXzzilOg/v-deo.html
@@MAgrippa76 Thank you so much! There once was a guy who was part of our commando forward recce element and designated the patrol sniper , they were out on an extended observation patrol . Due to lack of airlift capacity, they could not be reinforced and there were no fighter ground attack aircraft available to take out an extended patrol of the Buzo Tactico,.
And so, this soon turned into a fighting patrol , he didn`t moan much, about taking a sniper rifle to a gunfight. ;)
A very incomplete version of a much larger interview, can be found here.
ua-cam.com/video/GVBZPqUmEEs/v-deo.html
Thank you , Ian .
I hired one of these No4 7.62NATO at Bisley in 1982 as I thought it would be the best rifle for 600+ yards. It blew up halfway through the Daily Telegraph shoot and fortunately a piece of the locking lug jammed in the trigger sear and saved me from a face full of bolt.
Well I was hoping you would finally cover this thing.
There was a company called Australian international arms that produced .308 lee Enfield a few years back.
The belgian army also used this rifle variant in 308 nato.
While they should've stuck to the FN FAL...
@@superwout This predates the FAL....
@@roelkomduur8073Yeah yeah yeah, I know all to well. Then they should have been more patient. Meh. This is Belgium. Not England. Only FN. Meh.
To add to the sights point... The error inherent to battlefield range estimation using the mk.1 eyeball even at 200 or 300 m, is greater than the difference between 300 yds (274 m) and 300 m, so there was really no point changing the thing to make it any more accurate (unless it was a scoped sharpshooter's rifle).
We're not talking about competition shooting here... A solder (or squad/section) would just estimate the range, set their sights & take a shot and then try to observe & adjust either sights or point of aim based and simply just fire several shots and eventually someone's going to get lucky.
Thanks a lot now I have drooled all over my T shirt, beautiful condition B.T.W.
Regular No. 4s in .303 were still in some use into the early seventies, they had to be prised out of the hands of the old sweats who did not trust these new fangled S.L.R.s that would not hold a consistent zero.
@Dan Didnot Mr Costello had a pretty good argument... Indeed, these men are fading away. Sadly.
Juggling .303 & .308 sounds like a logistical nightmare...
We accepted the FAL as the L1a1, @Forgotten Weapons Ian, not the other way around.
Yards to metres certainly sounds plausible. A cricket pitch in Australia is 20 metres long. A cricket pitch in the UK is exactly the same length at 22 yards (one chain).
So, if a bullet travels flatter, then simply adjusting your aim to the new unit of length should be of some assistance.
20m = 20,000mm, 22 yards = 22x3x12 = 792 inches = 792x25.4mm = 20,116.8mm
So not exactly, but less than half an inch is close enough for cricket work.
would be awesome to see a test comparing original sights to the sterling adjusted sights, to see if the claim is true!
I'm glad that somebody tried to keep the guns useful. That's the sort of thing I would do.
Big respect, even though the result wasn't much use to anyone.
Beautiful family of weapons, with some fantastic engineering. Makes me proud to be British!
finally, i was waiting for this
CR 60 GA is the UK MOD drawing number as issued by CDIA Royal Arsenal Woolwich. CR is the drawing prefix for rifles, GA means general assembly
60 just means it was drawing set 60 in that series.
Love it, but I have an affinity towards 7.62/.308 converted service rifles. My wish list gun to own and for you to cover is the FR-8 Spanish Mauser.
I also love the FR-8. Lovely weird conversion, confuses the hell out of folks at the range. I'll sometimes troll folks and tell them it's a rare bolt-action Garand.
I used to have a no4 converted From 303, to 7.62.
So no stripper clip, but removal magazine.
Hit metal plate at 500 meters, no problem.
Testing the sight calibration…sounds like a good crossover project with 9 Hole Reviews.
A Yard is 3 feet, while a Metre is 3 feet 3 inches. So the sights would still work, up to @ 800 yards.
Adds up pretty quickly, to tell you the truth.
0:16 - YES! Oh my god, finally a Lee Enfield I'm actually invested in wanting (aside from the riot single-shot .410 conversion)
There is another single shot .410. The Slazenger conversion done at Lithgow in the post war era. I did find an image of one by searching for "410 Lithgow single shot bolt action"
@@gotsloco1810 Saw some but they don't look as interesting as the No.1s with the full stock
A rifle I would be quite happy to own, given the relative lack of .303 these days.
I would love to see you do a video on the ishapore Lee Enfield 2A/2A1.... I would even gladly lend you the one I have to do it.
There is a spreadsheet out there with the entire Enfield designations and their significance. It's a very long sheet.
The Dominion of Canada Rifle Association (DCRA) also converted a number of No 4 Mk1 (and Mk1*) rifles to 7.62 NATO in the 50's (IIRC) for civilian target shooting - not intended for military issue. I don't know how many were converted from No 4's.
8:19 "A thousand of them were sold to Sierra Leone of all places..."
When the 5.56 mm C7 rifle was introduced into service by the Canadian Forces, there was some talk of manufacturing a bolt-action version for the Cadet Corps. This would have used the Lee-Enfield action. But it never got beyond the stage of discussion. The same was true of using a .22 semi-automatic version.
Instead, the Cadets were stuck with air rifles. In my opinion, it is just not the same if it does not go "bang!"
Does this count as another gasp of the Lee-Enfield action?
The Indian (Ishipore) 2A and 2A1 rifles are all factory-built as 7.62 rifles, not conversions, as far as I know. The receiver is different (slightly altered design as well as different steel used) though much of the rest of the gun re-uses No.1 Mk.III furniture and parts. They are not really a conversion but rather a new gun based on the Enfield and designed around most of the same parts, which is interesting in it's own right.
The meters to yards thing with the sights is also the case with the 2A rifles, which kept the same old No.1 Mk.III rear sight. Not sure how accurate it is but it seems likely that it is close enough for a rear-line rifle. The 2A1 rifle has a new rear sight.
A few years ago, I bought an old SMLE from a coworker. He only asked $50 because it was messed up and he couldn't shoot it. It was a No. 4 MK1, with Australia marked under the bolt handle. It had a magazine marked .308 Ishapore. I never shot it, so never got it straight which cartridge it actually fired. It eventually got converted to a DeLisle clone. (Which I still own) It makes me wonder now what it was.
Australia never made the No.4 Mk 1. All the Australian rifles were No.1 Mk 3 actions or No. 6 Mk 1 Jungle Carbines (which were a No.1 action with a carbine length barrel).
The Lithgow factory just hadn’t made the conversion before WW2 and just didn’t afterwards because the plan was to switch to FAL’s (as the SLR) after WW2.
Hey Ian I think you should do a new series on the forgotten vehicles in a country's army in their history
The Chieftain has that covered.
I believe the Danish Sirius Patrol still use one of the earlier variants of the Lee Enfield for use on Greenland.
It's mostly used for protection against wildlife and it's used because of the harsh conditions and reliability of the rifle.
No they use M1917 Enfields, which are a Mauser action chambered in .30-06.
Love Lee Enfield's, gorgeous rifle 👍
Gorgeous rifle, holds 10 rounds, and is highly dysfunctional
Nice overview
I can well believe them not changing the rear sight. Around 1981 At Bisley ranges, I was using one of them. Never having shot one before we were sent to the zeroing range (25m) and put 10 rounds through it. Then off to the 1000m range for the competition. I thought I had done pretty well with 38 out of 40 using iron sights. Gutted. I was way down the field. a large proportion had got maximums, and the rest of the day was spent as a knockout to get down to the winner. If memory serves me well this was a great weapon to shoot as it always dropped straight back onto the target. It was also very good indoors with a .22 barrel. Thanks for bringing back even more memories.
It would have been expensive to manufacture new rear sights when all you had to do was remember that 100 is the point blank battle sight, 200 is basically flat, 300 is maybe 1-2 clicks off, and 600 or whatever is a few more than that. How often would troops using those rifles ever even shoot at ranges beyond say 200m?
Many 762 conversions were used for NRA target shooting, in 60s and 70s, 80s, with changes to sights.Most full bore target rifles these days in use are of more modern design / manufacture in the UK.
Saw one of these at a small gunshop last summer.
3:42 is there any reason why the magazine housing (?) right next to the bottom screw was tapered? It's shape looks like it was purpose built for another shaft.
Hey Ian I recently got a K98k with a MG15 barrel on it from the factory, have you ever come across those?
The sights correct in metres to around 1000 plus metres but you need to zero using the correct height foresight. Also all 7.62’s in the UK that I have seen are proofed to 20 tons, not 19.
But Does it Strip?
Interesting. We're these made simultaneously with the ishapore 2a1 .308 SMLE?
I was thinking the same thing! Im sure the Ishapore was the last enfield type rifle in military use. Ive shot an Ishapore once and I felt the .303 rifles are a little more accurate in my opinion.
The ishapore 2a and 2a1 were made from 1964 through about the mid 1970s, but there are scattered reports of much later production dates that have not really been confirmed (If I am remembering correctly, my reference books are still in boxes from moving)
I just looked at the specs for the standard .303 vs the .308 nato of the time. At 280 yards the .303 is two inches below the .308. At longer distances the .308 drops off more steaply than .303, so at 500 yards, the .308 is 8 inches below the .303...so you know what, that is not too far off for such different calibers. I mean if you are trying to snipe with it sure that might as well be in a different time zone, but for a general service weapon, not far off at all.
What version of the Lee Enfield was the Canadian army using the in the arctic until very recently? I think I saw a video on this channel that talked about it, but don't recall which one.
It was L8 to the party I guess...
ngl fam thinking about the ejector being spot welded onto a detachable box magazine will be the reason I don't sleep tonight
I found a rifle that looks like this rifle but mag is more slanted in front, and as a long barrel about maybe 48 inches,the foregrip does not extend all the way up the barrel the foregrip is short it looks a lot like this rifle. It's on display on a wall but its bolted to the wall, so I can't take it down to really look at it. I can get a picture of it.
Sounds like a 'Bubba special' or a genuine sniper version...if its the sniper version tear it off the wall and run...getting rarer than hens teeth
I really hate to be "that guy", but the British Army adopted the FAL as the L1A1, not the L1A1 as the FAL. Sorry! Thanks for the best gun channel on the webs.
FAL, very different to British SLR.
Parts not interchangeable, including magazines
@@skylongskylong1982 i don't know why they insist using imperial for Machining, well at least not that fubar process that gave birth m14.
Very different? An AR would be "very different". I think you mean very similar.
I wonder how well the new ejector held up spot welded to the new magazine?
Not very. My first one was missing the extra bit when I got it and the next one started to show looseness after few years. Stupid prices, now.
A visit to a specialist a good workshop with simple tools to bend what is essentially "clock-spring" steel of the "reinforcing" and the right spot-welding gear fixed that problem
If you are not too worried about the "look", a little bit of "blacksmithing will get a 2A1 mag to run in a No4, as I have on my "bush rifle" No4 built from an ex-7.62 target rifle. There are also "aftermarket" 7.62 mags made for 2A1 rifles. Not always readily available, but they work with a little careful "tweaking" Some that I have encountered have ludicrously stiff springs; more at home in an M-14 mag than a bolt-action rifle..
@Ian which regiments / units where issued with this L8 Rifle in the UK if any? I'm interested because my dad was in the Coldstream Guards 2nd Bttln. during the 3 years that they changed over to the SLR & that the STEN was replaced by the STERLING. He says he remembers the BREN being converted to 7.62 x 51mm NATO. But he has never seen or heard of this L8 Conversion.
The Lee Enfield is the equivalent of using your older siblings notebook notes on a class they used to take in high school.
"You think we need some new rifles for this new caliber."
"Eeeeh... Later."
Had one of those as a marine cadet
I picked up what I think is a Charnworth Lee in 308 a few months back. The magazines... Ugh, the magazines. It's just easier to single feed the damn thing.
That "Flop" at 8:20 :D
its a dream of mine to go to a range with you Ian
Beautiful rifle too!
Wow I have to say that this is a very kool way to get the ejector set in the new mags instead of the rifle...