I submit the Enfield is the Ultimate SHTF rifle!


PDA






Wildalaska
October 8, 2004, 03:52 AM
I dare ya to prove otherwise...

Battle proven reliability!
Fast rate of fire!
Long range capability!
Fast reloading with clips!
Hard hitting!
Tough and rugged! In fact I dare say the toughesst!
Accurate!


The Enfield (No 4) has LESS flaws than any other candidate!!!!

Go on prove me wrong!

WildidareyacomeonidareyaAlaska

If you enjoyed reading about "I submit the Enfield is the Ultimate SHTF rifle!" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!
9mmepiphany
October 8, 2004, 04:39 AM
how about the M10 coming in from australia via tri-star? new production enfield No.4 chambered in 7.62x51mm feeding from m-14 mags.

actually i agree with you, as i also love the enfield No.4. my only objection has been getting cheap .303 ammo (i don't reload) and stripper clips. i have been very impressed by how fast the action can be cycled and how accurate they are.

one of my fantasy rifles is a No.4 mkII (T) chambered in 6.5x55mm...i know i'm a sick puppy :what:

WhoKnowsWho
October 8, 2004, 05:12 AM
Nah, can't be the ultimate SHTF rifle since I don't have one, so therefore, all points are null and void! :p

threeseven
October 8, 2004, 06:51 AM
http://www.darkminds.com/~drake/junk/no48x6.jpg

<3 Enfield.

I have no doubt if the SHTF one of my six Enfields would be my choice. I might take my No. 5 though, because it's nice and light :)

http://www.darkminds.com/~drake/junk/no5mk18x6.jpg

Jaeger
October 8, 2004, 08:26 AM
As long as ammo availability isn't an issue I agree with you whole heartedly! That's why I built this.

http://www.hunt101.com/img/055063.JPG

While teaching a patrol rifle course earlier this year I brought my scout out to show my AR15 wielding compatriots what a real rifle could do. I was able to easily shoot a perfect qualification score and still stay within all of the time limits. I really needed to stay on top of it with my stripper clips but it definitely can be done! :D

rbernie
October 8, 2004, 08:37 AM
As much as I like the Enfield - using your criteria, the M1 gets the nod. Greater rate of fire, no less demonstrably rugged, fast-loading, hard-hitting, yada yada.

foghornl
October 8, 2004, 08:56 AM
Hard to argue one over the other...the "Smellys" are top-notch turnbolt rifles, but I give the nod to the "US Rifle Cal .30 M1" on 2 minor points...
It is fractionally faster to relaod with the en-bloc clip than the strippers, and .30-06 ammo is USUALLY a bit cheaper and easier to find than the .303 Brit load.

That being said, I have seen some REALLY FAST guys with Smellys & stripper clips, though. I understand why some of the WWII German Infantry men thought that a lot of the Montgomery's Guys were carrying subguns of some sort.

threeseven
October 8, 2004, 09:03 AM
I believe the record is 38 aimed shots in one minute, including 4 full magazine reloads of two chargers each.

So yes, I suppose you could say it's pretty fast.

Ash
October 8, 2004, 09:30 AM
You know, the SHTF has to be defined a bit better for me to say. If you're in, say, a month-long scenario, I would go Garand all the way. It's more accurate (for me) and quicker to reload. I own both the SMLE and the No. 4, and can shoot better with the Garand. In a firefight, I would be much, much happier with a Garand.

However, if SHTF turned into post-appocalypse, I would rather have the Number 4. There are very few parts to break on the Enfield compared with the Garand. Sure, you could lose or damage the magazine, rendering it a single-shot, but that's not very likely. It doesn't require nearly the level of cleaning and lubrication that a Garand does to keep running, and you don't have to worry about recovering your clips (except you can put the charger in your pocket whereas the Garand clip pops out). Keep in mind how many Enfields the Afghani's used against the Soviets. If I were put into primative conditions for extended periods of time without backup or resupply, I would prefer the Enfield. Of course, I would also be very happy with an M39 Mosin, as it is more rugged than the Enfield, just as accurate, and with even fewer parts to break.

Ash

Hawk
October 8, 2004, 10:06 AM
I pretty much need a good trigger to shoot well. I'll even concede it's likely that my inability to work with a ratty trigger is a problem not shared by many shooting milsurps.

So, my personal ultimate milsurp SHTF or otherwise rifle is a K-31.

Battle proven reliability, Fast rate of fire, Long range capability, Fast reloading with clips, tough, etc doesn't mean much if you can't hit anything.

Like the old IDPA dude said "You can't miss fast enough to catch up"

Hey, WildJerseyDevilAlaska: is Canjar still around? In a former life, I had an Interarms mauser mark X that wasn't worth spit until it got Canjar-ized. I haven't heard anything of them in quite a while (Canjar, not Interarms).

Mulliga
October 8, 2004, 10:09 AM
I dare ya to prove otherwise...

How much ammo will you find for your precious Enfield at Wally World or the local gun shop? Can you always guarantee you'll have access to your ammo stores or reloading equipment if the SHTF?

The Enfield is a fine rifle, but IMHO if it can't be fed from anywhere in the U.S., it ain't a SHTF rifle. Just my opinion. ;)

cslinger
October 8, 2004, 10:21 AM
I don't know I still tend to thing a good ole' pump shotgun with a variety of rounds or even a high quality .22 make pretty darn good choices.

My argument being that I am not going to war. I am hiding or sneaking. If I have to fight chances are it will either be a close range affair.

I think you need utility more than tacticality. Chances are you will be doing more hunting then anything and for that you want to be quiet and be able to have enough ammo on you to sustain you for long periods of time. The .22 might not be humane if given a choice but in a bad situation it will take most game up to dear size if you do your part.

All that being said the old smelly would make a dandy TEOTWAWKI rifle for all the reasons you mentioned. I also think an AK-47/SKS would as well.

Chris

Rupestris
October 8, 2004, 10:33 AM
So, my personal ultimate milsurp SHTF or otherwise rifle is a K-31.

I agree. Being a left handed shooter the Enfields rate of fire would be deminished with me behind the trigger.
I would prefer the K31, a Win94AE, or a Pump shotgun. - All slightly more Ambi-friendly.

rbernie
October 8, 2004, 11:19 AM
If the 'long-range punch' part of the equation was removed - SKS (with an adequate rear sight) all the way. Ammo is far mo' plentiful, it's got enough punch for both medium-game and defense purposes within 150 yards, is anvil-stoopid-simple, is certainly as 'battle-proven' as the Mk4No1, has a greater rate of fire than the Enfield, and is about as accurate as most non-sporterized Enfields out to 150 yards.

Certainly, 303RR ammo is not particularly plentiful - 7.62x39 is better, .with 223 and 308 probably tops of the centerfire world. Of course, there's also probably more 22LR ammo out there than everything else combined.....

In my SHTF scenario (which doesn't involve 150+ yard sniping nor fending off maurauding brownies or other such dangerous critters), I'd reach for the SKS first and the 10/22 second.

If I were playing the game according to WildstartingthingsupAlaska's rules, I'd reach for my 308-chambered Mauser mit receiver-mounted peep sight. Now THAT is the best of both worlds - all of the attributes of the Enfield (save a minor loss of tolerance to lots of use without being cleaned in sandy and/or muddy conditions), chambered in a cartidge thats got mo' steam than the 303RR and will be plentiful until the day the world ends.

Sistema1927
October 8, 2004, 12:07 PM
I am almost with WildneveradulldayAlaska on this.

However, the basis for my "Scout" rifle was an Ishapore 2A1. All the benefits that WildthinkaboutthatamomentAlaska states, along with the availability of 7.62 NATO ammo.

lee n. field
October 8, 2004, 12:34 PM
That's why I built this.

Jaeger -- tell me about this. What front sight and barrell are you using?

Andrew Wyatt
October 8, 2004, 01:26 PM
when Building a scout, could could always convert it to .45-70 or 7.62X54R.

WildAlaska speaks truth!



AndrEnfieldsew WyRuleatt

goon
October 8, 2004, 01:32 PM
As far as ammo availability right now, Yes. 303 is pretty common where I am, and you can even get it at Wal-mart. It is pricy though.
I can't argue with the Enfield.

R.H. Lee
October 8, 2004, 01:40 PM
Enfields come in different flavors. Mine is a P-17 (30.06). I dunno if it's the "ultimate", but it certainly is accurate and reliable. .303 Brit is nigh on impossible to get around here.

AZRickD
October 8, 2004, 01:57 PM
I use an Itshootspore in .308 as my trunk gun. Cost = $78

That being said, a low-cost Yugo SKS would give it a run for the money for that purpose.

Rick

Jaeger
October 8, 2004, 02:03 PM
The barrel is a surplus 2 groove that I bought from Springfield Sporters for $20.

The front sight is from XS Sight systems.

You can see a write up of it here. (www.303british.com)

Click on the article "Saving a Burnt Out Jungle Carbine".

1moa is the norm with this rifle. It still needs a better trigger though. I have a CanWest trigger on my "need" list.

armoredman
October 8, 2004, 02:14 PM
I like my Mosin, with the cheap ammo less than $2 for 20 from J&G. I would love a Mauser in .308, though....any thoughts on that Spanish Guardia Civil 1916 short Mauser in .308?

rbernie
October 8, 2004, 02:16 PM
I'd also interested in the CanWest trigger - lemme know if yu oget it and how it works out. I have a Huber trigger on my Mk4No1, and it's not exactly what I would have liked given the high cost of the unit.

garrettwc
October 8, 2004, 02:19 PM
Jaeger that project looks real interesting but...
... link no workie. :p

I tried Mozilla and IE on a T1 line and can't get the page to load.

Jaeger
October 8, 2004, 02:29 PM
Well, I checked the link. It's the correct address. THe site must be down.

I sent the action and new barrel to Bo Wallace at Ashley Outdoors (before they were XS sight Systems). He installed the new barrel, cut it and crowned it. He installed the new front sight and adapted one of their scout mounts to fit the Enfield. He aslo relieved the stock.

The stock is a Ram Line, the rear sight is a standard micrometer sight and the scope is a Leupold Scout scope. The Sling is a Galco Ching Sling and the stock Pack is from Eagle.

It's a great setup and has accounted for several deer. It usually gets a few strange looks from other hunters in the field.

jefnvk
October 8, 2004, 02:44 PM
Riley may be on to something. 1917 Enfield, at least fixes your ammo availability. Although, my Mk.4, I think, is the best built, best feeling gun I have. Including new production.

Wildalaska
October 8, 2004, 02:46 PM
All righty then..........

1. The Enfield is tougher than the Garand
2. It is easier to find 30-06 than 303....but the prepared SHTFer will scrabble up enough ammo to have on hand

My JC from a rest shoots about 2 inches at 100.....any service grade garand does the same...

You flaming jingoists are just poed becasue there is a Eurotrash rifle thats better than our home grown product :)

WildleeleeleeAlaska

perry1963
October 8, 2004, 02:54 PM
I like the M1 myself but i read in a gun mag years ago, i don't remember wich one, the writer said that of the 4 main contries in ww2, germany, japan, england and USA, for there main battle rifle the germans and japanise choose a hunting rifle, the americans choose a target rifle and the british choose a rifle made for war.

Dr.Rob
October 8, 2004, 03:18 PM
303-very popular in Canada, so maybe in Alaska it makes sense.

As for dispatching zombie hoards? Nope there are better bullet propulsion devices that hold more bullets.

As far as a good hunting rifle? A tad heavy, but it will certainly do the job.

As far as 'tough' goes a fiberglass stock and stainless will stand up better than wood and blued/parkerized steel to weather... if you were gonna use it for say.. cracking coconuts with the butt-end then a steel butt plate is essential.

I think I prefer the 03A3 Springfield (cuz I have one) which isn't a 'target rifle' it's a copy of a Mauser.

BigG
October 8, 2004, 03:22 PM
You may be right. I just have never been able to warm up to a Smelly, or any other mil.bolt.gun atall. Bolt guns are supposed to be in African calibers, imho, WildenfieldcrazyAlaska! :D

Cosmoline
October 8, 2004, 03:27 PM
Meh. I'll keep my Mosins. For one thing, 7.62x54R ammo is far cheaper and bulk tins from the eastern block are easy to find around Alaska. Plus, 54R hits harder than the .303 and does better with bigger bullets. But mostly, I just don't like them much. Shooting an SMLE gives me the same feeling as finding a Canadian quarter mixed in with my change :D

Wildalaska
October 8, 2004, 03:36 PM
For one thing, 7.62x54R ammo is far cheaper and bulk tins from the eastern block are easy to find around Alaska.

Corrosive Third World surplus....OK...thats fine, Ill take Win White Box or HSM.....and pay the few extra $$

Plus, 54R hits harder than the .303 and does better with bigger bullets

Whoa, OK now you are contradicting the first point...BTW tell me what the factroy ballistic differece is btw 7.62x54R and 303....hint...its nothing....

But mostly, I just don't like them much

Ah but that doesnt mean that it is better...in fact I would argue that the Mosin is far worse than the LE

WildsothereyamosinfreakAlaska:neener:

Sylvilagus Aquaticus
October 8, 2004, 05:22 PM
Yeah, .303 and 7.62x54R are both .311/.312 projectiles, really.

You're starting to sell me on the idea, WA....even though I have a vault full of M-N's.

Maybe I'd better start looking for a SMLE to do a jobby like Jager did.
Makes more sense than cobbling up one of my Mausers....and I don't feel bad about bubba-izing an Ishy.

Regards,
Rabbit.

Cosmoline
October 8, 2004, 05:31 PM
Here's the high end performance for each rifle:

NORMA 7.62x54R
150 grain bullet at a MV of 2,953 fps with ME of 2,905 ft. lbs.



Hornady Light Mag .303
150 grain bullet at a MV of 2,830 fps with ME of 2,667 ft. lbs


And that's giving the .303 the advantage of a +p light magnum loading. With handloading the 54R can be cranked up another notch beyond Norma.

Granted, FMJ ball is similar with these cartridges, but the edge still goes to 54R. The 54R is in the same class as the .30'06 or 8x57JS, while the .303 is on par with the .308 or 7x57.

Andrew Wyatt
October 8, 2004, 05:46 PM
of course, you culd have your gun rechambered in .303 epps (basically .303 AI)


it allos you to shoot standard .303 ammo and you can handload to 7.62X54R velocities, should you care.


the enfield, in .303, is arguably the best all around field rifle. especially in scout rifle or jungle carbine guise.


I'd like to see the mosin adherents explain what makes their rifle superior, besides a questionable increase in velocity.

The enfield in stock form has better sights, better trigger, larger magazine capacity and a better safety than the mosin, Better sights trigger and larger magazine capacity than the mauser , and a larger magazine capacoty than the 03a3.

Vern Humphrey
October 8, 2004, 05:56 PM
Quote:
-------------------------------------------
Enfields come in different flavors. Mine is a P-17 (30.06). I dunno if it's the "ultimate", but it certainly is accurate and reliable. .303 Brit is nigh on impossible to get around here.
-------------------------------------------

The P-17 (or more correctly, "United States Rifle M1917) isn't a Lee design at all -- it's basically an M98 Mauser, modified to cock on closing, with a different safety.

Quote:
--------------------------------------------
I like the M1 myself but i read in a gun mag years ago, i don't remember wich one, the writer said that of the 4 main contries in ww2, germany, japan, england and USA, for there main battle rifle the germans and japanise choose a hunting rifle, the americans choose a target rifle and the british choose a rifle made for war.
----------------------------------------------

That was said about World War ONE rifles. The objection to the Springfield was its fine, elaborate sights. (The M1, of course is a World War TWO rifle).

The M1903A3 (also WWII), with it's receiver-mounted aperture sight was a much better battle rifle than the M1903 of WWI.

The M1 is generally conceded to have about the finest battle sights of any military rifle. When coupled with the rate of fire, ease of loading, power and accuracy, those sights make it about tops.

Quote:
----------------------------------
of course, you culd have your gun rechambered in .303 epps (basically .303 AI)
------------------------------------

I have an M1905 Ross. These .303 caliber rifles had their chambers deepened to overcome extraction problems in the mud of the trenches of WWI. Mine produces cases that look a lot like .303 Epps automatically. I use a neck resizer only on this rifle.

Gewehr98
October 8, 2004, 06:25 PM
I agree. Gratuitous pic of my own version of the best Lee-Enfield go-to gun:

http://mauser98.com/jc-3.jpg

Pee Ess: There's no such thing as a P-17 Enfield. There was a Pattern 1914 Enfield, aka P-14 Enfield, chambered in .303 British. This rifle was a modified Mauser action, considerably different in design and function from the Lee-Enfield rifles. The U.S. Enfield, M-1917 was a logical outgrowth of the P-14, albeit chambered in .30-06, and issued to our doughboys in WWI to make up for the lack of available 1903 Springfields. It was NEVER designated as a Pattern 1917, Pattern 17, or P-17. Now you know the rest of the story. ;)

Cosmoline
October 8, 2004, 06:32 PM
I'd like to see the mosin adherents explain what makes their rifle superior, besides a questionable increase in velocity.

Because my Finns got the funk! Ooooh yeah baby. You know it. They are DOWN with their own bad selves.

Andrew Wyatt
October 8, 2004, 06:33 PM
I daresay that was the most persuasive argument ever.

LONG LIVE THE MOSIN!

P95Carry
October 8, 2004, 06:45 PM
I'll thow in a quick Enfield vote .. and that'd probably just as likely be the Jungle as a MkIV. Like Wild says ... that Jungle can really shoot pretty tight at 100 .. I find the peep sight excellent.

Arguably the Mauser bolt is the stronger .. but for me the Enfield is way faster reloading as the bolt runs true all the time .. danged Mauser bolts are too ''wobbly'' IMO!


Sistema .. your Ishy ....... does it group OK? Mine is real poor grouping and have not shot it much because of that. Using mil ammo BTW.

Vern Humphrey
October 8, 2004, 06:49 PM
Quote:
--------------------------------------
Arguably the Mauser bolt is the stronger .. but for me the Enfield is way faster reloading as the bolt runs true all the time .. danged Mauser bolts are too ''wobbly'' IMO!
---------------------------------------

The bolt on my M1 Garand works just fine in rapid fire.:D

rbernie
October 8, 2004, 06:56 PM
Hornady Light Mag - 150 grain bullet at a MV of 2,830 fps with ME of 2,667 ft. lbs And lemme tell you this about that - shooting the LightMag 303 stuff in either of my Enfields flattens primers pretty alarmingly. I'll not do that again.

But this all misses the point - IF you can find 303RR locally (or stockpile accordingly), its slightly lower performance relative to a Russkie 7.62x54R or 308 or 30-06 is largely academic when compared to the platform benefits of the Mk4No1. The Enfield is sufficiently mo' better that the Moisin in all respects that the Moisin really can't be saved (in this discussion) by its more powerful cartridge.

But, of course, all of this presumes that we're talking about stock platforms. I still maintain that a Mauser 98 in 308 with a decent Williams or Lyman receiver-mounted peep sight TROUNCES the Enfield in evey capacity except mud-tolerance.

atek3
October 8, 2004, 06:58 PM
Among bolt actions, enfield definatly wins. I will submit however, that my M-39 finn mosin has a few nice advantages. With mojo double aperature sights, my M-39 can probably out do most any enfield in the accuracy department. Also it has an 1898 reciever, so until TEOWAWKI, it isn't legally a 'firearm' which makes less 'confiscateable' (for now)

atek3

Wildalaska
October 8, 2004, 07:03 PM
Yep but in all around reliability with minimum maintenance under trying conditions (remember there is no power, no running water, volcanic ash everywhere, Demonrat liberal zombies running everywhere to feed on Bush suporters)...gimme the Enfield!

The true test was in the mud of Passchendaele, guarantee that the M1 would not have passed the test...

But here..lets do this.....

Find some goey swamp mud...open the action of a Garand, fill it full of mud...open the action of an Enfield...fill it full of mud...then clean it out...which one ya gonna back in action faster?

WildtheultimatetestAlaska

Vern Humphrey
October 8, 2004, 07:11 PM
Quote:
---------------------------------------
The true test was in the mud of Passchendaele, guarantee that the M1 would not have passed the test...
---------------------------------------

The M1 passed the test of two years of trench warfare that characterized most of the Korean war -- under harsher conditions than Passchendaele. It passed the test of the Solomons, New Guinea, the Aleutians, and the Bulge.

It functioned well in the worst jungles in the world -- the triple canopy of Viet Nam. I carried one myself (after my issue M2 Carbine got wrapped around a tree.)

Matt G
October 8, 2004, 07:30 PM
I like the SMLEs. I have shot them a lot, and carried them hunting a good deal, and done some very good work with them. I think that they're a superb all-around rifle for the money, and can certainly do a variety of tasks.

But "ULTIMATE SHTF rifle"?!? I beg to differ.

The two-piece stock creates bedding issues.

The rimmed cartridge must be carefully loaded in the stripper clips, and carefully loaded in the rifle. In times of stress (such as... uh, battle), this can be problematic. Getting your top rim behind the rim of the next one coming up creates a complete stoppage.

They're heavy.

The actions are NOT all that strong. Strong,yes. But not THAT strong.

What is the advantage over, say, an AR10, or an FN-FAL?



I have and love my Springfield 1903. It's mighty accurate, and has a stronger action than a SMLE. The sights are on par, or slightly better, depending on the model of Smelly. The .30-'06 cartridge is significantly more powerful than the .303 cartridge. The stock is easier to keep tuned for accuracy. The cartridge is rimless. The stripper clips are less clunky and easier to transport.

Now, it's true that the SMLE is a REALLY fast bolt-action, with its cock-upon-closing feature. It's true that the SMLE has an unusually high-capacity for a bolt-action, with its 10-rd magazine. It's true that the SMLE is pretty quick to reload, with its detatchable box magazines and stripper-clip top reloadability.

But what does it have, really, over a good reliable, accurate .308 semi-auto rifle?

Dave Markowitz
October 8, 2004, 08:15 PM
A Lee-Enfield is heavy compared with an AR-10 or a FAL???

I happen to agree with Wildrullebritanniaallaska. FWIW, I've owned a variety of the rifles mentioned in this thread so I have some basis for comparison. E.g.:

I used to own a 1944 Springfield M1.

I currently own four Lee-Enfields: a No.4 Mk.I, a No.4 Mk.II, No.1 Mk.III* SMLE, and a No.5 Mk.I Jungle Carbine.

I have an M1891/30 Mosin-Nagant, a Finnish m/1891, and a Finn m/1939.

Also a VZ-24, Kar-98k, and a Turkish M1938.

If SHTF = TEOTWAWKI, I'm grabbing the No.4 Mk.I. It's as accurate as my M1 was and I've shot it out to 300 yards, scoring hits on man-sized pop-ups (at the Ft. Indiantown Gap range). .303 British is powerful enough for anything that walks in N. America, short of grizzly bears. It's also pretty commonly available.

The No.4 is rugged. It's easy to maintain. It's reliable. It has better ergonomics and sights than any other military bolt action rifle, even taking into account that I'm left handed.

If SHTF means a localized, temporary disturbance, I'd be more likely to grab my Mini-14 or AR-15.

Sistema1927
October 8, 2004, 08:20 PM
Quote:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
your Ishy ....... does it group OK? Mine is real poor grouping and have not shot it much because of that. Using mil ammo BTW.
------------------------------------------------------------------------

I had the barel chopped to 19" and re-crowned. With Portugese or Aussie milsurp I generally get approx. 2" groups at 100 yds. using a 2.5x pistol scope from a bench.

More accurate than the "minute of man" accuracy I need for this particular rifle.

Cosmoline
October 8, 2004, 08:22 PM
Why favor the No. IV mk 1 over the No.1 Mk. III?

Kaylee
October 8, 2004, 08:35 PM
Guess it all comes back to what "SHTF" means for you. Living presently in East TN, the need for a general-purpose rifle that could double as a large game rifle if "SHTF" is minimal -- what big game there is would be gone in a week.

You know what this means Vern? No seasons and SCREW the bag limit!
:)

Thus, a little .22 or even box trap for squirrels and the like, and some intermediate-chambered people popper for um... varmints.. makes more sense for around these parts.

In a place with more critters and less people (*sigh*).. the Enfield makes more sense. Personally I prefer the Mauser action to the Enfield, Springfield, or Mosin, but they'll all do the job I reckon. Heck, a decent commercial sporter would do just fine as well.

Dave Markowitz
October 8, 2004, 08:40 PM
I just remembered this point in favor of the Lee-Enfields -- the excellent way they handle gas escaping from a cracked or broken case. You can have a complete case head separation in a L-E and not know it until you open the bolt. In contrast, you'll get gas back in your face if you experience the same thing in a Mosin.

Wildalaska
October 8, 2004, 08:46 PM
The M1 passed the test of two years of trench warfare that characterized most of the Korean war -- under harsher conditions than Passchendaele

Pshaw! Read some accounts of the Chosin resevoir!

It functioned well in the worst jungles in the world -- the triple canopy of Viet Nam

Dont think that the Tommies packin Enfileds in Malaysia and Burma and New Guinea would characterize RVN as "the worst"

The two-piece stock creates bedding issues.

So bed it...my JC is bedded...

The rimmed cartridge must be carefully loaded in the stripper clips
Thats the purpose of clips...to prevent poor loading in the heat of battel...all my SHTF ammo is on clips

What is the advantage over, say, an AR10, or an FN-FAL?



Weight, ergonomics, battel proven.....

Why favor the No. IV mk 1 over the No.1 Mk. III?

Better sights.....


WildaintthismorefunthanpoliticsAlaska

greg531mi
October 8, 2004, 08:53 PM
Most 303's have sewer pipe for bores. Too many people shoot surplus ammo, and then don't clean the bores. Now, I do have a 308 Enfield and a couple of 308 Mausers, with great bores. Why? 308 was never made with corrosive ammo. Went to the local gun store today, had a Century 308, converted to Mark 5, with a bore that you could eat on, next to it was a couple of orginal 303 Mark 5's with bores of sewer pipe.
Also, with 308, you don't have to carry two calibers of rifle ammo, and just face it, 303 surplus ammo is about gone! Also, 303 don't fit in my HK's!!!
303 is a caliber of the past, fading into the sunset, like the 8mm Mauser, and a host of other calibers not produced today in new guns.
If you do make one a SHTF gun, make sure you have enough 303 stashed!!!

Vern Humphrey
October 8, 2004, 08:57 PM
Quote:
--------------------------------
Pshaw! Read some accounts of the Chosin resevoir!
--------------------------------

I know people who were there. And in '80 and '81 I was Deputy Operations Officer of the 2nd Infantry Division in Korea. I know Korean officers who were there, too.

Weapons failures fall into two categories -- systemic flaws and lack of maintenance. Under severe conditions -- very cold weather, or very muddy conditions, perfectly good weapons may fail until the troops learn to care for them.

Quote:
--------------------------------------
Dont think that the Tommies packin Enfileds in Malaysia and Burma and New Guinea would characterize RVN as "the worst"
--------------------------------------

I once was trained by a Captain who had been a corporal with Merrill's Marauders -- Buster Skelton was his name. He had a very high opinion of the M1 rifle

I had the honor of serving with Australians in Viet Nam, many of whom had been in New Guinea (they train there) and they seemed to think the Viet Nam jungle was about as bad as anything they'd ever seen.

I spent a year in Singapore, training the Singapore Army, and that's the same jungle as Malaysia (only separated from it by the Straits of Lahore.) I conducted training exercises in Borneo -- which in my humble opinion is worse than the jungle in Malaysia and Singapore.

I'll go with Vietnamese triple canopy jungle in the monsoon, and defy anyone to find worse. :D

rbernie
October 8, 2004, 09:00 PM
Now, it's true that the SMLE is a REALLY fast bolt-action, with its cock-upon-closing feature. Ya know, I've heard this said a million times and I just don't get it. The cock-on-close feature is the ONLY thing that I literally HATE about the Enfield. It's WRONG. It takes so much force to close and turn the bolt that I can't maintain a good cheekweld and target picture while I work the bolt. It slows me down to no end. (And yes - I have this same issue with my 95 Mauser.)

So what's the secret method for working the bolt that I've been missing? Why am I the only one that doesn't get this? ;)

Vern Humphrey
October 8, 2004, 09:07 PM
There are basically three ways to work a bolt action (I know, there are some more specialized ways, but they aren't at issue here.)

The first is thumb-and-forefinger -- just grab the bolt handle the natural way and lift up, pull back, push forward and push down. This is the method most people use.

The second is the "cupping" technique. With this technique, you turn the palm of the right hand toward your face, and lift the bolt with the cupped palm, sweeping it back. At the end of the stroke, you reverse the hand and push the bolt forward and down vigorously. This is the best way to work stiff military bolts, especially cock-on-closing bolts.

The third way is for VERY smooth actions -- you position your hand flat against the stock -- thumb pointing up, fingers forward, and rock the hand backward and forward. Very fast with the right gun -- such as a 50-year old Model 70 Palma Match rifle.

Andrew Wyatt
October 8, 2004, 09:17 PM
It takes so much force to close and turn the bolt that I can't maintain a good cheekweld and target picture while I work the bolt.


WHereas on the mauser and mosin, it takes so much force to lift the bolt that i can't keep any kind of cheek weld.

Cosmoline
October 8, 2004, 09:18 PM
Vern's made a good point there that's rarely explored enough. The third method listed is very similar to the method I once saw illustrated with one of the old straight-bolt Swedes. It allowed for extremely rapid fire.

With my Mosin I use the palm and kind of slap it open, gripping the knob on the back stroke if I want to get the bras to fly real high and impress people. I re-engage it with just my thumb. I've always had a tough time with Enfield bolts because I find myself gripping the knob with my fingers for the full stroke. I'm irritated because the forward stroke is the hard one and I'm used to it being the easy one.

rbernie
October 8, 2004, 09:40 PM
I normally will pry the bolt away from the stock (rotating it counterclockwise) with my right forefinger, bring it back with my cupped hand, rotate my hand around it as I reach the end of the bolt travel and push it forward with the meaty base of my right thumb, finally rotating it clockwise with my cupped fingers.

I guess that I don't notice the issues with cocking on opening because the rifle's already in recoil and my target view has already been interrupted. It's the forward-n-downward push at the end of the cock-on-close that just seems to come at the same time as when I'm reacquiring the target.

SpookyPistolero
October 8, 2004, 10:00 PM
First off, Id like to thank WilddistractionondebatenightAlaska for giving me a break from the headache of political threads and back onto more fun things like SHTF rifles.

I would agree that a good bolt action is definitely a good stick to reach for should trouble arise. It should be fast to operate, and to load, and be military in origin. The Enfield fulfills this scout role wonderfully. On these rifles there is less to go wrong. Possibly more importantly, it is much more politically correct and less likely to draw attention and get you into trouble with whatever law might be around.

Depending on where youre at, a bolt action might not be the ticket when trying to solve numerous problems at once, so backing it up (somewhere at home with quick access) with a good semi like an AK or FAL seems very prudent.

The ammo concerns with 303 are valid, and I dont think it would remain very plentiful if any long term problem occurred. Stocking up is a solution to this, but accidents/theft/etc could make a bad day worse. My pseudo-scout mosin is my stick of choice because of this. Its been adequately bubba'd up, with a lovely turned down bolt (angled, not straight down), scout scope, and chopped and recrowned barrel. Its now my favorite rifle, being fast to operate, easy to reload, and extremely well balanced. On top of this, the 7.62x54 round should prove to be very common even in rough times. The argument that caliber X has more velocity/energy than caliber Z doesnt really hold water since at any practical distance, any cartridge above the 303/308 power level will do just fine.

To expand on a previous point, I think its a dangerous notion to depend on an EBR as your go-to SHTF piece. If the law is going crazy snatching up anything that looks like trouble and youre in the warpath, your piece will be gone. I think the thousand bucks spent on the semi could be spent on more ammo to practice properly working the bolt-action. But honestly, all these thoughts are worth what you paid for em.

-SpookylovestheseSHTFthreadsPistolero

Heavy Barrel
October 8, 2004, 10:25 PM
Yeah,but it still is one ugly piece.:barf:

goon
October 8, 2004, 10:41 PM
While it is true that the Mosin Nagant is a little more powerful than the .303, for all practical purposes, they do the same thing.

I have an M-39 and and SMLE. Of the two, I would take the M-39, but only because for me, it is that "one rifle". I have found my dream rifle, and it is a 60 year old Finn. It is deadly accurate, simple, durable, and tough. Mine also happens to be quite beautiful, with just enough meat on the rear end. :D The "meat" makes the recoil so soft that you can shoot it all day and go home feeling great.

Having said that, the SMLE is one hell of rifle. It will lay some smack on you fast and hard. The action on an Enfield is as quick as you will find on any turnbolt, and with its 10 round mag and strippers, it is fast. The cock on close works just fine when you work the bolt hard and fast like it was made to be worked. If you imagine that there are angry Germans shooting back at you, it helps. ;)

Both will reach out much farther than I have any business shooting and will make a mess of whatever they hit when they get there. I will agree that while I can find .303 within about 20 minutes, I can order 7.62x54 noncorrosive ammo cheaper. I can get 60 rounds of Wolf 7.62x54 locally for what I buy 20 rounds of .303 for. I can get 500 rounds for my Mosin Nagant for $100. It is true that you can't compare Wolf to Winchester, but both go bang and price is a factor. I would rather I don't know of any deal on .303 that will get me that much ammo for that price.
Unfortunately, I haven't shot my SMLE in a couple years because of the price of ammo for it, but I am going to use it to hunt this year.
I am planning to start handloading for both as well, so hopefully price won't be as much of a factor.

Jaeger
October 9, 2004, 12:18 AM
What, no advocates of the Carcano? :evil:

Gewehr98
October 9, 2004, 12:55 AM
Although, as witnessed by the events at Dealey Plaza nearly 41 years ago, it has the makings of a damned fine varmint rifle! ;)

jame
October 9, 2004, 01:10 AM
Whoa.

Now that was a little cold.

Wildalaska
October 9, 2004, 01:15 AM
Dude now that is soooooooooooooooooooooo rude and totally againts everything this Board stands for!



















Bwaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaahahahahahahahahahahahaha

WildgototloveagoodonelinerAlaska

bullfrog99
October 9, 2004, 01:37 AM
I think you are close on all counts except the magaziens. There is nothing quick about magazine changes with the Enfield no4 series. Best sights on any issue combat gun period in my opinion though.

BruceB
October 9, 2004, 02:43 AM
The Lee Enfield rifles were not intended to be used with several magazines, and loose (out of the rifle) Enfield mags do not hold cartridges very securely.

The rifle was intended to be loaded with chargers ("strippers", on this side of the pond) and the training in charger-loading the rifle was extensive and intense. I know, because the Canadian Army trained me on the #4 Mk 1.

The issue of the rimmed cartridge was simply not a problem AT ALL in the military. Soldiers knew how to load both the chargers and the rifle, and combat-packed ammunition was supplied already-loaded in cloth bandoliers, two pre-loaded chargers per pocket. Of course, it still made sense to actually CHECK to ensure that each charger was properly loaded.

The training manual for our #4 Rifles stated very explicitly (should be just about an exact quote): "When fewer than five rounds remain in the magazine, the magazine shall immediately be replenished with an additional charger of five rounds." Here's where the sustained-firepower of the Lee Enfields was maintained.

Note too, that many later-issue #4 and #5 rifles have their single magazine serial-numbered to match the rifle.

I'd be mighty happy to use a #4 or #5 as my SHTF rifle. I saved my life with a #5 one morning, I believe, and it was under EXTREME pressure and close-range, high-speed shooting....about two feet. Truly, the #4-5 is a tried-and-trusted companion to me.

Sunray
October 9, 2004, 03:02 AM
Wildalaska, I agree with you except for one thing. Ammo availability. It's hard to beat the 100% reliability of a No. 4, but .303 Brit ammo isn't common everywhere. Especially Stateside. .30-06 and .308, on the other hand, is readily available anywhere. So is 12 ga shotgun ammo.
bullfrog99, one doesn't change mags with a No 4 or a No 1 MkIII. If you don't have stripper clips, you just fill the mag while it's in the rifle with loose rounds.
Enfields just aren't the same as a regular mag fed rifles. It's no big deal to load an Enfield mag while said mag is in the rifle. Trust me. The Brits designed this rifle for fighting. The standard way to load them was with 5 round stripper clips, not by changing mags.Target shooting was not a consideration. Target shooting was nothing more than training.

Andrew Wyatt
October 9, 2004, 03:14 AM
I beg to differon the magazine change speed. I've practiced a lot, and it's about as fast as an m-14 magazine change.

Wildalaska
October 9, 2004, 03:19 AM
Ammo ammo ammo.........

What you guys mean is CHEAP ammo............

Sorry I can go into Wal Mart and buy 303 up here...so the prepared survivior buys 2000 rounds of win white box, spends some time clipping it up, gettin some bandoliers, etc...

Isnt that what prep is about?

Nope no one has yet to defeat the proposition..........

The Enfield is the ultimate SHTF rifle


WildihavespokenAlaska

The_Antibubba
October 9, 2004, 04:00 AM
So is the Enfield action strong enough to be rechambered for 7.62 Russian? The cartridges are very close, and Mosin ammo is dirt cheap right now-a couple of spamski cans and you are set. And corrosive ammo won't corrosode if you clean your rifle after shooting.

Gabe
October 9, 2004, 05:15 AM
British Army did convert some sniper variants to fire 7.62Nato.

Badger Arms
October 9, 2004, 07:46 AM
What's all this talk about the .308? The reason one uses the .303 is because it's a tapered case with a HUGE rim and runs at a decent, moderate pressure. The 7.62x51 is a nearly straight case that runs at higher pressures to attain its velocity. the .303 is not as sensative to type of powder and can be EXTRACTED reliably from firearms which fire said cartridge.

Now, I won't say it's the ultimate. I think the Mosin Nagant is a decent number myslef. I prefer a gun longer than the M44 and M38 carbines, however. The MN is not sensative to rimlock either. Being a straight magazine with a cartridge interrupter, I can't imagine a more reliable feed system. Extraction is about as positive as positive can get. The sights are more simple on the MN and about as clear as anything to see and operate. The MN has a shorter standard stock (I have kids).

rbernie
October 9, 2004, 11:10 AM
What's all this talk about the .308? In a SHTF situation, most folks will have far more ready access to 308 than 303, especially those of us that aren't particularly close to the Canadian border.

My local WallyWorld carries a total of four boxes of 303 and about four hundred boxes of 308. When I run out of what 303 I have stockpiled, I'm going to have to rely upon the local supply chain, and that effectively makes the Mk4No1 an albatross.

Which is why I also have a Mauser 308, and may just pick up a Enfield 2A. :)

Dave Markowitz
October 9, 2004, 11:33 AM
So is the Enfield action strong enough to be rechambered for 7.62 Russian? The cartridges are very close, and Mosin ammo is dirt cheap right now-a couple of spamski cans and you are set. And corrosive ammo won't corrosode if you clean your rifle after shooting.

As a matter of fact, it's been done: See http://www.jpfo.org/smle.htm

It's kinda interesting, in a perverted sort of way.

Jaeger
October 9, 2004, 11:44 AM
There is (was) someone who was converting Enfields to 7.62X54R a while back. For the life of me I can't remember who the heck it was or what the conversion entailed. I think it was a pretty simple rechambering job.

Personally, I've been tempted to ream my chamber out to 303 Epps. It still allows you fire standard 303 Brit. ammo while being able to step your reloads up a notch. As a side benefit, case life is supposed to be greatly enhanced.

It's too bad the supply of 303 Greek ammo (HXP) dried up. That was great ammo! I lucked into 800rnds of it still sealed in tins earlier this year. Winchester white box is excellent ammo. Sellier and Bellot makes some very good, affordable ammo. I've also had excellant results with Century's Hotshot ammo. They offer FMJ and soft point ammo. Accuracy with the Hotshot ammo has been very good (1.25 moa) and I can buy it locally for $28 for 200rnds.

Jaeger
October 9, 2004, 11:45 AM
That's the conversion I was thinking of! Thanks Dave.

Biff
October 9, 2004, 02:08 PM
Okay, too much thinking could get expensive!

Here is my idea: the WildWest Convertible!

Take one #3 or #4 Enfield. Modify it so that it becomes a take-down similar to the WWG Co-Pilot. Supply a 20" .45-70 (or Wild West's magnumized .45-90) barrel and a 24" .303 barrel with scout mounts. Supply an extra bolt head for tha .45-70 rim if necessary. Put a WWG ghost ring on the reciever.

...as if Steve didn't have enough to do...

Wildalaska
October 9, 2004, 02:24 PM
Bwaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaahhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhahahahahahahaha

WildimnotshowingthatonetoanybodyAlaska

rbernie
October 9, 2004, 02:39 PM
But the interesting part of all of this is that NOBODY is trying to sell the idea of a levergun (even one of WildihavetoomuchtimeonmyhandsAlaska's own creations) as the ultimate SHTF rifle.

I find that, as Mr Spock used to say, fascinating.

Wildalaska
October 9, 2004, 03:04 PM
But the interesting part of all of this is that NOBODY is trying to sell the idea of a levergun (even one of WildihavetoomuchtimeonmyhandsAlaska's own creations) as the ultimate SHTF rifle.

Lever action rifles I submit are more specialized tools...the ones we make are not optimum for SHTF for the following reasons:

1. In the 457 and 50 calibers, the recoil is far more potent than even the nastiest of the classic SHTF rifle...
2. Range, even with 30/30s, is limited to 200 +/- yards...
3. Both 457 and 50 require specialized loads
4. Shooting lever guns from the prone position is harder than a bolt gun....

If I am gonna be stuck with nothing but large furries around, gimme a 457 (kill anyhtibng on the planet and use shot shells)...but if I am worried aboutr 2 legged demonratkerrryitemutantleftiezombies, gimme that thetre enfiled


WildenfieldAlaska

Biff
October 9, 2004, 03:04 PM
Wild...

I got a few ideas on how to do it. This would open up the CA and AU markets for Jim. Possibly a good light African rifle as well.

goon
October 9, 2004, 05:13 PM
If we are gonna go ultimate Grizzly defense rifle, maybe someone could come up with a 45-70 AK.
I still love the leverguns too though.
If we are going to pull them into the SHTF rifle debate, I am thinking that the 99 Savage 308 is the best candidate. It is about the only lever gun that will match performance with a bolt action. It is true that there are a few Browning 1895's and some Winchester 88's out there, but I still think the Savage would be the best candidate.

I guess there are Browning BLR's too, but I don't know much about them.

Back to the original thread though, anyone know anything about the new AIA Enfields? I contacted Tri-Star a few weeks ago and the word is that the M-10 is currently available and that others will be shortly. I am planning to replace my FAL with one when I get employed again.
In the mean time, does anyone else have one yet? Has there been a gun-mag evaluation done on them yet?
I am thinking that they have HUGE potential.

Gewehr98
October 9, 2004, 06:12 PM
If we are gonna go ultimate Grizzly defense rifle, maybe someone could come up with a 45-70 AK.

Not the best kept secret, but I'm building one as a prototype at this very moment. I plan on testing it out on the Florida feral hog population. ;)

Wildalaska
October 9, 2004, 06:18 PM
I got a few ideas on how to do it. This would open up the CA and AU markets for Jim. Possibly a good light African rifle as well.

Nope, nope nope no Enfiled conversions...

WildnopenopeAlaska

Sulaco
October 9, 2004, 07:06 PM
In 30-06.

http://www.winchesterguns.com/prodinfo/catalog/images/535012m.jpg

Feanaro
October 9, 2004, 07:51 PM
Sorry I can go into Wal Mart and buy 303 up here...so the prepared survivior buys 2000 rounds of win white box, spends some time clipping it up, gettin some bandoliers, etc...

Isnt that what prep is about?


Not all of us are as economically well off as you, jelly roll. ;) For the price of an Enfield and that much ammo, I could buy an AK and three or four times that much ammo locally. Or if we allow out-of-state purchases, an M48A and a ton of Yugo 8mm from ammunitionstore.com. Heck, I can't even FIND .303 of any sort round these parts. Sure, a pleb like myself could buy the ammo little by little but what if the commie zombie JBT U.N. Grizzly bears attack before then? What if part of your stock is destroyed in a tragic smelting accident? ;)

Wildalaska
October 9, 2004, 08:29 PM
Jelly Roll?

Not plural?

Dude I pull my shirt off I got more rolls than a Jewish Deli!!!!!

Anyway, back on topic, may I kindly direct your alls undivided attention to reaerch the various ammo suppliers wherein you can buy 303 ammo at not much more than Russkie new manufacture...yes Russkie surplus is cheaper,...

but come on, when the mutantaliencommies are attacking, ya gonna trust yer families life to a lesser platform just becasue its cheap???

WildithinknotAlaska

Gewehr98
October 9, 2004, 10:21 PM
Pretty darned cheap. Still sitting on a bunch of Sellier & Bellot .303, and one of my Dillon 550 conversion kits is set up for .303, with a big bag of Winchester unfired brass sitting nearby. I'm not worried, I figure 1000 rounds is enough for a while. Heck, I figure 1000 rounds on hand for each of the 24 calibers I shoot and reload for is at least adequate. ;)

Feanaro
October 10, 2004, 01:15 AM
Anyway, back on topic, may I kindly direct your alls undivided attention to reaerch the various ammo suppliers wherein you can buy 303 ammo at not much more than Russkie new manufacture

True enough, there are places I'm sure. I've never looked though. But I can get heaps of 7.62x39 Wolf or Barnaul locally as well. I might find a box or three of .303 if I look real hard. Now if I had 2000 rounds on hand, that's another story. But in an emergency situation I probably wouldn't have it. I don't have two hundred rounds on me, between three rifles. I would need to obtain something fast like.

but come on, when the mutantaliencommies are attacking, ya gonna trust yer families life to a lesser platform just becasue its cheap???

Six people armed with "lesser platforms" is better than two or three people with the ub3rl337gunz0rsofdewm! for the same price. :D Now if money is no object... sure. Assuming we accept the Lee Enfield as the superior platform. My experiance is small there, I admit. But it hasn't been really impressive.

goon
October 10, 2004, 04:23 AM
With all the great surplus rifles out there, you really don't have to settle for less.
It is true that some of you can't find .303 locally. But I bet that you can find some type of 8mm locally, and probably 7.62x54 as well. Almost certainly 7.62x39.
The Mosin Nagant, Mauser, and SKS are well proven weapons. You can get them really cheap as far as guns go (especially the Mosin Nagants).
If all else fails, pick up a couple 30-30's and call it a day. I can't imagine that there is anywhere in the US that you can't get a couple boxes of 30-30 ammo.

I guess what it comes right down to is that there is no one rifle that fits all sizes. Gotta look at your situation and see what works well for you.

I also brought up the idea of rechambering an Enfield on another board. It is a cool idea, but someone pointed out to me that I would be back to the same problem after the supply of 7.62x54 dries up.
I guess no matter what, you gotta buy what you want and stockpile a good supply of ammo and reloading components. I plan to keep my grandkids shooting my guns. ;)

BryanP
October 10, 2004, 04:18 PM
I don't know that it's The Ultimate(tm) but since I gave in to weakness and bought a No. 4 Mk 2 yesterday at the Nashville gun show I would like to know the best source for inexpensive .303. I prefer non-corrosive but if there's a massive price difference I could be convinced to spend extra time on cleaning.

Oh, and I would like to officially blame OEF_VET, Cslinger, Sheslinger and admar2. I told Frank to dope-slap me if he saw me buying a gun and instead they stood there encouraging me. Bunch'a danged enablers, that's what ya are. :neener:

Vern Humphrey
October 10, 2004, 04:44 PM
Why not let the enemy vote? After all, these are the people who went up against the battle rifles.

No one on the other side tried to imitate the M/N, the Lee-Enfield, and so on. The one rifle both the Japanese tried to imitate was the M1.

jobu07
October 10, 2004, 05:19 PM
I've got a couple of enfields, a mk 3 and a No4. Both are damn good rifles and i've found .303 to be just as powerful a round for shootin' logs and pieces of paper as 7.62x54R. I love both of my nagants also, but I think that the enfield is just a slicker action than most other bolt guns out there. It's faster to operate without beating yourself up I think, and .303 is more than adequate for whatever it is you'll be shooting at. It wouldn't be my first choice if I were going to be offensive once the shtf, but it's a fine rifle for surviving in the wilderness and defending yourself against attackers.

Jaeger
October 10, 2004, 09:47 PM
The link (www.303british.com) to the article on my rifle is working again. "Saving A Burnt Out Jungle Carbine"

Vern Humphrey
October 11, 2004, 05:31 PM
The M1 is about as accurate as the Lee-Enfield. Individual specimens of either may be more or less accurate than the counterpart rifle. By and large, the M1 is as accurate as its sights -- and the M1 as issued has very good iron sights.

Skofnung
October 11, 2004, 06:04 PM
Lee Enfield?

Great gun.

My only beef? It has a pretty nappy trigger, even for a service rifle. Out of the 8 or 9 that I have fired, only one had a good trigger.

Minor beef over. It's good enough for government work.


My counter proposition is that a suppressed bolt action .22 LR is the ideal.


:neener:

Wildalaska
October 11, 2004, 06:34 PM
Vern if the M1 was as good as the Enfield the British would have used it :D :neener:

Wildinww1Alaska

Vern Humphrey
October 11, 2004, 06:48 PM
Quote:
----------------------------------------
Vern if the M1 was as good as the Enfield the British would have used it.
----------------------------------------

If the British knew bupkis about guns, we'd be singing "God Save the Queen" right now.:neener:

SMLE
October 11, 2004, 07:45 PM
OK, now my MY 2 cents worth of free opinion. :D
If you're talking BOLT ACTION only, there is simply NOTHING better than the Lee Enfield. No other bolt gun has the combination of features that the LE embodies. The MNs may have a slight edge in accuracy, but their bolts SUCK. I like MNs, I used to collect them and had nearly every variant except the snipers, but as far as Infantry battle rifles, the Lee Enfield leaves them in the dust.
The Mausers, even with turned down bolt handles max out in ROF about where the LE starts. So what if the Mauser is "stronger", we're not talking about custom magnum sporters here. The "issue" of feeding rimmed cases has been proved moot in two world wars and more "small wars" than I care to list. The SMLE took 22 years to refine, it went on to serve 60 years in frontline service( and is STILL in service in some places). The Mauser took 37 years to 'refine' and was being traded off to 2nd line units and cut up for scrap after barely 47 years active service. The 1903, '03A3 and 1917 are just Mausers wearing different makeup. The '03 has a fragile, user UNfriendly rear sight. If you don't have perfect vision, I defy you to use the peep sight. The 1917 and '03A3 do have better rear sights, but they're still slow and have less capacity than the LE. Also, with the MNs and all the Mausers and variants, you have to break your stock weld to work the bolt. You don't with an LE. You also have ot break your weld to work the bolt on a K31 and in speed trials, the LE is still the faster rifle. Here is your benchmark; 38 aimed shots in 60 seconds all placed in 12" at 300 yards from a prone position with issue sights and no sling for support. Reloading RIMMED cartridges with stripper clips.

There is some validity to the logistic argument against .303 Brit. but just get an Ishapore 2A1 and that is solved. Now I have 2500 - 3000 rounds of SA mil-surp .303 on hand as well as some Greek and British. I'm not too worried about that issue.

Vern said:Why not let the enemy vote? After all, these are the people who went up against the battle rifles.Why copy a bolt action when you're already making bolt actions? While the Lee Enfield would be a step up from the Mausers, the M1 is two steps up. But again, I'm talking BOLT actions ONLY.

As I said, this is my 2 cents, YMMV.

SMLE
October 11, 2004, 07:47 PM
Vern if the M1 was as good as the Enfield the British would have used it Actually the Brits DID use a few M1s but only a FEW. :D

SMLE
October 11, 2004, 07:55 PM
If the British knew bupkis about guns, we'd be singing "God Save the Queen" right now. Considering that the Colonial Armies were armed with muskets based on British patterns (until they were replaced by French patterns) we did pretty good. And of course the 1855 Springfield was a copy of the 1853 Enfield including bore dia. rifling, rate of turn, depth of grooves, progressive depth rifling etc. And the 1917 Rifle was just our version of a Brit. version of a Mauser.

The intestinal and genital fortitude of the grunts in the firing line was what made the difference.:D

Vern Humphrey
October 11, 2004, 07:55 PM
Quote:
------------------------------------
Actually the Brits DID use a few M1s but only a FEW.
------------------------------------

Which they immediately dropped and jumped back in horror, "OOOOOH, OOOOOH! It reloaded ITSELF!":p

SMLE
October 11, 2004, 08:08 PM
Which they immediately dropped and jumped back in horror, "OOOOOH, OOOOOH! It reloaded ITSELF!"Good one. If Wellington had had his way, the Brits would've stormed ashore at Normandy with Brown Bess on their shoulders. :neener:

Vern Humphrey
October 11, 2004, 09:00 PM
Quote:
------------------------------------
Good one. If Wellington had had his way, the Brits would've stormed ashore at Normandy with Brown Bess on their shoulders.
------------------------------------

And led by officers who purchased their commissions.

(The British Army used to sell commissions. Once you bought a commission, it was your property and you could sell it when you were ready to buy a higher rank. When an attempt was made to end this practice, the Duke of Wellington strongly opposed it -- promoting officers by merit would let the wrong sort in, you know.)

Jaeger
October 11, 2004, 09:57 PM
Which they immediately dropped and jumped back in horror, "OOOOOH, OOOOOH! It reloaded ITSELF!"

Wanker! :D

P95Carry
October 12, 2004, 01:00 AM
I reaffirmed my love for Enfield yesterday .... put 100 or so rounds thru my Jungle and near as much thru my Turk Mauser (OK, it ain't a K98). When it comes to speed and smoothness, Enfield wins hands down... even did better at 600 yds too.

I have yet to use a Mauser where unlocking the bolt is easy ... it always seems to need an upward hard shove ... then when bolt is pulled back it feels sloppy. OTOH the Enfield, unlocks easy - bolt comes back like on rails and a solid shove forward with palm of hand does the trick.

I am leaving M1 out of this equation .... just comparing the two bolt styles. Maybe, just maybe ... the Mauser extractor is that bit stronger.

goon
October 12, 2004, 01:43 AM
Having never fired a Mauser, I can't really comment on the shooting characteristics of them.
I can say that between the Enfield and my M-39, I have to go with the Finn. For me, it is that one rifle. It just has exactly the right weight, balance, and fit for me. The round it fires is powerful and the rifle itself is accurate. I will admit that the bolt on the Enfield is quicker, but the bolt on my M-39 feels like it is sliding on ball-bearings.
For pure war, the Enfield may very well be superior (Although the Finns showed what Mosin-Nagants in the hands of warriors are capable of). But as the world stands now, it is doubtful that any of the classic bolt actions will ever a real war again.
As for shooting, hunting, and SHTF use, it all turns mostly into a matter of personal preferences.

355sigfan
October 12, 2004, 04:17 AM
dare ya to prove otherwise...

Battle proven reliability!
Fast rate of fire!
Long range capability!
Fast reloading with clips!
Hard hitting!
Tough and rugged! In fact I dare say the toughesst!
Accurate!
End QUOTE


A bolt action for SHTF ha ha ha ha.

Battle proven yes just over 50 years ago. The brown Bess was battle proven also big deal.

Fast rate of fire compared to what a muzzle loader. Its so slow compared to a good semi auto its funny.

Long range capability. So what a AR10 and M1A have long range capabilities. The military went away from long range rounds for a reason. Most people don't fight at 800 yards.

Faster reloading. Its not as fast as I can pop a new mag in my M4, M1a or AR10.

Tough and rugged so what so are a lot of other rifles. Its an interesting relic for a collection and thats about it.
Pat

BigG
October 12, 2004, 11:37 AM
James Paris Lee was an American. Remington made some of his designs before olde Englande adopted the American designed rifle that became the SMELLY.

And I agree the British don't know bupkis about guns - with rare exceptions.

goon
October 12, 2004, 03:03 PM
bolt action for SHTF ha ha ha ha.

Battle proven yes just over 50 years ago. The brown Bess was battle proven also big deal.

Fast rate of fire compared to what a muzzle loader. Its so slow compared to a good semi auto its funny.

Long range capability. So what a AR10 and M1A have long range capabilities. The military went away from long range rounds for a reason. Most people don't fight at 800 yards.

Faster reloading. Its not as fast as I can pop a new mag in my M4, M1a or AR10.

Tough and rugged so what so are a lot of other rifles. Its an interesting relic for a collection and thats about it.
Pat



In order:

Action doesn't matter all that much. If a man is good enough with his bolt action to hit you with the first shot, he doesn't need to empty half a mag at you.

The AK has also been around for a long time. So has the 1911 and the M2HB. Just because they are old doesn't make them useless.
Would you just let some guy shoot at you with a BAR? It's OK, right? Because it is old?

As for rate of fire, when compared with a fullpower semi-auto, a practiced bolt action shooter can shoot very fast. Plenty fast enough anyhow.

Long range sniping is preferable to closing and grabbing them by the belt buckle in some scenarios.

Reloading - yes, it is easier and quicker to slap in another mag. What happens whey you run out of mags? Are you really likely to put them back in your mag pouch while you are getting shot at? If you lose all your mags, your AR-10 turns into a single shot. Compare that with a gun that uses strippers. You lose all the stripper clips. and your gun is still completely useable with loose ammo.
IMO, the military went away from long range rounds because they couldn't make the average soldier into a good enough marksman to use the full capability of those rifles. We civilian shooters can become as proficient as our bank accounts will allow.
And it isn't just the range, it is also the accuracy. I like knowing that if I can see something, my rifle will hit it.
Also, since you don't see the need for long range shooting, why do you have the AR-10 and the M-1A? You don't need those powerful rifles, because people don't fight at 800 yards, right?

Rugged is a prime consideration for me. Things get banged around when they are used hard and you need something that will stand up to that. Most any military weapon, even the M-16, will take quite a bit of abuse and keep working. That is why I prefer them over similiar sporting arms. If you get a stuck casing in a Mosin-Nagant, you can beat the bolt handle with a hammer to get it open, and not harm the gun at all doing it. Can you confidently do that with most new sporting arms?

Insult our battle rifles all you want, but they put people in the ground 50 years ago and they still would today if need be.

fds5116
October 12, 2004, 03:28 PM
WildAlaska & Biff,
At one time I was contemplating a .303 based wildcat; it looked as if I could blow out the case straight and make a .444 marlin clone. While not a 45-70, it would have a lot of performance for the furries. Make a switch barrel for that and you're good to go.

Too much time on my hands...

Andrew Wyatt
October 12, 2004, 04:16 PM
Most people don't fight at 800 yards.


SOme people do shoot at things bigger than a human, or at humans farther away than .223 reach easily.


Sometimes people fight when its windy.

It's pretty obvious you've seen a boltgun being shot by someone with skill.

SMLE
October 12, 2004, 05:21 PM
355sigfan said:Battle proven yes just over 50 years ago. There some fresh graves in the US and GB that are the result of "poorly trained and equiped irregulars" who were using Lee Enfields. US and Brit troops in Iraq and Afganistan have captured plenty of LEs and taken fire from them as well. There is also a case that was documented in Soldier of Fortune magazine where a US Marine used an captured LE to wipe out an Iraqi mortar crew. He was quoted saying "When you shoot them with a .303, they stay shot!"

I also second what Goon said too.

355sigfan
October 12, 2004, 08:52 PM
Action doesn't matter all that much. If a man is good enough with his bolt action to hit you with the first shot, he doesn't need to empty half a mag at you.
END QUOTE

Actually it matters quite a bit. Maybe not in a long range firefight. But thats seldom the case. Most engagments are of a CQB affair. At close quarters a bolt is simply too slow. They are ok as sniper rifles where one shot is usually enough. But as a close quarters battle weapon its not enough.

SNIP
There some fresh graves in the US and GB that are the result of "poorly trained and equiped irregulars" who were using Lee Enfields.
END QUOTE

I would hazard to quess that there are far more graves of the enfield armed soldires than their are of our M4 armed soldiers.

As for losing magazines. Your not likely to lose your last mag if you have any tactical training at all. You always feel for a new mag before doing a speed load. If your out your screwed either way.

As far as the AK47 and 1911. The 1911 has evolved with the times and its still one of the easiests pistols to shoot accurately under speed. This is because of its short trigger reset, low bore axis and overall good ergonomics. Its also a reliable design if built right. The AK is a cheap easily produced weapon that works ok for poorly trained troops. So it remains popular. The bolt action battle rifle has been obsolete for a long time.
If you want more power than a 223 offers try a good 308 semi auto or the new 6.8. For my needs as a leo the 223 is perfect. I bet its just fine for most as well. It is lacking in long range stopping power I admit. I think the military would be better off with the new 6.8 mm.

Pat

ilcylic
October 12, 2004, 08:58 PM
Not to knock the .303, but if we're talking WWI bolt guns, why not the 1903?

I rather like mine. But it's got a lot of work into it. :)

-Ogre

Feanaro
October 12, 2004, 09:22 PM
Actually it matters quite a bit. Maybe not in a long range firefight. But thats seldom the case. Most engagments are of a CQB affair. At close quarters a bolt is simply too slow. They are ok as sniper rifles where one shot is usually enough. But as a close quarters battle weapon its not enough.

All rifles have a weakness. AR type rifles are well suited to close-medium range because of their low recoil and high capacity. But those low recoiling cartridges aren't well suited to longers ranges. MBRs have hefty enough rounds for medium-long(ish) ranges but recoil makes them less suited to CQB, though it can be done. Bolt actions are good for medium-long(er) range work but are slow and unwieldy in CQB. Play to your strengths and the enemies' weaknesses.

goon
October 12, 2004, 11:52 PM
I guess it all depends on what your SHTF is.
As for me, I don't envision being attacked by huge mobs of thugs. The firepower advantage of a semi-auto just isn't a huge deal to me. I do own two, an AK and a FAL, but neither works as well for me as my Mosin Nagant. The AK is very fast handling and utterly reliable, but at 200 yards I am mostly just making noise. The FAL is more effective at that range and more powerful, but it seems to be overly complex for what it does. For a military arm with an unlimited supply chain supporting it, it would do just fine. But I have had trouble with mine already and that is enough to make me question it. I just prefer a simpler weapon with fewer things to go wrong with it.
I figure that if I ever do find myself hip deep in a SHTF situation, I am going to run... until I am 400 or so yards away. Then I am gonna turn around and the people chasing me had better get behind something solid. They will need it.
CQB is not for me under any circumstances. I have no illusions that engaging a superior force up close and personal would result in anything other than me getting killed and the enemy getting my Mosin Nagant.

Dying is something everyone has to face, but they ain't taking my rifle. :D

ken B
October 13, 2004, 12:47 AM
I figure that if I ever do find myself hip deep in a SHTF situation, I am going to run... until I am 400 or so yards away. Then I am gonna turn around and the people chasing me had better get behind something solid.

hehe if I ran 400 yards, I'd have to keep that front sight from floating 4 inches up and 6 inches down while I'm sucking wind!

SHTF in a bolt action, won't the Ishapore be better? Same nappy trigger, but runs 7.62 and a bit more common here....still use the strippers, battle sights..etc...

I'd have to go 7.62 in a semi and opt for the FAL varients or L1A1....semi auto battle rifle so CQB isn't tooooo outrageous, and heavier .30 for longer range, though the accuracy may not be there...

better yet! Get the wife armed with the M4 .223, kids rock out with .22 or such, and Dad can rock on long range with the old MBR. if money wasn't an option...

but man those old Enfields look so cool.... Jaeger , I've read and reread your article on your 'burned-out' JC, I found a Savage chopped up bad and attempting my own version for the last month or so....awaiting the parts no from the bead blaster and refinishing!

Ken B
North Texas

SMLE
October 13, 2004, 01:15 AM
Not to knock the .303, but if we're talking WWI bolt guns, why not the 1903? Re-read my first post on this thread, I lumped the '03 in with all the other Mausers.


355Sigfan:I would hazard to quess that there are far more graves of the enfield armed soldiers than their are of our M4 armed soldiers. True, but the point I was making is that an 100 year old rifle can be used to kill you just as dead as the latest and greatest plastic fantastic ubertactical wonder gun. The fight would have ended the same even if OUR guys were packing LEs and Lewis guns. Leaving all else in place, give today's US troops the same small arms their ancestors carried in WWI, and they'd still kick @$$ on anything out there.

And while you're trying to get the sand out of that M4, the LE armed guy even has a better club than you do. Plus his rounds will punch through cover that the M4/M16/M249 can't. "Newer" dosen't always = "better" and "old" don't = "useless".

rbernie
October 13, 2004, 01:21 AM
All of which is moot. Putting aside WildlivinginfantasylandAlaska's fictitious and completely rigged scenario - in any likely SHTF (and not TEOTWAWKI)scenario, the SKS will be king. :neener:

Andrew Wyatt
October 13, 2004, 01:23 AM
in pat's defense, he's a LE trainer, and his idea of SHTF is a swat call or something similar, with CQB in buildings and such.


That said, a jungle carbine or number4mk1 based scout is approximately the same size/weight as an m4, and has a lot more punch, and is about as fast as a pump shotgun when wielded by a trained individual.

P95Carry
October 13, 2004, 01:26 AM
Slightly OT but - hoping we'll hear something from Marty soon Andrew.

Andrew Wyatt
October 13, 2004, 01:29 AM
I'm holding out a faint hope that i hear something from tristar before the end of the year.


if i'd have known it would have taken this long, i wouldn't have done the group buy.

P95Carry
October 13, 2004, 01:37 AM
I am a patient guy Andrew ...... so still optimistic. My FFL copy is there so - just waiting and hoping. Don't beat yourself up over the group buy deal ....

Heck - I have been waiting since last December for replacement rear sight for my L1A1 from Dan at Volunteer Ordnance!! It has a FAL one on right now which is too low .. the ''proper'' L1A1 version has been long awaited!

The Last Confederate
October 13, 2004, 02:10 AM
Find some goey swamp mud...open the action of a Garand, fill it full of mud...open the action of an Enfield...fill it full of mud...then clean it out...which one ya gonna back in action faster?

Heck, I don't know about the M1 (it's internal magazine is it's most vulnerable feature) but I know that "test" would be no problem for my M14 rifle. All I'd have to do it take out the mag and watch the mud drip out of the reciever, the problem is more or less solved.

Your rifle may be the best bolt action rifle, but ultimate SHTF gun? Not a chance! For one thing ammo is corrosive, difficult to find (if you have to leave your stash) and the bore is not chrome lined! Corrosive ammo + unchromed bore = big long term problems. Hardly the SHTF type resistence I'd want.

I can think of several firearms that would be better but, like another said, it depends on your enviorment. If you are going to be in an area where you'll NEED to be able to make long range shots (past 300 meters) then that limits the options some. However, if a shot is going to be that far out, you should be avoiding trouble anyway. And where I live, a shot that is past 200-300 yards, it really hard to find. Unless you're facing down a highway or something similar.

Anyway, if you just HAVE to make those 300+ meter shots than I recommend the M14.

1. It is more accurate than the enfield, the .308 ammo can be found anywhere, from gas stations to wal-marts, heck even our own armed forces still use the round.

2. It is VERY reliable. Someone who was an X marine claimed that in all his firearms experience, the M14 was the 2nd most reliable gun, beaten only by the AK. Nice chrome bore helps add to this, don't need to clean it as often. + It's self regulating gas system.

3. Thirdly, it has a high capacity, which may not make a difference if you are shooting at 500 yards, but it will make a difference if you are engaging targets at under 200 yards, espessially multiple targets.

4. It is the best of all worlds in that it can be loaded by a mag change, by stripper clips, or by hand feeding the rounds into the follower from the top. So, if you loose all your spare mags, you still have a 20 shot rifle in your hands! There is no other battle rifle that can do all of these three loading methods (as someone before mentioned, enfield doesn't function well in mag changes, as rounds fall out).

5. Nice light weight, and it is the lightest weight battle rifle there is when in a synthetic stock. Even lighter still if we are talking Bush or the new SOCOM.


Now, as I mentioned earlier, if you don't HAVE to have a rifle that can make 300+ yard shots, your options open up even more. Two other rifles that are better than the enfield in the under 300 yard option are the SKS and AK47 types. There are other good options as well.

goon
October 13, 2004, 01:19 PM
hehe if I ran 400 yards, I'd have to keep that front sight from floating 4 inches up and 6 inches down while I'm sucking wind!

Me too. But I still think it would be a better choice than going toe to toe with a numerically superior force.

I'm holding out a faint hope that i hear something from tristar before the end of the year.

I contacted them a couple weeks ago. Here is the reply:

"We have the M10 A2 in stock. Other models will not be available until 2005. All questions should be directed to our product manager Don Madole."

I would really like to hear if they have worked the "bugs" out of the 7.62x51 Enfield yet, in particular, the weak and spotty ejection. IMO, that is really the only weakness with one. If they have taken care of that, they have created about the best Enfield ever. I want one too, but I am gonna have to wait until I get some money (job). It is just as well though because that gives them time to work any bugs out of their first production run, and it will allow the price to settle a little bit as demand drops.

UnknownSailor
October 13, 2004, 03:45 PM
For the person who commented about the bore on your typical Enfield, I have one of the No. 4 Mk2* imported about 10 years ago. Mine was made in 1954, fired five times, and packed away in cosmoline. All serial #s match, and I have the evil bayonet. Nice wood furniture, and spotless bore.

I have less than 300 rounds through it.

I would use it as my SHTF rifle without hesitation.

Andrew Wyatt
October 14, 2004, 01:31 AM
I would really like to hear if they have worked the "bugs" out of the 7.62x51 Enfield yet, in particular, the weak and spotty ejection.

they fixed the weak ejection, with the use of a plunger ejector.

Clean97GTI
October 14, 2004, 02:05 AM
I'll chime in with my votes for SHTF rifles

Long range: Mosin-Nagant M44. Short enough to be easily carried, yet still accurate to longer ranges. CHEAP to feed and plenty of ammo available. A local dealer stocks tens of thousands of rounds

Everyday rifle: AK-47 of some type. 7.62x39 is cheap, the rifles don't break and provide good enough accuracy as well as capacity to keep heads down. I could also go with an AK-74, but 5.45 isn't as common. I can still find it though as the same local dealer stocks it all.

After those, I'd say go with an AR-15 type. .223 is cheap, but the AR's aren't as rugged as the AK's. I would also be remiss if I didn't include a pump-action 12ga shotgun in my "head for the hills" arsenal.

If you enjoyed reading about "I submit the Enfield is the Ultimate SHTF rifle!" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!