Enfield No. 5

Status
Not open for further replies.
X

xtarheel

Member
Joined
Dec 30, 2002
Messages
246
Location
North Carolina
Bought a "jungle carbine" at a gun show last week. Always wanted one partly because they looks so cool for a milsurp. Had to wait a few days to pick it up and started to get buyers remorse as I was researching on the internet and hearing how many counterfits were out there. I was relieved when I finally got it and found the date, inscriptions, lightened bolt handle, 800 yard site and propper milling on the barrenl and receiver to be as they should be. One thing that I read that doomed this rifle was the "wandering zero". I was wondering how much of a problem this is. Is it something that just shows up during rapid fire with a hot barrel?

I would be interested in hearing of any ones experience with this rifle. I just loaded up some .303 with 150gr jacked bullets but haven't had a chance to shoot it yet.
 
Apparently the "wandering zero" problem was, the shooter would sight in his #5, but it would fail to hold the zero over time.

In other words the rifle would be sighted in, and the next time it was checked, the zero had drifted off.

Not all rifles had the problem, but enough did that the Brits declared it "Endemic in the design" and surplussed them out.
 
I have two No5s. They're good little guns. Great to give to someone that ridicules you about small guns. :D

As far as the wandering zero goes, I think it has to do with the lightened action and barrel and the bedding interface. It could also have to do with how the barrel interfaces with the stock up front. Honestly, I'd not worry about it and just take it out and shoot it and see how it does.
 
Love mine!

I have never had any problems with the so called "wandering zero" or the recoil. I shoot my loads, which are 150gr spitzers over 40gr IMR4895. Very accurate, and yes, a reduced load (somewhat). Fantastic rifles, mine having a Long (L) butt stock, which makes it fit me (I'm 6'3') very well. Enjoy the rifle. It does not kick like a M44 or M38, but a little more than a #4, being that the #5 is over a pound lighter. Handy rifle.:D
 
Thanks all for the input. I understand that with heavier loads the .303 has a short case life due to the rear locking lugs in the Enfield causing a "springy" bolt, so I stuck to a starting charge of H-414. I have heard that Reloader 15 is a good powder for the .303 but the two shops I checked didn't have any.
 
Zero

The general opinion of the Enfield shooters I know in the UK is that the whole wandering zero 'problem' was a deliberate fake.

The story goes that the soldiers involved in the development of the No5 thought that the British Army really needed a semi-auto after the war, so a problem was 'documented' to get the No5 dropped.
 
xtarheel, I am not sure where the "spongy action" rumors came from. Yes, you cannot fire magnum loads with an Enfield action, as you will begin to have set back of the bolt. But, the #4 action was successfully modified by changing the bolt head, barrel, and magazine to .308. The Brits and Canadians used their L39A1 and L42A1 rifles as their primary sniper rifle up into the 90's.

Don't be afraid of the action. Load following a good loading manuel as reference. It has survived for over 100 years, and I have never heard of an incident where an unsafe situation occured from normal use of the rifle. Long Branch #4mk1* rifles are still today issued to the Canadian Rangers for patrol duty in the extreem north of Canada. The #4 rifle is the only reliable weapon with accuracy and durability to survive up there today.
 
Funny how last night, having to work out-of-town today, and not knowing if the whole "Day without an Immigrant" fiasco was going to turn into a dangerous mess, that the first rifle that I thought about packing in the trunk of the car as "insurance" turned out to be my No. 5 Jungle Carbine, along with a full mag and a fist full of loaded stripper clips.
 
So let me tell you a Jungle Carbine story...

...I traded a 1858 Remington kit gun for one back around 1980. Bad decision...That rifle was the worst thing I ever used. shoot a 3-round group (generally 1.5"-2"). Lay aside. shoot a group from my Mosin (now there was a nice shooting rifle. Sporter stock, turn-down bolt, cut down 22" barrel & a set of Williams guide sights, it would shoot 3/4" groups @ 80 yards with the 180gr Norma loads. Mild recoil, but a boom like a field artillery piece). Lay aside. Shoot 3 more rounds from the .303 and start cussing the 4" to 9" drift. You could spend all day trying to chase that group into the bull, but That wasn't necessary, because the lousy stock design would pound my cheek, and that little strip of rubber they laughingly called a recoil pad would bang my shoulder too much when hunched over the bench to get off a full box before I'd give up and console myself with the Mosin. I then planned to get an aftermarket stock, and have it rebarreled in .444 Marlin, but finally got disgusted enough that I actually hacksawed that POS into 3 pieces and threw it in the trash, one piece per week. I read somewhere years later that the wandering zero was caused by bad headspacing, and more recently, that they were also made with oversized chambers so corroded ammo one might find in jungle situations, would still reliably cycle. I must admit that that sounds plausible, since the ranges one encounters an enemy at in tripple canopy jungles tends to be short, so a 9" 100-yard pattern isn't all that big a handicap at 10-20 yards. I've also heard of guys wrapping a ring of tape around their shell cases to make a tighter fit in those oversized chambers. I would think that if this were the case, shortening the barrel and re-facing, then a proper reaming would fix a loose chamber...
 
Funny thing is, no one who's tried to systematically recreate the "wandering zero" has ever done it, or if they have, they haven't publicized their results. From what I recall, it broke out into two different categories, "wandering zero" and "would not zero". The former seemed to happen when the rifle was hot, 200+ rounds in a short period of time. The latter happened right out of the proverbial box. I can't remember what unit armorers did with those rifles, probably "lost" them somewhere.

That rifle was the worst thing I ever used.
Click to expand...
Clipper - are you sure it was a No. 5 and not a ginned up "Jungle Carbine" from Golden State Arms or some place like that? I guess it's possible you could have wound up with a rifle that wouldn't zero, but the accurate ones far outnumber the inaccurate ones.

... that little strip of rubber they laughingly called a recoil pad ...
Click to expand...
It's not really a recoil pad. It was for providing a bumper for protecting aircraft floors. As a recoil pad it focuses the recoil into a smaller area, intensifying it.

As far as oversize chambers, that's been standard on the design since before WWI. It's part of the reason it's so reliable, you can cake it with mud and dirt and it'll still work. If the chamber is in spec, it won't have a noticable effect on accuracy. Sniper rifles had the same chamber specs, and I don't think anyone is going to say those had accuracy problems. Headspace can impact accuracy, but not to the degree you're reporting.

Could be you just had a shot out barrel, or the flash hider wasn't perfectly centered.
 
WE had a Lot of enfield variants come thru the shop when i was working there. the biggest problem we seemed to have, was that when some one would claim that rifle with a decent bore would not shoot, was that it probably had a loose butt stock. I do not remember it is a screw or a bolt, But that opeing in the buttplate will allow you get access and really tighten down that fastener to make sure the butt stock to receiver joint is VERY tight. then keeping the forearm screws snug tight will often cure a rifle that will not shoot to the same POA morethan once.

We did get some in from one importer that we believe were paki or indian in origin, ALL of those had crappy bores. none would hold 5 inches at 100, and most much worse, several that would do nothing but keyhole. We sent them all back but for two that we had a buyer who was looking for something to a 45-70 bolt gun on, I think he got at least one of those to work, of course with a new barrel.
 
I've owned 5 No5mkI's in my life, and all shot well and exhibited no "wandering zero", tho I have heard of other shooters experiencing it.

I think it was, if a genuine problem, exaggerated.
 
the biggest problem we seemed to have, was that when some one would claim that rifle with a decent bore would not shoot, was that it probably had a loose butt stock. I do not remember it is a screw or a bolt, But that opeing in the buttplate will allow you get access and really tighten down that fastener to make sure the butt stock to receiver joint is VERY tight. then keeping the forearm screws snug tight will often cure a rifle that will not shoot to the same POA morethan once.
Click to expand...

Careful when you tighten the stock bolt - No. 4 and 5 rifles you can do it on, but on No. 1 rifles you must remove the foreend first, otherwise when you turn the screw you'll split the foreend. A lot of people haven't gotten the message - I have yet to strip a No. 1 that doesn't have a crack. :fire:

The king screw (the one right in front of the magazine well) needs to be as tight as possible. "White-knuckle" tight is how it's usually described. If it's loose you'll get patterns instead of groups.
 
the wandering zero on this rifle is a problem that was figured out , after ww2, but i wont go into details here. do not worry , it is doubtful that you will be able to recreate the conditions, that led up to this problem.
 
Dunno if "figured out" is the right term, since there are still vigorous arguments going on sixty years later as to whether it exists at all...
 
the wandering zero on this rifle is a problem that was figured out , after ww2, but i wont go into details here. do not worry , it is doubtful that you will be able to recreate the conditions, that led up to this problem.
Click to expand...

C'mon, rangerruck, let the rest of the unwashed masses, myself included, in on these little secrets. Details away!
 
I got my No. 5 about 30 years ago. I also got about 4,000 rounds of milsup with it. After those rounds and about 3,000 more, the only time I got a wandering zero was when the blood left my shoulder. Clean yours well and it will be a fun gun to bruse with through the years. Interestingly enough when I think of home defense, I think of this one. With it shouldered I can hit anything my eyes go to.
 
There is no Wandering zero.....

but the rifle does kick like a mule........I think the short sight radius and light weight makes shooting tight groups, when compared to a No1 or N04, more difficult......I have never heard of a grunt complain about having a lighter rifle to carry.....chris3
 
My #5 is very accurate. It will shoot 2" groups from the bench or prone at 100 yards all day long. Doesn't kick near as hard as a .375 H&H, but a little more than my #4's.

It would be a very good patrol rifle in my opinion.
 

Attachments

  • Misc Stuff 030.jpg
    Misc Stuff 030.jpg
    80.8 KB · Views: 25
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top