Gibb's Rifle Co Enfield Jungle Carbine .308

Status
Not open for further replies.

ZGunner

Member
Joined
Feb 2, 2012
Messages
750
Location
South GA
I'm going to pick this rifle up tomorrow evening. I love the cock-on-closing Enfield action and I like the smaller size of the 20" barrel. The 10 round mag is a plus, as is the nickel finish. I figure its a poor man's Ruger Gunsite Rifle. $325 and a 20 minute drive and it's mine. I can't see anything wrong with that.

Anyone have any experience with his particular rifle? Good, bad or otherwise?
 
I have a Gibb's Jungle Carbine in .303 British. Despite the usual bashing I enjoy this rifle a lot. The nickel plating makes it easy to care for and I find it to be pretty accurate as well as fun to shoot. I am sure the .308 will be the same.
 
I have always thought the Jungle Carbine was really cool looking. I don't own one but have shot one. The recoil is fairly unpleasant for the usual reasons of design. One thing I have always heard about the original Jungle Carbines is they have a problem called "wandering zero". I think I read somewhere there is a fix for the problem and possibly Gibbs has solved it. If you find that your rifle is not maintaining its zero it is not specific to your rifle and it may be fixable.
 
I've heard rumors that the Lee-Enfield action is marginal in terms of strength for the higher-pressure .308 cartridge. They were just rumors though, but it may warrant some research on the topic before purchase.
 
There never was a "wandering zero problem" -- real Jungle Carbines shoot to point of aim all day long -- and Gibbs didn't solve it by using No. 4 actions. They used No. 4s because 1) they were available, while No. 5s weren't, and 2) they could buy ten of them for the price of a No. 5. And both actions handle .308 just fine.
 
There never was a "wandering zero problem" -- real Jungle Carbines shoot to point of aim all day long -- and Gibbs didn't solve it by using No. 4 actions. They used No. 4s because 1) they were available, while No. 5s weren't, and 2) they could buy ten of them for the price of a No. 5. And both actions handle .308 just fine.


bainter1212 -
Wandering zero was caused by soldiers flinching more and more as they shot

According to the first published source I pulled of my bookshelf some of the original Number 5 Jungle Carbines did have a wandering zero problem this contributed to it being withdrawn from service. I know I have seen this information elsewhere. Perhaps you guys are right and the wandering zero is a myth, but it is an oft repeated myth if it is. There is also a comment that the receivers are lighted to the point that conversion to 7.62 Nato is unsafe. I'm guessing the Gibbs Jungle Carbine just looks like an original Jungle Carbine. I will attempt to find other sources mentioning wandering zero. If this is myth I would very much enjoy seeing a hard to impeach source confirming it to be a myth.
 
I have not had any problems with a wandering zero with my Gibbs or my genuine number 5. I have read multiple places that the wandering zero was a myth with multiple reasons given for the foundation. I will try to document some of them for you when I get some time. The mechanics do not point to any reason the aim point should move so I am inclined to believe it was driven by human error.
 
Wandering zero was caused by the British Army wanting the SLR. They were the last to use a bolt action, and they didn't want to miss the rush to self loading rifle.

I have 2- #5Mk1"s that shoot point of aim all day long. Maybe I got the 2 good ones????????
 
Wandering zero was caused by the British Army wanting the SLR. They were the last to use a bolt action, and they didn't want to miss the rush to self loading rifle.

I have 2- #5Mk1"s that shoot point of aim all day long. Maybe I got the 2 good ones????????

That would not surprise me at all if it is the source of the wandering zero issue.:D
 
After doing a little more reading I don't believe the "wandering zero" problem can be credibly dismissed by "soldiers flinching" and "the British Army wanting the SLR". I have read from several sources that the problem perplexed the British who investigated it. So far I have not found a definitive statement from an unimpeachable source of what caused the phenomenon of "wandering zero" to occur inconsistently or confirming it was a myth. The following components are suspected as contributing to the problem: stock warpage due to not having fully seasoned wood, and the methods used to lighten the receiver and barrel. It is suspected a high volume of fire in a short period of time caused the above mentioned components to permanently shift the zero.
 
The Jungle Carbine was a full-size battle rifle in .303 Brit that was expediently cut down for use in dark, thickly-forested terrain, where shots fired against the enemy were short-range affairs.

Some years back, I owed a Gibbs JC in .303 Brit, and while l like the cartridge, I thought the JC, at least as Gibbs put it together, was crap.

I shot it for a while and then sold it for more than I paid, which is always a provable indicator of P.T.Barnum's theory that "there's a sucker born every minute." Yes, that includes me as the original purchaser.

Anyway, if you want something short & handy in .308 that doesn't look like everyone else's short & handy .308, you might consider a Tanker Garand in that caliber. Tim Shufflin makes a 16" model he calls the Mini-G, which is a conversion he does (using a new Criterion .308 barrel) from a full-sized 30'06 Garand that you supply. You have, I believe, 2 or 3 choices for muzzle breaks, and there've been no complaints that I've seen about "wandering zeros," which is typically & historically an excuse for poor marksmanship.

My Tanker isn't a Schuff's, however. It's an old mid-'90s Arlington Ordinance that has run perfectly from the git-go.

Tanker-2.jpg

I added the Schuster MB and my practice is to replace the op rod spring every 500-rds. Very accurate out to 200yds and no malfs whatsoever. In my battery of rifles it serves the role as a "truck gun" for a quick bailout if the S ever Hits The Fan while I'm wheeling around.

A much better performer and more satisfying to own than the Gibbs was.

Just sayin' ...

:cool:
 
Last edited:
Went and picked up the rifle the other day. Im pretty impressed with it. Between rain and a honey-do list I haven't had a chance to shoot it yet so still more to come. Until then, here's a picture.

imagejpg1_zps89055cbe.jpg

The cheek riser is a nice addition, it brings my eye right where it needs to be.
 
Went and picked up the rifle the other day. Im pretty impressed with it. Between rain and a honey-do list I haven't had a chance to shoot it yet so still more to come. Until then, here's a picture.

imagejpg1_zps89055cbe.jpg

The cheek riser is a nice addition, it brings my eye right where it needs to be.


Looks great! So much more charisma than the “Tanker Garand”. Interesting that both rifles are modern inventions with the Gibbs being closer to historical reality than the “Tanker Garand”. Whatever you give up in capability (not much of anything meaningful) with the Gibbs is more than made up for by the cool factor of the Jungle Carbine. Even the name “Jungle Carbine” is more impressive. “Tanker Garand” sounds like something belonging to the Exxon fleet. For fun and to astound Garand shooters you should learn to rapidly fire the Lee Enfield action using “The Walbridge Method” that creates a 180 round cyclic rate of fire.
 
Weird.....looks like it's built on a No. 1 rifle. Hence the rear sight. A No. 4 or No. 5 would have a rear peep and ladder sight......
 
Weird.....looks like it's built on a No. 1 rifle. Hence the rear sight. A No. 4 or No. 5 would have a rear peep and ladder sight......

My wife likes the notch and blade type sights. That made it alot easier to justify buying it.

If the Walbridge Method involves holding the bolt handle with the thumb and index finger and operating the trigger with the middle finger, I have that down pretty well. Accuracy isn't that great but it is rather quick.
 
If I recall, it's built on the Ishapore 2A or 2A1 action, made with improved EN steel to withstand 7.62Nato pressure. That's definitely an Ishapore, as opposed to a SMLE magazine.

Mine is similar to this one, but wearing a FAL flash hider as you never know when you may want to mount a bayonet charge....
2A1Scout001b.jpg

Ishapore markings on wrist...
Indian Crown
Rifle Factory India
2A1Scout014b.jpg
 
My wife likes the notch and blade type sights. That made it alot easier to justify buying it.

If the Walbridge Method involves holding the bolt handle with the thumb and index finger and operating the trigger with the middle finger, I have that down pretty well. Accuracy isn't that great but it is rather quick.
Well if the wife likes it......it is a good buy.

I recommend shooting a No.4 or No.5 with the ladder sight if you ever get the chance. Really ekes out the accuracy potential of these rifles.

If you ever get out to Sacramento, let me know. I will let you shoot my Jungle Carbine. It is my favorite milsurp rifle by far.

Edit: I am former USAF. Glad to talk to another airman.
 
Gibbs .308 carbines are all built on a No.2A or 2A1 Ishapore rifle like 4th point says. They are good, handy carbines in my book and can be very accurate. Like 4th, I prefer to scout mount them and make them a general purpose rifle. Some maintain that you should only use 7.62 NATO cartridges in them as that is what they were designed for. Do the research and come to your own conclusion. Personally I try to stay with loads that are equal to the NATO specs as they are more accurate in this rifle. Federal blue box .308's are equal to the NATO load in ballistics and are very accurate. Sighting wise, I do not like the original sights as they are hard for my eyes to use and the sight radius is extremely short. Williams makes a receiver sight that must be drilled and tapped for but is an excellent addition. Get out and shoot that rifle, if not I'll buy it from you.;)
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top