jefnvk
Member
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.
I submit the Enfield is the Ultimate SHTF rifle!
- Thread starter Wildalaska
- Start date
- Status
Wildalaska
member
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
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
Member
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.
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.
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.
Cosmoline
Member
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
Wildalaska
member
Corrosive Third World surplus....OK...thats fine, Ill take Win White Box or HSM.....and pay the few extra $$
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....
Ah but that doesnt mean that it is better...in fact I would argue that the Mosin is far worse than the LE
WildsothereyamosinfreakAlaska
Sylvilagus Aquaticus
Member
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.
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
Member
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.
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
Member
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.
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
Member
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.
-------------------------------------------
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.
Darned nice gun for carry and thumping things in the food chain.
I agree. Gratuitous pic of my own version of the best Lee-Enfield go-to gun:
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.
I agree. Gratuitous pic of my own version of the best Lee-Enfield go-to gun:
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
Member
Because my Finns got the funk! Ooooh yeah baby. You know it. They are DOWN with their own bad selves.
Andrew Wyatt
Member
I daresay that was the most persuasive argument ever.
LONG LIVE THE MOSIN!
LONG LIVE THE MOSIN!
P95Carry
Moderator Emeritus
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.
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
Member
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.
--------------------------------------
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.
rbernie
Contributing Member
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
Member
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
atek3
Wildalaska
member
Yep but in all around reliability with minimum maintenance under trying conditions (remember there is no power, no running water, volcanic ash everywhere, Democrat 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
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
Member
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.)
---------------------------------------
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.)
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?
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
Member
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.
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
Member
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.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
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
Member
Why favor the No. IV mk 1 over the No.1 Mk. III?
Kaylee
Member
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.
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.
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked
- Locked
