Loading the .303 Brit?
visit
.303 British.Com
Also visit
Jay Currah's
The Lee Enfield
Surplus Rifle.Com's Rifle Data Section's
[SMLE #1 MkIII] --
[Enfield Rifle No.4 Mk 1 and 2<
Please take time to visit our sponsor.

The Winning Photo for March,
jisii’s 1918 BSA
| About this site |
|---|
| C&R Dealer Links | General Related Links |
| The Member's Map | The Gun Control Forum |
Due to the main focus of this site on the collecting and shooting
of C&R and military surplus firearms in their collectible original configurations,
sporterising topics will not be permitted in these fourms.
Thankyou,
ParallaxBill
Parallax's Trader Boards
See the new location at the bottom of the forum list
**Membership applications no longer required to post but you still must be registered.**
No dealers please!
Back in Production, New and Improved
Darrell's Scout Mount Page & Forum
| Author | Comment | ||
|---|---|---|---|
cmw0081 |
Why are some wrapped in copper wire? |
Lead | |
|
I don't know anything about Enfields. Why are some wrapped in copper wire?
|
|||
Renfield54 |
|||
|
The Enfields that were wire wrapped, were done to re-inforce the rifle for launching rifle grenades with blank rounds........
FWIW..........Steve
"Dusty old helmet.....Rusty old gun......They sit in the corner and wait"
~Audie Murphy--1925-1971~ |
|||
ordonnanz gewehr |
|||
|
And how is wire wrapping supposed to do that? I seriously doubt this would make a difference.
|
|||
Swaffield |
|||
|
It was done in an effort to strengthen (and hold together) the wood, not necessarily the action and/or barrel. It was also done on some E.Y. rifles, again as
strengthening.
|
|||
reddogge |
|||
"What happened? What the HELL happened?" Jake Holman "The Sandpebbles" |
|||
portugeejn |
|||
|
I wonder if it wasn't so much to reinforce the rifle, as much as to keep the wood from turning into shrapnel and protect the operator somewhat if it let
go. My 2 cents.
RonP |
|||
Mad 4 Mausers |
|||
|
IMHO, the English hierarchy had little regard for their common soldiers, and outfitted them with the worst equipment. The wired-up Enfield reflects this
attitude perfectly.
Often cited in histories of WWII are descriptions of English troops having rotten teeth, sunken chests and narrow shoulders. Despite all this, these soldiers were brave and noble fighters, and the Germans for one, had great respect for them. |
|||
jrmc75 |
|||
IMHO, the English hierarchy had little regard for their common soldiers, and outfitted them with the worst equipment. The wired-up Enfield reflects this attitude perfectly.I'm not sure I follow this logic at all, considering that the No.4 Lee Enfield that they were armed with in WWII is arguably the best bolt action battle rifle ever made. Add the Bren, the Spitfire, and the long list of other excellent equipment the British and Commonwealth forces were supplied with, and that argument won't hold water. The GF rifles were wrapped to prevent the wood from splitting or shattering from the added strain of grenade launching...precicely to protect the soldiers using them. The use of obsolete rifles in the grenade launching role is hardly unique to the Brits...if you will recall, the US fielded quite a few '03s in that role during WWII. |
|||
timberlord |
|||
Mad 4 Mausers wrote: It was through actual experience that rifles were wrapped , same said of the Ishapore screw , and alot of the wire wraps are still decent shooters....even
60 - 70 yrs later.
Last Edited By: timberlord
06/19/08 08:43 AM.
Edited 1 times.
|
|||
Mad 4 Mausers |
|||
|
One can be sure that the "common English soldier" did not have, for example, a Spitfire on his equipment list.
The English soldier is not to be confused with the Aussie or Canadian soldier. You'll note the word, "Britain," was not used by this writer. Australia and Canada did not suffer from the ill effects of a class-driven society, and their nourishment, training, hygiene, and medical care were far better. The observation regarding the physical condition of English troops in WWII has been made by numerous historians. Were the Enfield "arguably the best bolt action battle rifle ever made," its action would be seen on modern sniper rifles, but it is not. The Mauser action is by far the favorite. Moreover, the Enfield would place better in present-day competition with other military rifles from the same era were it the best among them. |
|||
jrmc75 |
|||
Were the Enfield "arguably the best bolt action battle rifle ever made," its action would be seen on modern sniper rifles, but it is not. The Mauser action is by far the favorite. Moreover, the Enfield would place better in present-day competition with other military rifles from the same era were it the best among them.The Enfield action was seen on modern sniping rifles up until the 1990s or so, and that is entirely beside the point, as is the argument that winning on a rifle range equates to a better standard issue combat arm. The No.4 Lee Enfield is faster to operate, has better sights (rear mounted peep sights ARE the present day standard), and twice the magazine capacity of the K98k. The action is plenty strong and accurate for it's designed purpose, and it was cheap and easy to produce compared to a Mauser. All of which means considerably more during a period of total war than a slightly smaller group at the range And regardless of the many inequities of the British class system...the British regular army has been one of the world's most professional and best equipped since the days of the longbow. The sunken chests, bad teeth and the rest of it can apply to any chronically malnourished folk, of which there was an abundance all over the world at the time...that sort of thing rates right up there with the assertion that the Japanese were all scrawny and half blind, unable to shoot or fight. I'd like to see some citations for some of these "numerous historians", since I've been voraciously reading history since I was a child, and don't remember seeing any such descriptions of British soldiers from any credible source. |
|||
temperflash |
|||
|
The English were long noted for having a higher percentage of bad teeth, even among their Gentry. It is mostly genetic agravated by diet.
On other forums members have posted old photos of their ancestors in uniform, and the Britsh/English soldiers were as hale and hardy as any I've seen even compared to today's troopers. The illusion of the "Sunken Chest" is more a matter of posture than actual physique. An example would be the actor Gregory Peck, a large powerfully built man his shoulders forwards stance always gave the illusion of a sunken chest. The British Uniform of WW1 and earlier added to this appearance. The tight bodice with looser fitted tail of the uniform jacket, compared to the straight up and down tunic of the German and American counterparts. The Germans copied the British style uniform jacket for their own dress uniforms in WW2. Its said that the Germans themselves considered the Enfield superior for most forms of combat. The saying went that Germans went to war with a hunting rifle, Americans went to war with a target rifle, and the British went to war with a fighting rifle. Only the trend towards higher pressure cartridges has given the forwards lockup rifles the edge as a sniper rifle. In practice the Enfield bolt allows the sniper to cycle his bolt with a great deal less movement of his body, making it easier to remain hidden. Back to the wire wrapped rifles. The rifle grenade launchers of WW1 were very hard on a rifle, the kick was brutal. I've seen Garands reduced to junk from being used as designated grenade launcher guns. To prevent damage to regular issue rifles the British took the worst examples they had and converted them to grenade launcher only duty. These guns usually had shot out or corroded bores. the wire wrap was intended to keep handguards from spliting due to shock. Every WW1 and WW2 wire wrap I've examined had a terrible bore, and a couple I've seen taken out of the wood were pitted on the outside of the barrel like the surface of the moon. Actions were often loose as a goose. The soldier issued one of these was expected to never fire live ammo in it if he could avoid it. The Later Ishapore Wire wraps were most often regular issue rifles in good to fine condition. They were already obsolete and only used for this purpose because there were still huge stocks of .303 blanks to be used up. No need damaging a perfectly good .308 Ishy when the older guns were available. The few reports I've read of test firing the Ishy wire wraps indicate most can be expected to be good shooters. PS The Australians took old Lithgow rifles and cut the barrel back to about nine inches, cut the stock to a pistol grip, then installed a grenade launcher cup. The shortened barrel was run through a firing port on armored vechicles and the cup put on the outside. These were used to launch smoke grenades. I first learned of these when studying prop guns used in Sci Fi movies. The dwarfs in Star Wars carried these old smoke grenade projectors tricked out to look like rayguns. The guns without the launcer cup are occasionally seen in Australian Sci Fi films used as sawed off rifle/pistols. Also a field modification of battle damaged No.1 Enfields favored by the Chinese was to cut the barrel back to around 12-14 inches and solder a half of a brass coin to the barrel as a front sight. The foreend was sometimes discarded altogether. Sometimes the rear sight was removed and a slot cut in the charger guide to use as a rear sight. Parts removed were used to repair rifles in better condition. These cut down rifles were carried by bicycle messengers, runners, and ammo handlers for self defense. Theres also a dedicated grenade launcher version of the No.4 favored by Asian rebel groups. Its cut short and a tube barrel jacket supports and guides the more modern anti tank grenades , usually old Nato issue grenades. The original ladder peep sight is moved to the reciver ring. Apparently this combination has proven remarkable accurate, allowing more precise placement of the grenade than the standard set ups.
Last Edited By: temperflash
06/21/08 01:39 PM.
Edited 1 times.
|
|||
Mad 4 Mausers |
|||
|
"… that sort of thing rates right up there with the assertion that the Japanese were all scrawny and half blind, unable to shoot or fight."
"Voracious" reading implies no guarantee of comprehension, and the intended similie quoted above provides a very good example. A re-reading of Posting #6 is called for with careful attention to the comment made regarding the fighting quality of the English soldier. It is complimentary, not derogatory. |
|||
jrmc75 |
|||
|
I wouldn't be too critical of anyone else's reading comprehension skills if I were you there Socrates...my comment was directed at any such inaccurate
stereotypes, compliment or derogation has squat to do with it. British troops of the WWII or any other era were configured the same as their contemporaries.
|
|||