What to look for with Lee No4

[Livefast]

Hopefully I should be going to look at a Lee Enfield No4 soon but don't have much experience with vintage military rifles.

Is there anything I should specifically look for on these rifles and what is the easiest way to measure the bore? Is there a bore guage available?

Thanks

[dromia]

Why would you want to measure the bore?

[WelshShooter]

If the purpose is to see how "shot out" the barrel is you could possibly put a bullet into the muzzle end of the rifle and see if it "grips" at the ogive. As with any milsurps check to see if all parts have matching serial numbers and to see if all the woodwork matches (colour and damage wise). Most No4 Mk1s had the rear aperture sight with the simple adjustable sight. There are some which have a 200/600 yard (I think it's these values?) flip up battle aperture night. There's also a micrometer style rear aperture sight.

Another thing to check is the number on the bolt head which can be 0, 1, 2 and 3. Assuming that headspace is correct the lower the number, the "newer" the barrel. Over time you will need to swap up to a higher bolt head number to maintain head spacing and these can be expensive, so best to get a low number to start with! If you're buying from an RFD ask them to gauge it, if not then you'd have to buy some to take with you, if you care so much about this.

[Livefast]

Thanks Welsh.

People keep telling me to make sure that the bore isn't shot out, thats the only reason I was asking.

[dromia]

You can get an indication of a worn muzzle with a 0.311" bullet of known diameter (measured)

Looking from the breech end check the lead on the lands for wear, however freebore and lead wear in itself doesn't necessarily make a bad shooting rifle. I did some of my best Classic rifle shooting with a two groove Longbranch No4 MK1*, mismatched bolt and the throat worn a good half inch. That rifle just collected gongs out to 1000 yrds with HXP jacketed and my own cast bullet loads.

Put a tight patch down the bore, an over groove diameter soft lead slug is better if allowed, feeling for tight spots, slack spots and rough spots. It should be a smooth consistent feel as you push through the whole of the barrel.

[huntervixen]

In addition to this good advice, consider what you are looking for, a WW2 dated Mk1 or a post war hung trigger mk2.

Do your research on the various options first, lots of old posts here, plus the enormous Lee Enfield knowledge base over on the Milsurps forum.

A few more pointers ... With regard to the bore, you can also look at the crown for a good indicator of overall condition, check the barrel is floating correctly, it should only rest at the muzzle, you should be able push the muzzle up with felt resistance, if it doesn't move, the bedding is off, check the trigger for two stage let off, again if it feels odd or single stage, it might be an indicator of a bedding issue.

Poor bedding on a No4 will severely affect accuracy.

[ovenpaa]

...and if at all possible shoot it. Fultons of Bisley used to be very good in this respect, if they had a gun you were interested in they used to allow you to wander down to Short Siberia and put a few shots through it however that was a few years ago.

[Livefast]

Thanks gents, i'll be looking for a shooter rather than a war dated rifle for a collection. I'll get myself a fmj so i can roughly guage the muzzle end.

[Rearlugs]

IMHO, the "bullet in the muzzle" test is meaningless (the bullets themselves often vary in diameter!), as is the use of bore gauges. There was quite wide manufacturing variation in barrel bores, and there is rarely any correlation between measured dimensions and shooting performance. Many No4s seem to shoot very well despite muzzle damage or pitting, or where the muzzle completely swallows an unfired bullet.

About the only visible indicator of barrel performance is the chamber lead - a very worn lead may mean that performance is mediocre with modern commercial nitro/fmjbt ammunition. Bore should of course be shiny, and not have any rough points when a patch is pushed through. A barrel is less used when the rifling is sharp, but rounded or flat rifling doesn't necessarily mean that shooting performance is affected - many rifles are tack drivers even when they appear shot out (AJ Parker and other gun trade "ball burnished" selected barrels often appear worn out even when they are are unused!).

The bolt head size is not related to the age or usage of the barrel; they were dimensioned this way purely for ease of manufacturing assembly. It is common for a "new in wrap" unused rifle to have a 1 or 2 bolthead as factory fitted, and many 3s have also been reported.

Apart from the barrel, shooting performance is usually but not always determined by the fit of the forend. As mentioned by huntervixen, the barrel should rest on the front of the forend, but be free to move up or a little to each side. If there is any sticking or noises as the barrel is moved, then the barrel channel might be obstructed or the wood poorly fitted. (Note that, on many rifles where the stock bands don't fit very well, the front hand guard often moves forward and then fouls the foresight block). On the other hand, there are rifles with centre-bedding or even "solid bedding" that shoot perfectly well.

For the first-time buyer, I would point out that the "cosmetic" appearance of a rifle is entirely unrelated to its shooting performance. Any No4 with a decent barrel and correct forend fit should shoot better than its owner - regardless of how old, tatty and mismatched it might be (the rifle, not the owner, that is..). In fact the very worst shooting rifles I have fixed have been those "brand new" Mk2s that a lot of people have paid premium prices for. The reason being that those rifles were often just assembled at the factory - the forend fitting intended to be checked and adjusted by a unit armourer when the rifle was eventually issued. Most of them simply aren't bedded correctly when first unwrapped.

[huntervixen]

IMHO, the "bullet in the muzzle" test is meaningless (the bullets themselves often vary in diameter!), as is the use of bore gauges. There was quite wide manufacturing variation in barrel bores, and there is rarely any correlation between measured dimensions and shooting performance. Many No4s seem to shoot very well despite muzzle damage or pitting, or where the muzzle completely swallows an unfired bullet.

About the only visible indicator of barrel performance is the chamber lead - a very worn lead may mean that performance is mediocre with modern commercial nitro/fmjbt ammunition. Bore should of course be shiny, and not have any rough points when a patch is pushed through. A barrel is less used when the rifling is sharp, but rounded or flat rifling doesn't necessarily mean that shooting performance is affected - many rifles are tack drivers even when they appear shot out (AJ Parker and other gun trade "ball burnished" selected barrels often appear worn out even when they are are unused!).

The bolt head size is not related to the age or usage of the barrel; they were dimensioned this way purely for ease of manufacturing assembly. It is common for a "new in wrap" unused rifle to have a 1 or 2 bolthead as factory fitted, and many 3s have also been reported.

Apart from the barrel, shooting performance is usually but not always determined by the fit of the forend. As mentioned by huntervixen, the barrel should rest on the front of the forend, but be free to move up or a little to each side. If there is any sticking or noises as the barrel is moved, then the barrel channel might be obstructed or the wood poorly fitted. (Note that, on many rifles where the stock bands don't fit very well, the front hand guard often moves forward and then fouls the foresight block). On the other hand, there are rifles with centre-bedding or even "solid bedding" that shoot perfectly well.

For the first-time buyer, I would point out that the "cosmetic" appearance of a rifle is entirely unrelated to its shooting performance. Any No4 with a decent barrel and correct forend fit should shoot better than its owner - regardless of how old, tatty and mismatched it might be (the rifle, not the owner, that is..). In fact the very worst shooting rifles I have fixed have been those "brand new" Mk2s that a lot of people have paid premium prices for. The reason being that those rifles were often just assembled at the factory - the forend fitting intended to be checked and adjusted by a unit armourer when the rifle was eventually issued. Most of them simply aren't bedded correctly when first unwrapped.

Hi Rearlugs, hope you had a great Christmas, I thought I had heard of issues with the last of the Mk2 No4's, I suppose it makes sense if they never reached a REME armourer to be set up correctly for service.

Straight out of the factory and straight to Donnington, surplus rifles only ordered to keep the factories busy while the kinks were worked out of the EM2.

I agree about a properly set up No4 shooting well, my (FAZ F.T.R 48) Maltby Mk1 was built up from the ground up (using virtually a full set of Maltby parts) and NOS wood work by Phil Rose, all I did was very carefully tweak the bedding while refurbishing the wood and metalwork. it will out shoot me any day of the week, superb rifle!

Love to see what its capable of in the hands of a real marksmen.