No.4 Mk1 Savage

[Merc]

I acquired what initially appeared to be a well-used 1944 Lee-Enfield No.4 Mk1 made by Savage at an estate sale in October, 2014 that's turned out to be a great shooter. It has strong, crisp rifling and the action is fairly tight. I've cycled several hundred rounds through it without any major problems occurring other than a broken extractor spring. It's one of my favorite battle rifles.

Since I never could quite solve the iron ladder sight, I installed a bolt-on Addley Precision scope mount and a Bushnell scope and the old boy shoots tight groups at 100 yards. Shooting is always more fun when your rifle is zeroed.

I'm fairly sure the No.4 saw service during WW2 because of the stock's general dinged and dented condition. I wouldn't want it any other way. However, it had BLR (Beyond Local Repair) stenciled in big letters on the stock. I had no idea of what BLR meant when I bought it. After determining it's meaning and before shooting it, I had several gunsmiths look at it to determine if it was safe to shoot. No problems were found so the BLR designation remains a mystery.

Not being totally satisfied with what the smiths found, I decided to buy a .303 head space field gauge and use it to confirm their measurement and to occasionally check out the bolt/receiver myself for wear. The bolt closed 100% easily on my .070" head space field gauge which didn't make sense. I later found out that there are US civilian SAAMI head space specs (.070") and British military head space specs (.074"). Trying again with the correct .074" spaced head space field gauge only allowed the bolt to close to around 80% which confirmed the smiths' generally positive assessment of the rifle.

Had the No. 4 out to the range the other day along with a newly acquired and minty M1917 Winchester that I was shooting for the first time. Both rifles were shooting nice groups so it was a great day!

Merc

[Art]

It is possible that the stock on the rifle with the BLR came from another rifle after import, that stuff can happen, or that the rifle was repaired by the company that imported it, that happens too. Anyway, it sounds like a great rifle. Despite their reputation Lee Enfields with good barrels properly stocked are capable of telling accuracy. The only Milsurp I have that is capable of tighter groups than my NOS No4 Mk II is my M1903A3. Sounds like you got a good un. Enjoy it.

[Merc]

Hi Art,

I get a real hoot out of shooting these old rifles. The No. 4 attracts lots of attention at the range. Other shooters see the foresight protector and the brass butt plate. The M1917 and M1903A3 are works of firearm art IMHO. No-one was around while I was shooting the '17 the other day but I'm sure it will have its share of admirers.

The No. 4 had another problem that I forgot to mention because it seemed minor at the time. The foresight blade was loose and the set screw needed tightened which required a special screwdriver that I initially made and later bought. The blade actually fell out and I had to use a magnet to find it. Dirt was the only thing keeping it in place. They may have considered that a repair that was best performed by the armory because of the special tooling required to set the position of the blade.
It didn't matter to me since I used the scope.

Merc

[Sunray]

Every Regm't's weapons tech would have the front sight tool. Or he'd make one.
Beyond Local Repair meant something major was damaged or the Regm't's weapons tech couldn't get the parts. Mind you, it could also mean the finish was excessively worn. However, in this case it's very like the headspace.
CF weapons tech didn't use Field gauges, but they had 'em. Possible that the weapons tech didn't have one in his kit though. A Field is indeed .074". SAAMI is also .074".
Anyway, if a No. 4 on my MIU in the old days didn't pass the No-Go, the rifle was pulled out of service. Ditto for any FN with a finish that was worn excessively.
The stock's general dinged and dented condition means little. The rifle has been here there and everywhere for 70 plus years. A '44 Savage should be a Mk I* too.

[JB White]

You're going to have to explain this one to me:

A Field is indeed .074". SAAMI is also .074".

When buying U.S. made SAAMI spec gauges, the FIELD has been 0.070. I have one as part of a set as do untold numbers of others who purchased them. .064 GO, .067 NO GO, and .070 FIELD REJECT.
I got a MIL-SPEC .074 Field Reject out of Australia to complete my set for the Lee Enfield rifles.

Since that time someone has been producing a coin-type gauge in .074 to satisfy consumer demand. However, to the best of my knowledge this is not SAAMI spec. Unless they have changed the standard in the past year or so?

Ditto on the MkI* nomenclature. That little asterisk (called "star") is very important. A No4 MkI has a bolt release latch behind the charger bridge. The No4 MkI* (star) does not. Instead it releases the bolt via a slot in the guide rail.

[Merc]

Sunray,

My Enfield is indeed a No. 4 Mk 1* made in 1944 by Savage.

I just looked at the first head space field gauge I used and it's marked ".303 British .070" Field." I believe that all field gauges for .303 British should be labeled .074" for military spec and .070" for commercial spec.

I'm careful about the ammo I shoot. For example, I reload my .303 cases with 1 grain over starting load and neck size only. I watch the cases closely for evidence of stretching damage or primer distortion and have reloaded them multiple times. No head-case separation problems so far.

In addition to the No. 4, I also have the aforementioned M1917 Winchester and a M1916 Spanish Mauser and I use head space field gauges on all of them at least once a year. All pass the field head space gauge. I'm hoping to be able to shoot my old rifles occasionally (because it's a hoot!) and will retire them if they become worn beyond being safe.

Merc

[JB White]

If they pass now, then they'll last the rest of your life and beyond with just occasional shooting with standard loadings.

[Merc]

JB,

You gave me an excellent explanation on the M1917 page a while back concerning the different head space standards for Lee-Enfield .303 caliber rifles and where they apply. If you remember, we started out talking about M1917 but drifted to .303 British somehow. I was going to quote your explanation here, but maybe the followers of this thread would be interested in hearing it directly from you. Good to see you here, by the way.

Update: I took the liberty of copying JB's interesting post on Lee Enfield head spacing:

Begin quote:

Let's eliminate the SAAMI part first. Those specs (.070) are for sporting rifles where owners tend to reload commercial brass. There is a margin of liability built in there.

Military rifles are in a different relm. Chambers are generous to take into account water and mud, etc. Ammo is set to spec using heavier brass and there are no provisions for an individual reload. The .074 spec has its own safety margin where the rifle is safe to operate without fear of malfunction.

Emergency wartime spec was set for older rifles still in service. The FR can be up to .080 (.082 depending on the source cited) and the Lee rifle will still function without mishap. No reloads should be attempted as the fired brass has been stretched to or beyond its working limits.

The .303 head spaces on the rim which makes it much more forgiving than a rimless cartridge. If you do reload fired brass, resizing necks only, and keeping the brass segregated for the individual rifle helps to compensate by working the brass less, thus extending case life into a normal range. It isn't a fix for a generous head space. Only an economical work around for us shooters.

End quote.

Does anyone know of an ammo mfr who makes modern .303 British brass that is close or equal in size/weight to the original Mk 7 brass? I've weighed PPU, Remington and Winchester .303 British cases and the PPU cases weigh more than the others. The average PPU case is 9% heavier than Winchester Super X and 3% heavier than Remington Core-Lokt cases.

PPU ammo is so cheap that it almost makes reloading uneconomical. I do it because my No. 4 seems to handle a lighter load much better with less recoil and more accuracy. I use a starting powder charge plus one grain and 150 grain flat base bullets instead of the original 174 grain bullets loaded by PPU.

The US standard military .30-06 ammo was used in various civilian/commercial rifles through the years. I'm not familiar enough with .303 British ammo to know of any civilian/commercial applications although I'm sure there were or there wouldn't be a need for two different head space specs.

Merc

[Merc]

JB,

I've been lucky in that all of my milsurp rifles have had decent head space. The general advice you often hear is to remove the striker and extractor from the bolt when testing with a gauge. I followed their advice and stripped the No. 4 bolt. Re-installing the striker was the most difficult part of the project. Getting the threads started was frustrating. The cut out portion at the back end of the striker that accommodates the set screw seemed to resist all of my efforts to engage the threads. I was finally successful and per your advice, will be happy to accept the test results as a one-time evaluation and move on.

Merc

[MJ1]

I'm always amazed at the amount of concern about wearing out an Enfield from shooting on range days. It's not going to happen for the average owner.