Lithgow stock finish...

[bigedp51]

Enfield rifles were proof tested with two oiled proof cartridges, this seated the bolt lugs and bolt head to the bolt body. If the headspace increased over .003 the rifle failed proof testing.

No.1 Enfield bolt heads were measured and then fitted using a bolt head spanner wrench to work in and seat the bolt head to the bolt body. Bolt head timing was used when the rear of the bolt head was to contact the collar on the firing pin. Meaning the bolt head was to contact the firing pin collar and push the firing pin to the rear the last 90 degrees of bolt head rotation.

Bolt heads marked with the letter "S" for spare were the longest and were to be used on worn rifles where new or used bolt heads failed to meet headspace requirements.

When a new bolt and a "S" marked bolt head failed to bring the rifle into headspace requirements the rifle was sent for FTR/Overhaul. When this happened normally the surface hardening of the receiver was scraped and the rifle parted out.

Before you do anymore stoning on the bolt lugs I would contact Peter Laidler. Your rifle is a bitser and made up of leftover parts put together by untrained New Yorkers and the very reason you are messing with your bolt lugs. These rifles were never proof tested and the bolt lugs and bolt head were never seated properly as they would be during proofing.

[p246]

The following is an expert from Captain Peter Laidler who was a British armorer and has done more for the Enfield community than we can ever repay him for. He has also forgot more about Lee Enfield's than I will ever know. This should answer some of your questions. I will add once fitted one must also check that you have proper firing pin protrusion. I'll also agree with bigedp51 not to stone the bolt lugs anymore. Peter posts on milsurps.com and is very responsive to questions. Brian Dick is also a member there and answers a lot of technical stuff to. Good Luck.



Spare bolt heads issued from the factory were actually oversize and marked with a small ‘S’….., but nobody can tell me by how much! Other Armourers of the period have told me, only yesterday over a frantic phone call, that this is incorrect but they WERE all to the longest specification. Whatever it is/was, there should be room to stone to size. And THIS is where Armourers were always taught DON’T OVER CHS. Or in this case, should that read don’t UNDER CHS. If your rifle closes on the .074” NO GO gauge, this is what you do. Go to the No1 bolt head drawer and select half a dozen bolt heads that don’t overturn by more than 10 degrees (later, 15 degrees was permitted to make best use of remaining spare parts stockpiles), the bolt face is not ringed sufficient to allow the escape of gas past the primer and the striker hole is not greater than .084” dia. Try them all until you get the best fit. If necessary machine or stone the bolt head square and true until it closes over the .064” gauge and doesn’t close over the .074” gauge. The point at which the bolt doesn’t close prior to the .050” limit is academic because so long as it doesn’t go/close, it’s passed the test.

Now, how you shorten the bolt head it is up to you. You can machine it in a lathe if you like but some are quite hard, or surface grind but I was taught that the best way was to rub the face down on a sheet of ‘400’ wet and dry carborundum paper on a sheet of glass, just covered in slow running water. Go round and round with equal pressure, rotating the bolt head slightly every so often, taking a gnats knacker off at a time for several minutes and trying it again and again. Every so often, smear a smidgin of engineers blue on the rear of the .074” gauge and close the bolt head lightly against it to ensure a crisp round witness mark on the face of the bolt. This is the acid test of it being perfectly square to the bore. Be sure to remember these old Armourers technical words such as ‘gnats knacker’ meaning something too insignificant to be measured and ‘smidgin’, indicating a quantity equivalent to a gnats knacker.

That is very basically it! Once again, this is weeks of practice in the classroom and on the bench with discussion groups all put into one short period. And if we destroyed a rifle or bolts and boltheads while learning our trade ….., who cared so long as we learned and got it right eventually.

[mhb]

I appreciate the further input, but am not sure how to apply any of it, at this point.
I do not see any further need to lap-in the bolt to the receiver, at this point, and don't plan to do so - the bolt lugs and their seats in the receiver are well-enough mated and should be O.K. - the reason lapping was necessary is that both the bolt and receiver showed deformation of the mating surfaces indicative of previous service, evidence that neither was actually new. The firing pin hole, bolt face and firing pin protrusion are good.
I'd be happy to acquire a new-condition spare parts bolt head, but I don't want to buy a bunch of them, or one after another in an effort to achieve better, if not minimum, headspace: unfortunately, I don't know anyone with a box of spares to try. Even if I had a perfectly new receiver and bolt, I surely wouldn't attempt to seat the parts together by firing oiled proof loads, so have done what seemed proper and feasible with what I actually have. I guess I'll just have to try the rifle as-is and see how it performs, for now.
Some of the information in CPT Laidler's excerpt is a bit confusing: 'CHS', though obviously related to headspace, is not explained, though 'GO' and 'NO-GO' limits are clear enough; the '.050" limit' referenced is unexplained, and not self-explanatory. The permissible degree of over-rotation of the bolt head is interesting, but only useful it there are a number of candidate bolt heads to work with. The suggestions for methods of shortening the bolt head are clear enough, and I got a chuckle out of the Brit technical term 'gnat's knacker', which I suspect is their equivalent of the American 'RCH' (Rat's C..t Hair).
I was unaware of the need for the rear of the bolt head shank to contact the firing pin collar before the head is fully turned-in to the bolt body: is this critical in some way? If so, it would seem that it could be achieved (if not currently present in the assembled bolt) by increasing the firing pin protrusion until contact is achieved, and then shortening the protruding tip of the pin as necessary.
Weather permitting, I hope to shoot the rifle tomorrow, and will report results...

mhb - MIke

[p246]

If testing indicates you need a new bolt head and you determine the length you need pm with that measurement. I've been picking off both no 1 and no 4 bolt heads like JB White picking off body armor for a walk on the south side of Chicago. Good luck.

[Parashooter]

CHS = Cartridge Head Space.

.05" limit = minimum stopped distance of bolt handle from butt socket when checking with NO-GO gauge.

If the firing pin doesn't stop by contacting the rear of the bolt head, it stops when the cocking piece hits the bolt. This puts axial stress on the firing pin threads and leads to breakage there.

Firing pin protrusion is controlled by the distance between tip (A) and flange (B) - as well as the overall length of the bolt head. It cannot be correctly adjusted by screwing the pin in/out of the cocking piece.



The primary advantage of raw linseed oil for military gunstocks is that it dries very slowly, ensuring that any excess can be easily wiped off before forming a shiny surface film that is inappropriate in military use. Raw oil that has penetrated below the wood surface does eventually dry there - exactly where it is needed to protect the wood interior from moisture. "Boiled" linseed oil can make an excellent finish for a sporting gunstock, where shiny reflections are desired by some and scratches can be promptly repaired. Producing an appropriate dull, sub-surface, military finish with "BLO" requires significantly more skill and attention than raw linseed.

[p246]

Thank you para shooter I always enjoy your informative posts and you summed up BLO vs RLO better than I could. Having used both, the times constraints imposed by work, trying to shoot, trying to keep wife moderately happy is why I chose BLO at this time. Maybe if I make it to retirement and things slow down that will change. There is also the argument of using Tung Oil instead for its minor water proofing qualities but I probably shouldn't stir that pot.

On a side note you've save me a lot of headaches with you're post on bullet casting for mil surps, so let me thank you for that also.

[bigedp51]

At one time I told everyone to tighten up their headspace, on one rifle using different bolt heads I was well under minimum headspace with the bolt face just kissing the rear of the case. I got chewed out by Peter and he sent me a PM and stated that the longer the headspace the less bolt thrust that was delivered to the bolt. The case when it grips the chamber walls acts like a shock absorber and delivers less bolt thrust.

The bolt head timing or when the collar on the firing pin is contacted by the rear of the bolt head effects trigger pull. The Canadian manual just gives you a plus or minus air gap between the cocking piece and the rear of the bolt. This could change the bolt head timing from the 5:00 position to the 2:00 position as to when the the rear of the bolt head contacted the collar on the firing pin.

The Canadian No.4 manual has greatly reduced standards to keep the rifle in service with the Canadian Rangers. One example is excessive wood crush below the receiver and above the trigger guard which effected trigger pull. Normally when the wood crush was over .020 compined the fore stock was replaced. Because there were no new replacement fore stocks and to make up for excessive wood crush the trigger guard was bent to bring the trigger pull within limits. It was funny Peter sent me a PM and asked why the Canadians were allowed to bend the trigger guard when no self respecting British armourer would ever do this. I replied because they don't make new furniture any more and he told me to bugger off. The funnest one was in a open forum I was talking about raw linseed oil and the stocks being dry as a popcorn fart. The next night Peter thanked me because he ordered a beer in his local pub and said he was dry as a popcorn fart and got free drinks. Peter said something to the effect about acting like a wild colonial and dry British humor is why everyone bought him a round.

On bedding the No.1 Son the Australian and Roger Wadham a New Zealander who wrote a book on the Enfield rifle will give you good pointers.

[p246]

[QUOTE=bigedp51;487612]At one time I told everyone to tighten up their headspace, on one rifle using different bolt heads I was well under minimum headspace with the bolt face just kissing the rear of the case. I got chewed out by Peter and he sent me a PM and stated that the longer the headspace the less bolt thrust that was delivered to the bolt. The case when it grips the chamber walls acts like a shock absorber and delivers less bolt thrust.

The bolt head timing or when the collar on the firing pin is contacted by the rear of the bolt head effects trigger pull. The Canadian manual just gives you a plus or minus air gap between the cocking piece and the rear of the bolt. This could change the bolt head timing from the 5:00 position to the 2:00 position as to when the the rear of the bolt head contacted the collar on the firing pin.

The Canadian No.4 manual has greatly reduced standards to keep the rifle in service with the Canadian Rangers. One example is excessive wood crush below the receiver and above the trigger guard which effected trigger pull. Normally when the wood crush was over .020 compined the fore stock was replaced. Because there were no new replacement fore stocks and to make up for excessive wood crush the trigger guard was bent to bring the trigger pull within limits. It was funny Peter sent me a PM and asked why the Canadians were allowed to bend the trigger guard when no self respecting British armourer would ever do this. I replied because they don't make new furniture any more and he told me to bugger off. The funnest one was in a open forum I was talking about raw linseed oil and the stocks being dry as a popcorn fart. The next night Peter thanked me because he ordered a beer in his local pub and said he was dry as a popcorn fart and got free drinks. Peter said something to the effect about acting like a wild colonial and dry British humor is why everyone bought him a round.

On bedding the No.1 Son the Australian and Roger Wadham a New Zealander who wrote a book on the Enfield rifle will give you good pointers.[/QUOTE

Peter can be opinionated that's for sure. I can see why the trigger guard thing threw him, not the traditional British way. I have read a lot of "Son"s stuff and enjoy it. I have also read some stuff by Muffet2008 I think that's pretty good but I've seen him go high right a few times also.

[mhb]

for the additional information.
I now understand the '.050" limit', and know that it is not a problem in this rifle. The bolt head does, indeed contact the flange on the firing pin before being fully turned-in to the bolt body, though the rotation after contact is more like 270 degrees.
I did shoot the rifle this morning, and was quite pleased with the initial results: 002.jpg003.jpg

Fired a total of 25 rounds: 10 to seat the rifle parts and adjust the sights for windage and 3-5 shot groups; 1 of the Hornady 174 gr. .312" RNFB, and 2 of the Hornady .312" HPBT match. I'm gonna need a taller front sight, too. Still, with a group of 1 1/2" or less with each bullet type, I consider that I've achieved the A.G. Parker guarantee for the #1 rifle, and am declaring conditional victory. I suspect that further load development and testing of available bullets will yield results as good or better.

mhb - MIke

[p246]

Good target for the old Battle Rifle. Take that thing to Camp Perry...