Out of curiosity, when and who made 7.62 NATO Enfields? Was there much of a transition period, or conversions from .303 to 7.62? Was this an Indian only thing? Or did the English ever produce any in this caliber, or convert them?
__________________
Mosin Nagant evangelist on a mission to convert YOU!
Out of curiosity, when and who made 7.62 NATO Enfields? Was there much of a transition period, or conversions from .303 to 7.62? Was this an Indian only thing? Or did the English ever produce any in this caliber, or convert them?
Canadian armours and British programs converted rifles for match use and to test the possibility of conversion call the L8 I think. Don't for get the best one done was the L42A1.
Canadian armours and British programs converted rifles for match use and to test the possibility of conversion call the L8 I think. Don't for get the best one done was the L42A1.
Oh all cased up, each piece in it's special place....my eyes my eyes! frenchy
For service it was a transition with the forming of the Nato Alliance and standardizing the 7.62nato round.
The Canadian DCRA ( Dominion of Canada Rifle Association ) rifles were converted .303brit No'4's for match.
Then there's the rifles actually produced as 7.62nato.
Brits came out with the L39 , L42 , Envoy and the Enforcer.
India produced the 2A , 2A1
Here's a good site for info The Lee-Enfield Rifle
1968 RFI 2A1
The Australians were the first to do a trial on converting the No.1 to *7.62/.308 which would have required different grade steel and heat treating. The Indians used the information gained and learned by the Australians for their Ishapore 7.62 Enfields.
NOTE: An oiled proof pressure test cartridge delivers twice the bolt thrust (force) to the bolt and locking lugs. To this day the British military still tests its small arms with oiled proof test cartridges which subjects the firearm to the worst possible field conditions.
*There is less than 2,000 CUP difference between the 7.62 NATO and the .308 Winchester. The European CIP the equivalent of the American SAAMI considers these two cartridges to be the same.
Prior to the .303 Enfield being proof pressure tested the headspace was set as close to .064 as possible. After proof testing the Enfield was checked with a .067 headspace gauge, if the bolt closed on the .067 gauge the rifle failed proof testing due to excessive bolt lug setback.
The oil proof round was used to seat the bolt head and bolt lugs to the receiver as the oil round exerts twice normal bolt thrust. It was also used to to exert the maximum thrust on the bolt that could happen in the field. (firing with a wet chamber or wet ammunition)
The British used a different copper crusher method where the copper crusher was located at the very rear of the cartridge (axial thrust vs radial thrust)
There are uniformed people in our gun forums who tell you to grease or lube your cartridge cases to fireform them or oil them for other misinformed reasons.
The British Military in 1929 said do not oil or lube your ammo and the U.S. Military repeated it in 2008.
The effects of excess bolt thrust caused by oil in the chamber.
The British War Office "Textbook of Small Arms" is a wealth of information on small arms and the Enfield rifle. If you look at the chamber pressures of the .303 the early cartridges started at 16 tsi, through 17 tsi, to 18.5 tsi. In American english 18.5 tsi is approximately 45,000 CUP or 49,000 PSI or the last "rated chamber pressure" for the Enfield rifle.
Now here is the kicker, American SAAMI commercial .303 ammunition is loaded to less than 43,000 CUP due to the "older" Enfields sill being used today. This is due to the "lower" chamber pressure ratings of the earlier Enfields, (16 and 17 tsi or Tons Square inch)
In a nutshell this is why when American SAAMI commercial .303 ammunition is reloaded to over 43,000 CUP the cartridge cases fall apart and case head separations occur. In short our American commercial cases are NOT designed to British military specification and are designed for lower pressures.