enfield accuracy

m44mosin · 06-08-2009, 12:10 AM

what kind of accuracy should i expect out of a No.4 MkI enfield in average codition.

Iron_Colonel · 06-08-2009, 12:59 AM

Very good accuracy. If the bore isn't all shot out, and you can see strong lands and grooves, it is most likely a more accurate rifle than you are. Mine certainly is. If you had a scoped one, I would imagine it would be easy to achieve 1 moa anyways, if not better at 100 yds. If I had a scope on mine, I'm sure it would do better than 1 moa. Iron sights is very accurate as it sits, even with the Pakistani stuff. Looks like you'll have to get one and take it out and shoot it to see!

wunhunglo · 06-08-2009, 08:28 AM

Should be good enough to hit the Bulls Eye (or at least a man sized target) at 600 yards with decent ammo. (using standard iron sights)

Alan De Enfield · 06-08-2009, 05:23 PM

Iron Sights, 15mph wind right to left, only elbow support, Privi 174FMJ ammunition. 82 yards (75 mts)
Savage No4 Mk1*

2 sighting shots (at 10 O'clock) then 5 rounds.

SwedeSteve · 06-09-2009, 10:51 AM

I've only shot my No I, MK III a few times, but I can say it's really accurate. Even with these tired old eyes.

gandog56 · 06-09-2009, 12:27 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Alan De Enfield

Iron Sights, 15mph wind right to left, only elbow support, Privi 174FMJ ammunition. 82 yards (75 mts)
Savage No4 Mk1*

Define only elbow support.

Roys · 06-09-2009, 12:38 PM

"Define only elbow support. "
This should be interesting, if it's any different than the rifle resting in the palm of your hand and your elbow resting on the ground as in the prone position, or with the rifle resting in the palm of your hand and your elbow resting on a table or bench as in bench rest shooting.

George H · 06-09-2009, 01:09 PM

Not a fan of this rifle, are you sure that someone was shooting at your target. I've been known to do that.

Alan De Enfield · 06-09-2009, 01:12 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by gandog56

Define only elbow support.

Good question :
Lying prone, elbow on the ground, forend in hand. Butt in shoulder, finger on trigger.
Nothing to reduce the 'wobble' factor, No clamps, No sling, No bipods, No resting the muzzle on a box, sandbag or similar.

Alan De Enfield · 06-09-2009, 01:26 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by George H

Not a fan of this rifle, are you sure that someone was shooting at your target. I've been known to do that.

When you say "not a fan of this rifle" do you mean that you are not getting good 'scores' ?

Yes - someone (me) was shooting at the target - dont understand your point ?

Most No4s (unless well worn) are capable of giving you sub 1MOA, and in general are more capable than the people holding them.
Loose front trigger guard screws, loose cocking pieces screws, badly adjusted sears, bent trigger guards, incorrectly fitted woodwork (even a slightly loose butt bolt) etc will all have a major impact on accuracy. Get your rifle fitted up correctly by someone who knows what they are doing and you'll be surprised. A No4 with a quality ammunition (such as Privi Partizan 174gr FMJ) will give many modern rifles (open sights) a run for their money.
Ammunition makes a huge difference. I've reloaded 125gr, 150gr and 180gr bullets with various powder weights and just cannot get the accuracy I get with the Privi factory load.

No1s, I grant you tend to be 2MOA + and No5s 4MOA+ (well mine are anyway)
The later Enfield variants - like the Enforcer - with a scope will give me a 'cloverleaf'

m44mosin · 06-09-2009, 11:21 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Iron_Colonel

Very good accuracy. If the bore isn't all shot out, and you can see strong lands and grooves, it is most likely a more accurate rifle than you are. Mine certainly is. If you had a scoped one, I would imagine it would be easy to achieve 1 moa anyways, if not better at 100 yds. If I had a scope on mine, I'm sure it would do better than 1 moa. Iron sights is very accurate as it sits, even with the Pakistani stuff. Looks like you'll have to get one and take it out and shoot it to see!

i already have one! lol a No.4 MkI, only shot it once with winchester super x ammo 150gr SP, no bench rest standing at a paint can(50 yards) hit it every time. i wanted to put a scope on it and possiably a synthetic stock so i dont mess up the wood on it. ( ill be takin in the woods and stuff)

gandog56 · 06-10-2009, 12:42 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Alan De Enfield

Good question :
Lying prone, elbow on the ground, forend in hand. Butt in shoulder, finger on trigger.
Nothing to reduce the 'wobble' factor, No clamps, No sling, No bipods, No resting the muzzle on a box, sandbag or similar.

Yeah, made sense as soon as you said prone.

cold queso · 06-10-2009, 01:48 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by George H

Not a fan of this rifle, are you sure that someone was shooting at your target. I've been known to do that.

I would support banning any member saying bad things about the Enfield!

Palladin8 · 06-10-2009, 05:17 PM

^hahahaha! yeah I agree but I understand. Different strokes for different folks. I kind of feel the same way about Mosins though. They just don't trip my trigger like they do for everyone else on this forum. However I have been bitten by the Enfield bug and I understand how someone can end up with several of the same type of Surplus rifle.

Sprout47 · 06-10-2009, 06:12 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by cold queso

I would support banning any member saying bad things about the Enfield!

DO NOT FEED THE TROLLS!

Back to OP; Enfields are very accurate. The .303 round is very powerful and very consistent. It is probably the most accurate rifle I have fired and own. Just think, it was good enough to hit a head from 400m in two World Wars

Alan De Enfield · 06-11-2009, 02:20 AM

Lets not get carried away - they are not, and never were target rifles, yes - with a good one, and everything tight and as it should be, they will give you 1" at 100yds (MOA)

They were mass produced in times of war, not hand built target rifles, many of them have fired 10s thousands of rounds and will be worn and 'shaken' about a bit.

They were designed to give MOM (minute of man) which they do exceedingly well, lets not have higher expectations than they can actually be target rifles.

The actual accuracy requirements for Enfield rifles No1, No4 and No5 follow - note the 1" x 1 1/2" accuracy requirement is 100 FEET not 100 yards !!!

SMLE TESTING
For the SMLE All rifles were tested for accuracy by the Small Arms Inspection Department at 100ft, and 10% were also tested at 600 yds. All rifles were fired from a special mechanical rest, known as an Enfield Rest, and a special Telescope layer was used for laying an aim. The Enfield Rest was designed to simulate the conditions under which a rifle would be held when fired from the shoulder, and was provided with hand wheel adjustments for laying an aim. Trial shots were first fired and, if necessary ,the foresight was adjusted laterally, or replaced by one of a different height, until the shots on the target were within the required limits. Five rounds were then fired, and four of the five shots had to be contained in a rectangle 1 inch broad by 1½ in high. Rifle which failed this test were rejected. At 600 yds 10 shots were fired, nine of which had to fall within a 2 foot circle.
No 4 RIFLE TESTING
For the No 4 Rifle, the accuracy test was the same at 100ft ten per cent of all rifles were then fired at 200 yds when six of seven shots had to fall in a rectangle 6in x 6in , the point of mean impact having to be within 3 inches of the point of aim in any direction. Ten per cent of rifles fired at 200 yds were again fired at 600 yds when 6 out of seven shots had to be in a rectangle 18 inches x 18 inches the permissible deviation of point of mean impact being 9 inches up or down, or left or right. Two per cent of rifles were fired from the shoulder, ten rounds being fed into the magazine by charger and fired rapid to test “feeding up” and ejection. After these tests the barrel was inspected to ensure that there was no expansion in the bore or chamber and that it shaded correctly from end to end. (Was not bent)
No 5 TESTING
The firing test to which the No 5 rifle was subjected was the same as that for the No 4 at 100ft. It was not tested at 200 yds but 10 per cent were tested at 600 yards when the acceptance was ten out of ten shots contained in a rectangle 36 inches x 36 inches. Two per cent of the No 5 rifles were also submitted to the same functioning test as the No4 rifle.

Throughout World War 2 much of the accuracy testing was done by women shooters who quickly became proficient at the job. To speed up the procedure, the telescope layer was dispensed with, and aim was taken in the normal way through the back sight. The .1 inch aperture in the back sight was too large for easily laying a correct aim at 100ft, and a small spring steel adaptor was used.

Farmer · 06-11-2009, 06:33 AM

The drop stock on the enfield isnt everyones fave stock, but if u get used to it its great. The 303 lobs lead, but this was used to advantage to save many lives, and kept more than half the allies alive through 2 world wars.

Laufer · 06-14-2009, 01:54 AM

If someone were to buy a #4 with a decent barrel, and use '43 British or shiny 60s POF ammo, what might the gun be capable of ( though maybe not the shooter)?

Would groups at 50 yards easily be less than 3-4 inches?

wunhunglo · 06-14-2009, 02:40 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Laufer

If someone were to buy a #4 with a decent barrel, and use '43 British or shiny 60s POF ammo, what might the gun be capable of ( though maybe not the shooter)?

Would groups at 50 yards easily be less than 3-4 inches?

I would be looking for at least that at 100 yards.

06-08-2009, 12:10 AM	#1
m44mosin Senior Member Join Date: Oct 2008 Location: southwestern Pennsylvania Posts: 329	enfield accuracy what kind of accuracy should i expect out of a No.4 MkI enfield in average codition.

06-08-2009, 12:59 AM	#2
Iron_Colonel Senior Member Join Date: Jan 2008 Location: Washington St. Posts: 3,210	Very good accuracy. If the bore isn't all shot out, and you can see strong lands and grooves, it is most likely a more accurate rifle than you are. Mine certainly is. If you had a scoped one, I would imagine it would be easy to achieve 1 moa anyways, if not better at 100 yds. If I had a scope on mine, I'm sure it would do better than 1 moa. Iron sights is very accurate as it sits, even with the Pakistani stuff. Looks like you'll have to get one and take it out and shoot it to see! __________________ Mosin Nagant evangelist on a mission to convert YOU!

06-08-2009, 08:28 AM	#3
wunhunglo Senior Member Join Date: Dec 2007 Location: currently "Sunny West Africa" Posts: 4,098	Should be good enough to hit the Bulls Eye (or at least a man sized target) at 600 yards with decent ammo. (using standard iron sights) __________________ How can I 'Soar with the Eagles' when I'm working with such 'Turkeys'!

06-09-2009, 10:51 AM	#5
SwedeSteve Suspected Member Join Date: Feb 2007 Location: Anchortown, Alaska Posts: 23,158	I've only shot my No I, MK III a few times, but I can say it's really accurate. Even with these tired old eyes. __________________ Thank God we don't get as much Government as we pay for! -Will Rogers

06-11-2009, 06:33 AM	#17
Farmer Senior Member Join Date: Nov 2007 Location: Limbri NSW Au Posts: 496	The drop stock on the enfield isnt everyones fave stock, but if u get used to it its great. The 303 lobs lead, but this was used to advantage to save many lives, and kept more than half the allies alive through 2 world wars. __________________ Cheers, Rob I'm into gun control - I always use both hands!!!!!!!

06-08-2009, 05:23 PM	#4
Alan De Enfield Senior Member Join Date: Dec 2008 Location: Eastern England Posts: 271	Iron Sights, 15mph wind right to left, only elbow support, Privi 174FMJ ammunition. 82 yards (75 mts) Savage No4 Mk1* 2 sighting shots (at 10 O'clock) then 5 rounds.

06-09-2009, 12:38 PM	#7
Roys Member Join Date: Feb 2007 Posts: 77	"Define only elbow support. " This should be interesting, if it's any different than the rifle resting in the palm of your hand and your elbow resting on the ground as in the prone position, or with the rifle resting in the palm of your hand and your elbow resting on a table or bench as in bench rest shooting.

06-09-2009, 01:09 PM	#8
George H Member Join Date: Apr 2008 Posts: 28	Not a fan of this rifle, are you sure that someone was shooting at your target. I've been known to do that.

06-10-2009, 05:17 PM	#14
Palladin8 Senior Member Join Date: Nov 2007 Location: Las Vegas, NV Posts: 2,421	^hahahaha! yeah I agree but I understand. Different strokes for different folks. I kind of feel the same way about Mosins though. They just don't trip my trigger like they do for everyone else on this forum. However I have been bitten by the Enfield bug and I understand how someone can end up with several of the same type of Surplus rifle.

06-11-2009, 02:20 AM	#16
Alan De Enfield Senior Member Join Date: Dec 2008 Location: Eastern England Posts: 271	Lets not get carried away - they are not, and never were target rifles, yes - with a good one, and everything tight and as it should be, they will give you 1" at 100yds (MOA) They were mass produced in times of war, not hand built target rifles, many of them have fired 10s thousands of rounds and will be worn and 'shaken' about a bit. They were designed to give MOM (minute of man) which they do exceedingly well, lets not have higher expectations than they can actually be target rifles. The actual accuracy requirements for Enfield rifles No1, No4 and No5 follow - note the 1" x 1 1/2" accuracy requirement is 100 FEET not 100 yards !!! SMLE TESTING For the SMLE All rifles were tested for accuracy by the Small Arms Inspection Department at 100ft, and 10% were also tested at 600 yds. All rifles were fired from a special mechanical rest, known as an Enfield Rest, and a special Telescope layer was used for laying an aim. The Enfield Rest was designed to simulate the conditions under which a rifle would be held when fired from the shoulder, and was provided with hand wheel adjustments for laying an aim. Trial shots were first fired and, if necessary ,the foresight was adjusted laterally, or replaced by one of a different height, until the shots on the target were within the required limits. Five rounds were then fired, and four of the five shots had to be contained in a rectangle 1 inch broad by 1½ in high. Rifle which failed this test were rejected. At 600 yds 10 shots were fired, nine of which had to fall within a 2 foot circle. No 4 RIFLE TESTING For the No 4 Rifle, the accuracy test was the same at 100ft ten per cent of all rifles were then fired at 200 yds when six of seven shots had to fall in a rectangle 6in x 6in , the point of mean impact having to be within 3 inches of the point of aim in any direction. Ten per cent of rifles fired at 200 yds were again fired at 600 yds when 6 out of seven shots had to be in a rectangle 18 inches x 18 inches the permissible deviation of point of mean impact being 9 inches up or down, or left or right. Two per cent of rifles were fired from the shoulder, ten rounds being fed into the magazine by charger and fired rapid to test “feeding up” and ejection. After these tests the barrel was inspected to ensure that there was no expansion in the bore or chamber and that it shaded correctly from end to end. (Was not bent) No 5 TESTING The firing test to which the No 5 rifle was subjected was the same as that for the No 4 at 100ft. It was not tested at 200 yds but 10 per cent were tested at 600 yards when the acceptance was ten out of ten shots contained in a rectangle 36 inches x 36 inches. Two per cent of the No 5 rifles were also submitted to the same functioning test as the No4 rifle. Throughout World War 2 much of the accuracy testing was done by women shooters who quickly became proficient at the job. To speed up the procedure, the telescope layer was dispensed with, and aim was taken in the normal way through the back sight. The .1 inch aperture in the back sight was too large for easily laying a correct aim at 100ft, and a small spring steel adaptor was used.

06-14-2009, 01:54 AM	#18
Laufer Senior Member Join Date: Jul 2008 Location: Down south. Posts: 524	If someone were to buy a #4 with a decent barrel, and use '43 British or shiny 60s POF ammo, what might the gun be capable of ( though maybe not the shooter)? Would groups at 50 yards easily be less than 3-4 inches?