Installing a scope on a No. 4 Mk 1*

[BlitzKrieg]

JB...you collect. I shoot. I don't own tired worn relics, I don't run a museum. I own battle rifles
that are accurate or they're long gone.

Its moot to develop 303 Match loads that produce long range accuracy..... ? I should develop half
accurate loads that make it to 200 yds perhaps.

The problem with the Lee Enfield is : shooters make excuses for poor performance when the rifle most likely
can do the task, its the inattention of the shooter who fails the rifle.

Optimum performance : that is what I see from all my Lee Enfields and I've found over the last 50 years they have more accuracy than "collectors" have any idea of.

Not napalming you JB, I know you take the history of Enfields seriously and if collecting is your focus, its all good.

[Merc]

I collect old guns that I like to shoot. I’d be willing to bet they are all accurate shooters with the right ammo fired on a wind-free day through a scope. The No. 4 with Greek ammo proved that to me. It just so happens that the No. 4 is the only rifle I own that will accept a bolt-on scope mount. All others (M1917, M1903 and 03A3) require drilling and tapping in order to mount a scope which is something I’d never do. I can remove the scope and mount and re-install the iron sight on the No. 4 in less than 10 minutes. So, for now, the No. 4 will be the rifle I’ll take to the range to see how well I can do. Next time out, just for fun, I’ll set up targets at 100 and 200 yards. With these ancient eyes, do I care if I do poorly with the No 4 at 200 yards, or the best I can do is 6 inch groups at 50 yards with all the rest of my rifles equipped with iron sights? Not at all. There’s a lot to be said for just going to the range and shooting a few rounds with a 100 year old relic that fellow range mates can admire.

[Ned Butts]

Just a heads up, you can get S&K inst amounts for all of the above http://www.scopemounts.com/index.html?main.html

[Merc]

Ned,

Thanks for the information. I’m actually familiar with the company but didn’t know about their extensive offering.

My Greek returned 1925 M1903 Springfield with a new High Standard barrel would be an excellent candidate. I was shooting fairly consistently at 100 yards with it with the iron sights.

It’d be nice to put a mount on my M1917 Winchester.

[JB White]

Merc, did you feel as though you needed a riser/cheek rest to get a proper weld to the stock? I think you might really need one on a 1917.
I tried scoping an Eddystone back in the early 80s before anyone had a no-smithing mount on the market.
So, with the help of a friend we made one up. Got it as low as we could go within the realm of practicality but it wasn't comfortable. Prototypes were lacking in aesthetics and rigidity. Call them fugly and not to be trusted, but we chugged along in our spare time and actually used them.
Forward a couple of years and B-Square offered one on the open market. Looked much better! But my teeth took to rattling upon firing. I needed a neck like a giraffe to be able to settle in. I don't recall any cheap tie-on rests back then. Of course we didn't have the same shopping resources then as we have today. Gave up on the notion.

Blitz, a reply to your message I think I pretty much covered on the other board. No need to repeat here?
While it is still somewhat on topic in this thread, as accurate as that Eddystone was it wouldn't match what the Ruger M77 or the Win 70 could do in the same chambering. Not without glass anyway and my eyes were much sharper back then.

[Merc]

I was comfortable shooting freestyle but the scope did seem too high when the rifle was mounted on the rack because the bench seat was too low.

[JB White]

Nothing a seat cushion might remedy. Eh?

Glad to hear things are in your favor regarding the No4 rifle. Things *might* be different on the P14/M1917 platform.
So, if going that direction it's something to keep in mind.

[Merc]

JB,

I was 5’ 11” back in the day. Gravity took over and now 5’ 9 3/4”. A cushion or three would definitely help.

I might hold off scoping the other rifles for a while. I’m having cataract surgery next month so things might be looking better real soon. I could still see the targets at 100 yards really well a few years ago but things seemed to have gone down hill in a hurry. I discovered I could still see 12” white paper plates at 100 yards, but now they’re even getting hard to see. The scope on the No4 might be the only one I do because it’s really a hoot to shoot. I passed up taking it to the range this past weekend due to heavy winds in our area. No wind at all is ideal, but those days are rare around here and it always seems to be a cross wind from the west. The range runs south to north.

My Dr. only offers laser surgery which sounds like the best way to go. Anyone out there with a cataract story to relate?

[lyman]

wife is having hers done in Dec,

lens replacement, not sure if lasers are involved or not,

[Sunray]

"...that are accurate or they're long gone..." Battle rifles aren't and weren't made for great accuracy. Neither was the issue ammo.
Scoping an as issued Lee-Enfield is a kind of waste of money. And it reduces the value of the rifle. An already bubba'd rifle has no collector value though.
None of the aftermarket no gun-smithing bases are very good and a lot of 'em require removing the rear sight.
"...having cataract surgery..." A scope will not help if you have cataracts. A scope will not make a rifle accurate either.

[JOHN COOK]

north.

My Dr. only offers laser surgery which sounds like the best way to go. Anyone out there with a cataract story to relate?

Had laser surgery 2 years ago, check up 6 weeks ago and I checked out 20/20. Wife had hers last month went for final checkup yesterday and she has 20/20.

I had option of surgeon using knife or laser, I chose laser. In my and wife’s case Medicare will not pay a penny for laser but will with surgeon using knife. I paid out of pocket, couldn’t quite get my mind to accept knife in my eye. Probably a mental thing..LOL

John in SC

[Merc]

"...that are accurate or they're long gone..." Battle rifles aren't and weren't made for great accuracy. Neither was the issue ammo.
Scoping an as issued Lee-Enfield is a kind of waste of money. And it reduces the value of the rifle. An already bubba'd rifle has no collector value though.
None of the aftermarket no gun-smithing bases are very good and a lot of 'em require removing the rear sight.
"...having cataract surgery..." A scope will not help if you have cataracts. A scope will not make a rifle accurate either.

The Canadian made high quality scope mount that I installed on my No. 4 did require the rear sight to be removed but it isn’t permanent so no damage was inflicted on the rifle. As I mentioned previously, the scope mount can be removed and the original sight can be reinstalled and the rifle restored to its original configuration in less than 10 minutes. I posted some photos here that showed the targets so, yes I was able to shoot the rifle more accurately with the scope in spite of the cataracts. I can best compare looking through cataracts to as if you were looking through slightly fogged glasses. You sound as if you don’t have cataracts yet, but nearly everyone gets them at some point in their lives. The No 4 might be the most accurate shooting rifle I own. The scope just allowed me to see the target more clearly and to aim the rifle more accurately.

From what I’ve read, the HXP Greek ammo has a good reputation for accuracy even though it fires a military grade bullet. I was impressed.

[Merc]

Had laser surgery 2 years ago, check up 6 weeks ago and I checked out 20/20. Wife had hers last month went for final checkup yesterday and she has 20/20.

I had option of surgeon using knife or laser, I chose laser. In my and wife’s case Medicare will not pay a penny for laser but will with surgeon using knife. I paid out of pocket, couldn’t quite get my mind to accept knife in my eye. Probably a mental thing..LOL


John in SC

John,

I also don’t want to have my cataracts removed with a knife. The laser is more uniform and precise and the incision is supposed to heal faster with less pain.

[Merc]

wife is having hers done in Dec,

lens replacement, not sure if lasers are involved or not,

I read as much as I could about both methods. My doctor charges $2300 per eye for the laser surgery so it’s expensive and Medicare will only cover the knife method.

[JOHN COOK]

not,
I read as much as I could about both methods. My doctor charges $2300 per eye for the laser surgery so it’s expensive and Medicare will only cover the knife method.

Wow, we paid $1400.00. per eye. Our surgeon operates only on Wednesday, you have follow up next day. I was amazed at the colors were so vivid afterwards.

John in SC