Thread: Resurgence of interest in the old "Three Oh"?

I've got some Hornady scales coming this week

@Arthur McBride That's certainly a pretty grunty load! Good accuracy though

And.... another step! Picked up some primers today so I'm ready to go!

It may have been built in 1944 to halt blitzkrieg and banzai charges, but the old 303 still fills the freezer.... Took the old girl out for a walk today; the first things it's shot in nearly 10-years! I am going to get a set of ear plugs though; I'd forgotten how badly that 17.5" barrel barks...........

I love the old girl.... It's short because it was used for a bail gun many years ago

you could always fit suppressor...... sacrilege but well worth it and still be awesome.
I could never do very well with the open sights....

Originally Posted by bumblefoot

I love the old girl.... It's short because it was used for a bail gun many years ago

Greetings Bumblefoot,
Imagine how much better it would have been with your own loads. Next time perhaps. You can dial down the loads as well to reduce both boot and bark.
Grandpamac.

Originally Posted by mimms2

I always love enfields. Don't know why, they're technically pretty average. But still a hoot.

The things we do when we're young and silly eh

Why are they technically pretty average?

Originally Posted by mimms2

Rear-locking action (has pros and cons), horrendous trigger, skinny barrels, ancient (relatively speaking) chambering, loose tolerances (mostly age)... I always found the two-part stock thing hanging off the wrist a bit wierd too...

You are likely pissed again or have very little knowledge of Lee Enfields.

The Lee Enfield was a technological masterpeice in its time, 40 years ahead of anything else, double the firepower of a Mauser and constantly being improved upon . All the "faults" you list are what made it the best bolt action battle rifle ever produced.

Which makes them technically pretty average as a sporting rifle, for all the reasons mimms2, gave plus a few. And I have 3 of them which I enjoy greatly. Haven't found a battle yet tho to test their original merits. Oh, and they got their arse kicked I believe by the Boers with the 7X57mm Mauser. But the Germans found them uncomfortable at close quarters en masses. And on the battle field they were prized above the P14 which was a damn fine design, just didn't suit the trenches mud and blood too much. Horses for courses yes?

Originally Posted by Jhon

Which makes them technically pretty average as a sporting rifle, for all the reasons mimms2, gave plus a few. And I have 3 of them which I enjoy greatly. Haven't found a battle yet tho to test their original merits. Oh, and they got their arse kicked I believe by the Boers with the 7X57mm Mauser. But the Germans found them uncomfortable at close quarters en masses. And on the battle field they were prized above the P14 which was a damn fine design, just didn't suit the trenches mud and blood too much. Horses for courses yes?

No

You are as incorrect as Mimms is

Originally Posted by Jhon

Which makes them technically pretty average as a sporting rifle, for all the reasons mimms2, gave plus a few. And I have 3 of them which I enjoy greatly. Haven't found a battle yet tho to test their original merits. Oh, and they got their arse kicked I believe by the Boers with the 7X57mm Mauser. But the Germans found them uncomfortable at close quarters en masses. And on the battle field they were prized above the P14 which was a damn fine design, just didn't suit the trenches mud and blood too much. Horses for courses yes?

You are mixing up Long Toms and Cavalry Carbines used in the 2nd Boer War with the later SMLE.
Issues then were the ammo, single loading, poor marksmanship and training for the modern type of war.
All issues were resolved by the time WW1 broke out with the small, but superbly trained British Regular Army carrying the SMLE III with its adjustable windage, charger bridge feeding and spitzer ammo.

Originally Posted by mimms2

Were any of the things I said incorrect?



I'm not arguing they weren't good battle rifles. Nor am I arguing they were inferior to other offerings of their day. And it's not that I don't like them, even (I really do) You're just making shit up.

And I don't see how a crap trigger is any advantage to anyone anywhere...
Maybe you're pissed again?

Everything in your first post is incorrect, the two stage trigger pull was ment to help stop ND's.

You alter it to single stage if you want to.

Go do some reading before you yodle more codshit.

Geez; everyone calm down please

Originally Posted by mimms2

Who pissed in your weetbix dude.

I keep my finger off it, to avoid NDs.
"Alter it" is not speaking to "the rifle as it technically is"

So you're saying enfields are not:
Rear-locking;
with a technically horrendous trigger;
have skinny barrels;
are chambered in .303brit which is and ancient (relatively speaking) chambering (Considering that this current year is 2021)

Are you fucking high? Or having a stroke? Do you need medical atention?

You have missed the operative word your initial statement was based upon:

"Technically"

Instead you have simply listed your opinion without knowing why certain things you dont like were there in the first place, two stage trigger aside.

I would like to argue with someone semi lucid.

Can you put the booze and smokes down for a month and come back to this thread.