Thread: Which aperture for a lee enfield No4 mk2

Can i have some recomendations for a replacement aperture for my lee Enfield no4 mk2 to replace the 300/600 sight.
I'm wanting it for hunting rather than target shooting.

The rifle is grouping nicely but for the 100 yard distance, I'd prefer to be aiming at the deer rather than beneath it

Keen to avoid the standard ladder aperture but don't know enough of the difference parker hale models

I have been considering a williams peep sight but it sounds like some grinding down of the metal work that i want to avoid (rifle fullwood but with non matching bolt and mag)

Fill 600 hole with solder or weld and re drill hole lower for 100 zero

Originally Posted by m101a1

Fill 600 hole with solder or weld and re drill hole lower for 100 zero

Hadn't thought of that. Am also trying to get hold of a smaller front sight, but need to do the maths first to work out the change in size needed

Originally Posted by Manchester

Can i have some recomendations for a replacement aperture for my lee Enfield no4 mk2 to replace the 300/600 sight.
I'm wanting it for hunting rather than target shooting.
The rifle is grouping nicely but for the 100 yard distance, I'd prefer to be aiming at the deer rather than beneath it
Keen to avoid the standard ladder aperture but don't know enough of the difference parker hale models
I have been considering a Williams peep sight but it sounds like some grinding down of the metal work that i want to avoid (rifle full wood but with non matching bolt and mag)

I'd just build up the height of the front post with a substantial bead of white paint. For 100 yards that's OK as the factory front post is very narrow and at best poorly visible in lower light on a dark background. Or epoxy on a piece of green nylon string along the top of the post for TruGlo effect.

Note that, the No. 4 shoots a bit lower with its bayonet attached. The 300/600 yard flip sight was actually designed so that when the sight was set to 300 a soldier could "engage targets up to 300 yards with the bayonet attached" Anyway, don't go hunting with bayonet attached, you'd look a real dork. Blob of paint is more discrete and useful. Also the "up to 300" applies to military shooting in which the target is a vertical head/torso/legs, but quadriped deer and goats have horizontal torsos which leaves less vertical margin of error.

I'd spend spare cash on a 'sniper'/cheek pad for non-strained shooting position. Helps with iron sights too, not just telescopic sights. If you are not sure about this, do some sustained dry firing practice on the living room floor for 20 minutes and if by then you feel strain in the back of your neck, then a cheek pad will be useful to you. The wooden reproductions will look best, but you can get velcro ones too.

IAnyway, don't go hunting with bayonet attached, you'd look a real dork.

I prefer to avoid being thought a dork while hunting, So don't attach it to the rifle while hunting. Only after i see a deer do i attach it, but i find the shouted 'fix bayonets' command seems to scare the deer. Maybe they don't like it up em?

This one shoots quite well.

He swapped out the original sight with a flip up ladder sight he bought off EBay.Put "No4 rear sight" into the search bar and the results will give you an idea of what to look for in NZ

Many moons ago, Graham Henry showed me a 303 that he had sporterised, think he even wrote an article in the Rod and Rifle about sporterising the the 303. He had used the small peep sight that is fitted to the rear of the action, the one where you flip it for one distance and turn it over for the other. That may very well be your 300/600 peep. What he did is open up the closest one to 3mm, and carefully reduced the outside of the peep as well so it had a much finer "circle" to look through. He also completely removed the other one so you never got it wrong. And I think he fixed it somehow so it was always standing. He then sighted it for 100 metres, possibly using a higher foresight. He told me the human eye is an amazing thing, being round, if you look through a round hole it will always try to centralise what ever you are looking at. And what ever you are looking through doesnt have to be big or ugly, the finer, less obtrusive the better. And a human eye will always centralise no matter what size hole you are looking through, so you dont lose any ability by opening it out to 3 mm, but you do gain in dull light conditions. He then shot the rifle and was able to shoot 3" groups @ 200 yds no problem.

Keep an eye out for a parker hale 5c rear aperture sight.
It attaches via the flip sight screw and the ejector screw and requires no alteration to the rifle at all. That will tickeep the box you want, otherwise the ladder sight offers the best option with a 300 battle aperture but a 200 setting on the ladder.

Had the same problem with my sporterized Faz mkII.Kept the original Faz ladder rear, then swapped out the incorrect foresight blade for an original plus.075'' which now gives a 100 yard zero using 150 grain soft points, so no more 6 o'clock hold. Should add that grouping is using the ladder in the depressed position i.e using the larger diameter top "battle" peep.Your mkII should be wearing the 200-1300 yard ladder to be correct, not the 300/600 flip which is correct to the MKI* BTW our local fuzzy wuzzies dont like it up em either

Greetings Bluebaiter 222,
I think you have identified the simplest fix in installing a higher front site but there is another way. You may be able to use hand loads to sight in the rifle. I suspect that you are using 150 grain loads which may make the problem worse but you could try cutting your load a couple of grains to see if that brings the zero down. Also a switch to 174 or 180 grain projectiles may help. You don't need barrel straining velocity to bring down a deer with a .303, 2,200 fps is more than enough. I was lucky that my No 4 was close to dead on with 174 grain round noses and a reduced load. Chaz Forsyth did an article in NZ Guns a few years back on differences for point of impact with various projectile weights in a 303. I will have a hunt for it and report .
Regards Grandpamac.

@Manchester how high is the group at 100yds? The easiest solution as already suggested is a higher foresight. Back in the "day" the old guys at the fullbore club I was a member of usually had a selection of them in their range boxes.

It is easy to calculate how much higher it needs to be. In the past I have 5 minute araldited a higher blade to the front of the existing foresight just to try for correct elevation and then done something more permanent either easy flow a higher blade to the existing blade (and maybe wider as suggested) or make a a new foresight. They aren't too hard to make.

Question: Is the rifle as original with the battle foresight protector ears or has the rifle been sporterised and the protector removed?

Greetings Again,
The article was in Issue 161 of NZ Guns and Hunting. Chaz found that the 150 shot higher than the 174 grains, about 150 to 200 mm depending on whether from a bench or sitting.

Zimmer, I am intrigued by your question about the fore sight protector. My iron sight No 4 still has one and shoots close to point of aim. Your insight on this would be appreciated.

Regards Grandpamac.

Originally Posted by grandpamac

Greetings Again,
The article was in Issue 161 of NZ Guns and Hunting. Chaz found that the 150 shot higher than the 174 grains, about 150 to 200 mm depending on whether from a bench or sitting.

Zimmer, I am intrigued by your question about the fore sight protector. My iron sight No 4 still has one and shoots close to point of aim. Your insight on this would be appreciated.

Regards Grandpamac.

Nah it was just if adding a blade to the existing foresight , if the attaching method is not robust it could get knocked off plowing thru bush etc.

Originally Posted by Mauser308

Um, if he's aiming under the deer at 100 isn't a taller foresight going to make him aim at the ground? Or am I getting this totally wrong? He needs to file a small amount off the foresight to lift the muzzle as the easiest solution, combines with opening out the rear sight hole to allow more light in for hunting in bush. The thinning down of the outside of the peep sight isn't a bad idea either to be honest - more light and more field of view is always good!

My understanding of the OP's issue is the groups are high at 100yds when using the battle sight (ie aiming low to get a hit). To lower the POI either the rear sight aperture has to be lowered or the front blade raised. Have I read the issue wrong?

The 2 hole aperture flip battle sights already have nice sized holes in them equivalent to modern ghost rings. They allow for quick target aquisition.

By pure coincidence, this just came out: