Warning

 

Close

Confirm Action

Are you sure you wish to do this?

Confirm Cancel
Member Login
Site Notices
10/20/2017 1:01:18 AM
9/22/2017 12:11:25 AM
Posted: 9/13/2005 5:46:25 PM EDT
My dentist, a student, has an enfield re-chambered to nato 7.62(308) and wants to check it before firing it. He says that a gunsmith told him that he could not do it because it had been "re-chambered". Sounds like a load of crap to me. If the dentist had the gages he should be able to do it himself, right?
Link Posted: 9/13/2005 6:08:41 PM EDT
Are you sure it was rechambered? The over all dimensions of the 303 is larger than the 308 and I don't know if you can set the barrell back enough to rechamber it, plus you would have to replace or modify the bolt and the magazine.. You are aware that after WW2 they made SMLE in 308 new from the factory?
Link Posted: 9/13/2005 7:27:31 PM EDT
The .303 is a .311 bullet, not a .308 bullet. You could technically do it, but you'd get poor seal of the bullet in the bore... gas blowby...

Then there is the Ishapore 2A that IS chambered in 7.62x51 from the get go.
Link Posted: 9/13/2005 10:08:10 PM EDT
I concur....to have even a halfway shootable rifle, it would have to be rebarreled, not rechambered.

If your only goal is to make bang noises and let your bullets rattle down an oversized bore, rechambering might be a worthwhile venture.
Link Posted: 9/13/2005 10:28:52 PM EDT
Well, stupid as it is, they have been rechambered, rebarreled, as well as made from the get go in 7.62 NATO.........


Hell, I have even seen FA Enfields


Around here the big thing is mods to the Magazine, bolt, and dropping the barrel back and rechambering to 7.62x39......

makes a jungle carbine type sized rifle that is in a cheap(er) caliber
Link Posted: 9/13/2005 11:33:47 PM EDT

Originally Posted By TacticalPenguin:
Well, stupid as it is, they have been rechambered, rebarreled, as well as made from the get go in 7.62 NATO.........


Hell, I have even seen FA Enfields


Around here the big thing is mods to the Magazine, bolt, and dropping the barrel back and rechambering to 7.62x39......

makes a jungle carbine type sized rifle that is in a cheap(er) caliber



That makes sense, tho. The bullet diameter is the same as a .303.

The .308 makes no sense, from a practical standpoint. Rebareling was done to No4's even by the British & Canadian government for match rifles & sniper platforms. I own a Longbranch DCRA conversion in .308, and it's a sub-MOA match rifle. But, I know of no one who ever made a serious effort to merely rechamber an Enfield in .308 because of the barrel dimension issue. It would make a severely innacurate gun.
Link Posted: 9/14/2005 3:16:43 AM EDT
Thanks to all. I sent this page to the student and will let him figure it out. Again, thanks.
Link Posted: 9/14/2005 8:31:03 AM EDT

Originally Posted By swingset:

Originally Posted By TacticalPenguin:
Well, stupid as it is, they have been rechambered, rebarreled, as well as made from the get go in 7.62 NATO.........


Hell, I have even seen FA Enfields


Around here the big thing is mods to the Magazine, bolt, and dropping the barrel back and rechambering to 7.62x39......

makes a jungle carbine type sized rifle that is in a cheap(er) caliber



That makes sense, tho. The bullet diameter is the same as a .303.

The .308 makes no sense, from a practical standpoint. Rebareling was done to No4's even by the British & Canadian government for match rifles & sniper platforms. I own a Longbranch DCRA conversion in .308, and it's a sub-MOA match rifle. But, I know of no one who ever made a serious effort to merely rechamber an Enfield in .308 because of the barrel dimension issue. It would make a severely innacurate gun.



It would be much better to rebarrel to 7.62 x 54R for Enfields other than the Ishapore .308 model. The 7.62x54R operates at the same pressures as the .303, is also a rimmed cartridge, and ammo is so much more cheaper to shooot.

Link Posted: 9/14/2005 12:56:49 PM EDT

Originally Posted By eodtech2000:

Originally Posted By swingset:

Originally Posted By TacticalPenguin:
Well, stupid as it is, they have been rechambered, rebarreled, as well as made from the get go in 7.62 NATO.........


Hell, I have even seen FA Enfields


Around here the big thing is mods to the Magazine, bolt, and dropping the barrel back and rechambering to 7.62x39......

makes a jungle carbine type sized rifle that is in a cheap(er) caliber



That makes sense, tho. The bullet diameter is the same as a .303.

The .308 makes no sense, from a practical standpoint. Rebareling was done to No4's even by the British & Canadian government for match rifles & sniper platforms. I own a Longbranch DCRA conversion in .308, and it's a sub-MOA match rifle. But, I know of no one who ever made a serious effort to merely rechamber an Enfield in .308 because of the barrel dimension issue. It would make a severely innacurate gun.



It would be much better to rebarrel to 7.62 x 54R for Enfields other than the Ishapore .308 model. The 7.62x54R operates at the same pressures as the .303, is also a rimmed cartridge, and ammo is so much more cheaper to shooot.




Not necessarily. Rechambering in 762x54 presents a problem with the bolt face. To rebarrel in .308 isn't hard, really just a different extractor. Going to the 54R, with a wider rim, would require serious bolthead modification IIRC.

Also, it's not as inherently accurate as the .308, and the price of 762x54 could go through the roof if for some reason something happens to choke off com-bloc supplies. At one time, 8mm was pretty expensive here just like .303 is now. At least with .308, it's available at Walmart, and always will be.

Also, reloading for the .308 is cheaper and easier because of component availability and cost, even if you're just loading plinking rounds.
Link Posted: 9/14/2005 1:08:20 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 9/14/2005 1:08:48 PM EDT by MauserMark]
but why would anyone want to rechamber in .308 if the same price of new commercial winchester or remington brand .308 is the same price I see brit .303 remington manufacture at Academy?

I thought people want to rechamber to have fun with a lighter/smaller round?

like on Surplus rifle.com they rechambered an enfield for .45 auto, and .223.
Link Posted: 9/14/2005 1:48:23 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 9/14/2005 1:48:48 PM EDT by eodtech2000]

Originally Posted By swingset:

Originally Posted By eodtech2000:

Originally Posted By swingset:

Originally Posted By TacticalPenguin:
Well, stupid as it is, they have been rechambered, rebarreled, as well as made from the get go in 7.62 NATO.........


Hell, I have even seen FA Enfields


Around here the big thing is mods to the Magazine, bolt, and dropping the barrel back and rechambering to 7.62x39......

makes a jungle carbine type sized rifle that is in a cheap(er) caliber



That makes sense, tho. The bullet diameter is the same as a .303.

The .308 makes no sense, from a practical standpoint. Rebareling was done to No4's even by the British & Canadian government for match rifles & sniper platforms. I own a Longbranch DCRA conversion in .308, and it's a sub-MOA match rifle. But, I know of no one who ever made a serious effort to merely rechamber an Enfield in .308 because of the barrel dimension issue. It would make a severely innacurate gun.



It would be much better to rebarrel to 7.62 x 54R for Enfields other than the Ishapore .308 model. The 7.62x54R operates at the same pressures as the .303, is also a rimmed cartridge, and ammo is so much more cheaper to shooot.




Not necessarily. Rechambering in 762x54 presents a problem with the bolt face. To rebarrel in .308 isn't hard, really just a different extractor. Going to the 54R, with a wider rim, would require serious bolthead modification IIRC.

Also, it's not as inherently accurate as the .308, and the price of 762x54 could go through the roof if for some reason something happens to choke off com-bloc supplies. At one time, 8mm was pretty expensive here just like .303 is now. At least with .308, it's available at Walmart, and always will be.

Also, reloading for the .308 is cheaper and easier because of component availability and cost, even if you're just loading plinking rounds.



Here is a link on the 7.62x54R Enfield 7.62x54R Enfield

The 7.62x54R is capable of outstanding accuracy, the Soviet shooting teams were extremely successful in International competition using it.
Link Posted: 9/14/2005 3:41:13 PM EDT

Originally Posted By eodtech2000:

Originally Posted By swingset:

Originally Posted By eodtech2000:

Originally Posted By swingset:

Originally Posted By TacticalPenguin:
Well, stupid as it is, they have been rechambered, rebarreled, as well as made from the get go in 7.62 NATO.........


Hell, I have even seen FA Enfields


Around here the big thing is mods to the Magazine, bolt, and dropping the barrel back and rechambering to 7.62x39......

makes a jungle carbine type sized rifle that is in a cheap(er) caliber



That makes sense, tho. The bullet diameter is the same as a .303.

The .308 makes no sense, from a practical standpoint. Rebareling was done to No4's even by the British & Canadian government for match rifles & sniper platforms. I own a Longbranch DCRA conversion in .308, and it's a sub-MOA match rifle. But, I know of no one who ever made a serious effort to merely rechamber an Enfield in .308 because of the barrel dimension issue. It would make a severely innacurate gun.



It would be much better to rebarrel to 7.62 x 54R for Enfields other than the Ishapore .308 model. The 7.62x54R operates at the same pressures as the .303, is also a rimmed cartridge, and ammo is so much more cheaper to shooot.




Not necessarily. Rechambering in 762x54 presents a problem with the bolt face. To rebarrel in .308 isn't hard, really just a different extractor. Going to the 54R, with a wider rim, would require serious bolthead modification IIRC.

Also, it's not as inherently accurate as the .308, and the price of 762x54 could go through the roof if for some reason something happens to choke off com-bloc supplies. At one time, 8mm was pretty expensive here just like .303 is now. At least with .308, it's available at Walmart, and always will be.

Also, reloading for the .308 is cheaper and easier because of component availability and cost, even if you're just loading plinking rounds.



Here is a link on the 7.62x54R Enfield 7.62x54R Enfield

The 7.62x54R is capable of outstanding accuracy, the Soviet shooting teams were extremely successful in International competition using it.



That looks interesting, but they don't say how they get around the larger rim diameter and the bolt head. I'd be curious to know what that involves.

Not going to have a pissing match about the 762x54's accuracy. I don't think there's many cartridges on the surplus market that vary in quality and accuracy so wildly, and even its cheap price wouldn't convince me to convert an Enfield to it over .308....but that's just my .02.
Link Posted: 9/14/2005 4:44:01 PM EDT

Originally Posted By swingset:

Originally Posted By eodtech2000:
Originally Posted By swingset:

Here is a link on the 7.62x54R Enfield 7.62x54R Enfield

The 7.62x54R is capable of outstanding accuracy, the Soviet shooting teams were extremely successful in International competition using it.



That looks interesting, but they don't say how they get around the larger rim diameter and the bolt head. I'd be curious to know what that involves.

Not going to have a pissing match about the 762x54's accuracy. I don't think there's many cartridges on the surplus market that vary in quality and accuracy so wildly, and even its cheap price wouldn't convince me to convert an Enfield to it over .308....but that's just my .02.



I'd like to see a nice write up on such a conversion with pics and illustrations. If I was a skilled gunsmith, I would try this out.

Actually, I dead on agree with you about accuracy of the surplus ammo as most of it is nothing to write home about.
Link Posted: 9/20/2005 6:17:33 AM EDT
I'd love to get my hands on a 7.62x39 Enfield conversion.. Anyone know of a 'smith doing that in the US?
Top Top