Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted: 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.