View Full Version : Enfield Safety Q

March 03, 2009, 16:12
Actually, a matter with the bolts. All but one of my 303 Enfields have very generous headspace, like over FIELD measurements. A little less than the wartime max of 0.080" but enough to be of concern. I have noticed that screwing out the bolt head closes this up a bit but obviously there's a potential safety issue in doing so (haven't tried firing this way). Now I suppose the threads take up some energy from the firing process but what about the rest of the bolt head? I'm not noticing lot of bearing surface contact between the two anyways so is this really a problem or am I thinking in a way that might ultimately result in me eating a chunk of ordnance steel? I should add the rifles I'm referring to are all No. 1 Mk. III/III* pattern and don't have numbered bolt heads (the No. 4 does and I'll fix it later).

I'd prefer not to buy a batch of new bolts but if that's what's needed I'll have to scrape up the cash at some point. TIA.

March 03, 2009, 17:42
You just need a new bolthead, not a whole bolt. If you have one marked 1, go up to a #2, and so on.

March 03, 2009, 21:20
That'll work for the No. 4 Mk. 2, but not the earlier rifles. Mine are the No. 1 Mk. III/III* versions. Just needed to clarify I guess.

March 03, 2009, 22:22
Brian Dick, He can help you out. BDLLTD.COM

You have checked the MkIII's with a Military Field Guage, right?

March 04, 2009, 15:50
Used a Forster NOGO gauge with steel shims, all but one (I have three) came out to less than wartime reject of 0.080" (source: surplusrifle.com). I think the Forster gauge is 0.067" so I added a 0.007" (FIELD) shim and a 0.013" (FIELD REJECT) shim to get this.

FWIW, the one that didn't will be a long term project as it was basically a bubba'd parts gun but who can pass up an LSA 1915, right?

I'll see what that guy's got. Thanks for the linky!

March 04, 2009, 19:01
I got ya. LSA's are nice, good luck with the project. Here's a better link for you.