Opinions on This Enfield Please

C

cliff355

Joined
Apr 19, 2003
Messages
1,232
Apparently this outfit has a limited number of these Enfields in .308 Winchester and I was wondering if anyone had experience with this particular specimen.

The only other Army Surplus gun I have is a 98 Mauser (Israeli) in .308 and this Enfield sounds like it is something along that line (Cold War, revised to NATO round, etc.). I would like to steer clear of the more "authentic" guns which use the various "mm" ctgs. which I don't have brass, molds and dies for.

Any info appreciated. Thanks.

http://www.aimsurplus.com/acatalog/Enf-2A__Enfield_2A_.308_NATO_7.62x51_Rifles.html
 
They are not conversions. They gun was redesigned to handle the NATO round.
They are actually quite good as long as the headspace is good. Some of the last round had mismatched bolts which screwed with the headspacing.
They are built like tanks and great shooters. They aren't MOA accurate, but military rifles were never meant to be.
 
Both the Nepali Army & the Maoists use them, Along with the older .303s & modern INAS type stuff. {& evrything else they can get there hands on of course.}

Spiral
 
I've got one, so does forumite Steve P.

They're pretty nice rifles, once you clean off the old paint finish.

Many have reported minor stock repairs, stripped screws, etc. Usual milsurp stuff.

Lot of gunboard talk on the subject- check out The High Road.org.

Mine has a perfect bore- nice wood- one screw needs replacement- exactly typical of the bunch. Remember 7.62x51 NATo is not .308 Winchester- there is a pressure difference, if not with the casing. Lots of debate on that too.

Glad I have one- I still think they're a good deal. Don't expect a brand new rifle, though. They take FAL strippers and SOG has the correct bayonet for it.
Mine's scheduled for a scope in 2007.


Mike
 
IIRC they merely took the standard Enfield action -- which was not strong enough to handle 7.62mm in its original form -- and used a stronger steel in the hope that it would hold together at those higher pressures. It did. I'd assume that there would be some modified components to make the switch from a flanged to rimless chambering but other than that, I don't believe that the actual operating system has been changed.

Most owners like them. I'm looking at possibly purchasing one myself but I'm going to be very careful with it. IMO, some of that safety margin that we civilian shooters take for granted is not here with this rifle. I would also caution against shooting commercial .308 ammunition and to instead stick with 7.62mm surplus and handloads kept in that performance range.

Of course, I'm merely parroting the party line at this point. Better safe than sorry though, right?
 
Ad Astra said:
Remember 7.62x51 NATo is not .308 Winchester- there is a pressure difference, if not with the casing.
Click to expand...

I must confess that is something I did not know, and my affection for the Israeli gun has just diminished a little bit. It has fired about 500 rds. of .308 Federal ammo, but now I suspect round #501 may blow. In any case, I'll be scratching this Enfield off my list for the time being. Thanks for the heads up.

http://www3.sympatico.ca/shooters/7_62vs308.htm
 
98K mauser actions are not a problem with .308 winchester ammo, assuming headspace is correct.

There is a lot of cheap, good nato ammo out there for 7.62X51. It sounds like you reload already, so why give up on the Enfield? Plus, the light recoil stuff for 308 Win has many possibilitiers as well. Lighter bullett, lower pressure, etc.

Of course, it is your choice.

take care,

Tom
 
Yeah, all kinds of big stuff has been loaded into 98 actions. I've never heard of any problems with those Izzie .308s. (Though there's been some dispute about FR8- which, unlike FR7, should be strong enough.)

John

PS- Cliff, drop me an email, if you would
 
Tom:

I may give it some more thought, but this excerpt from the above link doesn't sound too good:

"Do you have a military surplus rifle chambered in 7.62 x 51mm? If so, I'll bet part of the reason you bought it was to get a "308 Winchester" at a really low price. Well, you screwed up. It's like looking at a Northern Pike and a Muskie. They're close yes, but each is distinctive, and you have to understand what you're looking at. "

That is the reason I got the Israeli and it has seemed to work just fine, but I'm open to the possibility that there was a flaw in my logic.

I always heard Enfields stretched the brass a little bit, but if the headspacing is shorter on commercial chambers than Military, an Enfield is bound to make a shakey situation worse with non-surplus stuff.
 
Cliff, if you like the rifle, nothing's changed. :D 7.62x51 ammo is available and cheap (relatively). Keep digging for information before you decide one way or another. Lots of people have opinions on this issue. :foot: :confused: :rolleyes: :cool: ;)

The low-recoil .308 ammo by Federal (I think) is supposed to be OK in Ishapores. I'm starting to reload again this winter and it's just another .30-caliber mouth to feed- with loaded-down range loads.

It is a huge debate if its safe or not to shoot reg. full-house .308 but I've already decided in favor of safety. ("Viewers, tune in next week for another edition of 'One Face To Lose' as Bubba tries out his new home-made .50 BMG zip gun.")

I do like the rifle a lot; just need to refinish it. Enfields rock! so does 7.62x51.


Mike
 
I wouldn't trust the Enfield with the 308 round. The 98 Mauser is strong, if the headspace is right. I used to have a 98 and it was a great gun.
The Enfields that I have seen did not have an extra locking lug on the bolt - as I recall - and I could be wrong here - the lockup was in the rear and the bolt handle did the lockup.

The Mauser locked up in front - tight and good for many reloads of cartridges.
 
The Ishapore 2As were made by a significant military power for real world use. They are metallurgically stronger than the Enfields made for the .303

7.62X51 nato would be safe in these guns. 308 wichester brass loaded to nato levels would be safe too. It is likely that .308 commercial would never blow up the gun. Proof loads are hotter still.

If you reload, or are willing to use the newer lower pressure commercial .308 ammo, or are willing to use surplus 7.62 nato ammo, this would be a great gun. If not, or if it troubles you, then you should pass.

BTW, number and position of locking lugs are, by themselves, no indicator of a gun's strength or safety. There have been high pressure cartridge guns made with rear locking lug bolts. The M61 Vulcan, in 20mm, uses six bolts, one for each barrel, and each bolt only has ONE lug!

Any properly manufactured rifle, in its original configuration, will be safe to fire with the ammo it was intended to shoot.

The Ishapore 2A was properly manufactured for the 7.62 nato.

Therefore, it is safe to use that ammo in that rifle, provided the rifle is otherwise safe.

My opinion is that the quote referenced above represents an emotional exageration. There is an element of truth in it, but the case is overstated.

This mild rant has come to its end.

please return to your regurlarly scheduled opinions!

:)

Tom
 
If you want to reload - then it is a good idea to get a rifle with front locking lugs.

If you get any surplus rifle - or any used one - I'd have it checked by a good gunsmith. I did just that before I fired the Mauser I mentioned earlier.

I have seen brand new U.S. revolvers that were not put together properly. I have seen some real problems at rental ranges. I would not want to bet my safety on a revolver with a crooked cylinder.

Rifles are not revolvers, but they can lose their stuff all over you.

I personally hesitate to use any reload that I didn't roll myself, and wouldn't use factory reloads. I have seen them damage guns.

I know that the odds are against any of this, but guns are made to set off explosives.... Better that the explosion stays in the barrel and ends when the bullet goes downrange.
 
gravertom said:
BTW, number and position of locking lugs are, by themselves, no indicator of a gun's strength or safety. There have been high pressure cartridge guns made with rear locking lug bolts. The M61 Vulcan, in 20mm, uses six bolts, one for each barrel, and each bolt only has ONE lug!

Any properly manufactured rifle, in its original configuration, will be safe to fire with the ammo it was intended to shoot.

The Ishapore 2A was properly manufactured for the 7.62 nato.

Therefore, it is safe to use that ammo in that rifle, provided the rifle is otherwise safe.
Click to expand...

Tom raises good points, but I'd like to clarify several things.

1. The M61 Vulcan is not firing with the breech directly in front of my face. ;) I do agree most emphatically with you that the results are what count, not the specifics.
2. We don't know what these rifles were proofed to, if they were in the first place.
3. There are dimensional differences between 7.62mm and .308.
4. There are considerable (11,000 PSI, or thereabouts) differences between the nominal maximum allowable pressures of 7.62mm and .308.
5. If the rifles could handle the higher pressures and smaller cases with no problems when they were new, that in no way guarantees that they will now. Receivers can and do stretch with use and increase headspace. (Particularly when one is routinely running ammunition that's up to 11,000 PSI above what's normal.)
6. While I do not have firsthand knowledge of 2A's grenading, a Google search of the rifle will likely turn up reports of .308 head seperations on the first page. Yahoo! did, anyway.
7. India is not a member of NATO and may have a different opinion of what NATO compatible means. The prosecution presents Exhibit A, the 1A SLR, which is not compatible with anything but is still, at least technically, an FAL.

None of these by themselves mean much. Taken together, they tell me to use 7.62mm surplus and to take it easy on the handloads. If I'm overly cautious, it's because I've had a rifle pop on me and I have no wish to repeat the experience.

If I were a betting man and I had money riding on it, I'd bet on a given 2A handling years of the hottest SAAMI-spec .308 loads with no problems besides what happens to the brass. Why risk it, though?

Put another way, I know what 10mm can be safely reloaded to according to SAAMI, but do you think that I really want to run that through my Glock? Sure, the pistol's rated for it, but the brass dies an early death and my margin of error is basically nonexistant; if the diopter on my powder measure slips and I gain a grain or two, it's going to pop. I'll give up the 100 FPS for peace of mind if nothing else.

This is coming off like I'm trashing the rifle. I'm not. (As I said earlier, I want one, and if I hadn't broken a tooth today I'd be shopping for one this weekend.) My point is simply to use a bit of caution. Milsurps carry no guarantees and when military rifles fail in use -- and they do, trust me, they do -- there are no lawsuits and if the number of catastrophic failures is within someone's idea of an acceptable limit, the problem is not even corrected immediately.

Be careful. Just saying.
 
Dave Rishar said:
Milsurps carry no guarantees and when military rifles fail in use -- and they do, trust me, they do -- there are no lawsuits and if the number of catastrophic failures is within someone's idea of an acceptable limit, the problem is not even corrected immediately.
Click to expand...

I very much appreciate all this information and value every comment . One consideration regarding this Enfield may be whether I want to deal with army surplus ammo or army surplus brass and at the moment I am not wild about either. That is, I'm not dead-set against it but just not wild about it and will give the matter alot more thought.

A thing that tempers my boldness following any mention of stretched brass or casehead separations is that I had an FAL blow to shreds on me with .308 Winchester Brand ammo. When that happens it becomes a matter of how well the gun handles loose gas in the breach, and as an unscathed survivor I can testify the FAL does so very well. I'm not so sure about the Enfield - maybe it is pretty good also.
 
The tooth-breaking incident is unworthy of mention. I will say that the act of eating has suddenly become interesting again, but hey...I needed to lose a few pounds anyway.

It was my fault, of course. ;)
 
Does this broken tooth tie into Sarge's hardtack-baking thread?

I'll bet a box of Enfield ammo, .303 or 7.62x51 NATO, just for thread content's sake. :D


Mike
 
Hey all,

I'm looking at getting a decent knock around rifle to throw in the vehicle for trips to the great outdoors. Would something along the lines of this Enfield do the trick? I want to get something reliable, accurate (enough), with decent knockdown power in case I decide to go hunting during deer/antelope season... and of course, something for the zombie hordes that'll be out in force one day :D

My other choice is a Marlin 45/70 Guide rifle. But they are getting hard to find.

Alan
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top