Kind of new ground for me. Never did an Enfield leaving the bolt handle and safety intact...and always have just completely replaced the tang....but have to admit there's a sort of gnarly quality here.

Had one only integral box bottom metal I did way back. Happened to fit the big A Square perfectly and holds three down. Weight empty is 10 pounds and one ounce.

The tang and bolt release REALLY needed some attention without breaking the bank., photos show my best effort.

This rifle will see heavy lifetime use in Zimbabwe

Duane, thanks for posting these pictures.

It looks awesome! Can’t wait to shoot it and get it ready to export to Zim. This will be Nigel Theisen’s new daily carry. The ammo will most likely be RL-15 pushing a 570 gr CEB brass flat-point solid to 2150 fps.

Duane that is fantastic. Nigel will put it to good use and Lane will handle the ammo!

Very nice - but I love a well done Enfield.

quote:

Originally posted by squeezenhope:
Duane, thanks for posting these pictures.

WEll...I post photos the easy way.... Give them to Abby ans they magically appear on the forum.

Wow... don't know if one could build a better looking "big stick"! Love it. I would have to get use to that bolt though... was it ergonomically designed for that big safety?

I'm in the same boat with a sports figure being interviewed...."Well..ya know, I don't know, ya know"

Perhaps some Enfield history buff can enlighted both of us

Just curious, is it still cock on closing or did you modify it to cock on opening?

Well, not my style, but it's superbly done.

quote:

Originally posted by loud-n-boomer:
Just curious, is it still cock on closing or did you modify it to cock on opening?

No..left as is...Guerss you get used to it.

quote:

Originally posted by Duane Wiebe (CG&R):

quote:

Originally posted by loud-n-boomer:
Just curious, is it still cock on closing or did you modify it to cock on opening?

No..left as is...Guerss you get used to it.

He may have grown up with one.

I have a 1917 Enfield that way, it doesn’t bother me a bit. But my first rifle when I was a kid was a 93 Mauser and still have a 96 also. Cock on close is just different but no big deal.

I guess the cartridge choice will answer the often repeated line that the dogleg bolt handle hits your hand during recoil.

Thank you for showing the 1917 Enfield action so much respect -- even leaving the flaming bomb stamp.

Yeah...a stamp, crest, etc really neds to be left alone in most cases. The heritage would othrwise be in doubt.

Not a huge enfield fan, but this was tastefully executed. What's the plan with the rear pic rail?

Nice. I say ya did your best with what you had DW, stock safety and all. The path for the safety appendage in the stock was well designed & executed and nice choice on the wood.

I wouldn't kick 'er out of bed for eating crackers!

I like it a bunch!

Thanks Duane,

Zeke

Nicely done....Love the big Enfields, nothing wrong with the safety's, doglegs or cock on closing.

Roger

quote:

Originally posted by Brandon.Gleason:
Not a huge enfield fan, but this was tastefully executed. What's the plan with the rear pic rail?

Client wanted the optin of relocation So...might as well make it as close to "sighted in and ready to go"" as possible

Love the long open grip on a boomer!!

Yep..A tracing of his larger hands and taking recoil into account sort of dictates the grip confiuration

Good looking rifle for sure.

So that one started as a '14 or a '17?

It's a 17..delivery postponed...owner has decided to go with cock on opening.

Looks like a good solid working rifle.

Duane,
Just looked at the 'boomer' again for the 5th time. Guess I like the lines. As for the quick view, it's growing on me simply because it's a good idea. Happy buildin'.
CB

Duane,

Nice rifle! I have two 1917 Enfields, 404J and 35W, built on them. I left the bolt handles and everything intact except the bolt release - these were turned back in with the tab removed. I agree that is something cool about the old gnarly setup. I love the safety - cams into the firing pin and locks the bolt in place with plunger at the same time. You helped me with a feeding issue on my 404J and did a proper follower for me back 2014. I also used your bottom metals. I've since built a new magazine and now have 5 proper rounds down vs the original 4! I 3D printed a negative mold of the original Mauser magazine dimensions and used that to form the metal around. The only regret I have on both rifles was changing to cock on open. I wish I had left cock on close. But I can cycle my 404 from the shoulder qickly - my PH said it sounds like I'm shooting a double I'm so quick on the 2nd shot.

Question: What bases are those? I have Talleys on mine now and have wanted to fit a front red dot as backup like you have. At this point I'm thinking of modifying a Talley - milling it flat and adapting to Trijicon red dot (the one that uses tritium and light pipe). But looks like you might have a better setup?

I'm sorry . Realize I did not answer your question. I made those bases here in the shop. Cient wanted the option to move the optic from ring to bridge. Might as well have them as close to same height as possible.

Could not find suitable bases (or blanks)....and then, what you could find seem to all be made out of aluminum.

Very nice rifle!
I always leave them cock on closing; There is absolutely nothing wrong with that system; the British designed it that way for a reason. To place the primary extraction and cocking motions and efforts, in different places on the bolt cycle.
It is not broken; American shooters are just spoiled and untrained.

quote:

Originally posted by dpcd:
Very nice rifle!
I always leave them cock on closing; There is absolutely nothing wrong with that system; the British designed it that way for a reason. To place the primary extraction and cocking motions and efforts, in different places on the bolt cycle.
It is not broken; American shooters are just spoiled and untrained.

Absolutely agree with the cock on closing concept. That is why the 303 Lee Enfield (SMLE) was the best battle rifle of all time with a cycle time quicker than any other battle bolt rifle. All bolt lift effort goes into primary extraction with cocking becoming part of the already strong feeding effort on closing of the bolt. Under enemy fire or a departing or charging animal the cock on closing bolt can be worked hard and fast with the cocking effort hardly noticeable.

Apart from various SMLE's I have used, my Schultz and Larsen M60 7x61 was cock on closing and even being a lefty I could cycle that rifle real fast to take multiple animals from a mob.

Shame to alter that M17 from cock on closing.

quote:

Originally posted by Duane Wiebe (CG&R):
I'm sorry . Realize I did not answer your question. I made those bases here in the shop. Cient wanted the option to move the optic from ring to bridge. Might as well have them as close to same height as possible.

Could not find suitable bases (or blanks)....and then, what you could find seem to all be made out of aluminum.

Thanks! Looked custom. Was thinking about seeing if I could make a base that could adapt to a Talley.

I had to tweak my ammo on both cock on open Enfield conversions. On the 404, just needed to uniform all of the primer pockets as I had inconsistent ignition - assumed the hard cci primer was being pushed deeper. Not sure, but uniforming fixed it 100%. On the 35 Whelen, had to go with a soft primer (Fed 210). I uniformed the pocket, but the shots were all over the target. Switched to Fed 210s and shot a clover leaf. Never seen anything like it before.

The reason your rifle would not fire after a COO conversion is that they did not make the cocking cam on the bolt longer. They probably just used the existing primary extraction cam which results in a very short FP fall, and consequent misfires. I wasn't your primers, nor your brass. It was the guy who did the conversion. Misguided attempts to improve something that was perfect to start with. You have to weld up the cam and make it longer; something many so called gun smiths can't, or don't want to do.
Another reason, to leave them alone!

Haven't actually tried it..but wonder if making the cocking notch longer (modify existing notch) ...maybe .060 or so?

Of course,pay attention to FP protrusion

Yes, that is the way to do it. Has nothing to do with FP protrusion.
This is why the cock on opening conversions use such strong springs.
It's totally a waste of time and money to fix something that works perfectly well as it is. You Americans never cease to amaze me.
The bolt on the bottom has been welded up to make the cocking cam longer; thereby increasing the FP fall. Still, nonsense..

Thanks..I have a fire damaged bolt..think I'll try it. Proptrusion comment is beause if notch is me deeper, FP will protrude further

Right, but the notch forward location does not change; it is welded and extended to the raar.

quote:

Originally posted by dpcd:
The reason your rifle would not fire after a COO conversion is that they did not make the cocking cam on the bolt longer. They probably just used the existing primary extraction cam which results in a very short FP fall, and consequent misfires. I wasn't your primers, nor your brass. It was the guy who did the conversion. Misguided attempts to improve something that was perfect to start with. You have to weld up the cam and make it longer; something many so called gun smiths can't, or don't want to do.
Another reason, to leave them alone!

Agree. Should have left COC. Anyway, everything works perfect now with the adjustments I made on the cartridges. Taken an elephant and 2 buffalo with the 404 - not a worry in the world on reliability.

Look over on the Gunsmmithing section; I have made stocks for the Rem 600. Laminated walnut and beech.

quote:

Originally posted by dpcd:
Right, but the notch forward location does not change; it is welded and extended to the raar.

Obviously Enfield FP springs do not 'bottom out' as they are compressed more with extended cocking cams?

Judging by your images the cam is extended rearward by about 1/4"?

Realize that you aren't actually increasing the FP fall over what the original cock on closing system provided. That striker fall distance is plenty and is totally adequate for reliable ignition.
You are just increasing the FP travel over what just using the primary extraction cam to cock it, provides.
That is not enough for reliable ignition.