Bolt Action Rifles

I have been collecting old military rifles since I was a young man of 19. (The Lee-Enfield No. 1 Mk III being my favorite, but that's unrelated.)

Anyway, a question I've never read or heard a good answer to is why some nations preferred a straight bolt handle and some adopted a turn down bold handle.

I shoot left handed and the straight handles make it faster for me to cycle the bolt than the turned ones do.

So looking at my Czech Mauser today the question entered my mind again. So I'm asking this questions here, because frankly you guys seem to be a better resource for information than the encyclopedia.

Thanks

When telescopic sights came into more common use the straight bolt handle was modified to allow clearance IIRC.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by JimmyHAD

When telescopic sights came into more common use the straight bolt handle was modified to allow clearance IIRC.

---

I've heard that a lot and it makes since, but weapons like the Lee-Metford had the bolt turned down before telescopic sights were use by the military.

I suppose there isn't a rhyme or reason. Some did and some didn't.

joscobo,

WRT the Lee-Enfields, the bolt handles being turned down placed the bolt knob in a much more accesible position - the hand movement needed is much smaller than with the 90 degree handles, leading to a much more fluid and rapid action of the bolt.

It has often been said that you knew when you had got there when there was only one distinct sound when the bolt was cycled (not four) !

I certainly could operate the bolt of my late lamented Enfield L39 faster than any other rifle I have ever used :)

Have fun !

Best regards

Russ

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by joscobo

II shoot left handed and the straight handles make it faster for me to cycle the bolt than the turned ones do.

---

I don't know the answer to your question.
I can say that in WWI at the Battle of Mons the rate of fire from the British infantry with bolt action Lee Enfields was so high that the Germans thought they were facing machine guns.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by welshwizard

I don't know the answer to your question.
I can say that in WWI at the Battle of Mons the rate of fire from the British infantry with bolt action Lee Enfields was so high that the Germans thought they were facing machine guns.

---

It's the slickest bolt action on any rifle I've used. I love the old Lee-Enfields. Best bolt action battle rifles made (very much my opinion of course). If only they had ditched the rimmed cartridge at some point. But, from what I read they were going developing a brand new cartridge and WWI broke out and they just shelved the idea. Perhaps because the No. 1 Mk III was just that good during the War To End All Wars.

joscobo,

+1 on your view of the Lee-Enfilelds - they are simply lovely rifles :)

-1 on your view about rimmed cartridges !!

The rim of the .303 (and other rimmed cartridges) is probably the best way of maintaining headspace when the rifle is used very briskly.

If the 0.303 magazines are loaded with each cartridge rim forward of the previous, then the magazine action is as fluid as one could desire :)

From my own experience, the 'one up, one down' method of magazine charging has lead to way more falures to feed than the above method.

WRT the No1 MkIII, I have always wanted to shoot a heavy barreled version like the Australian Lithgow target barrels :)

Have fun !

Best regards

Russ

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by PhatMan

joscobo,

+1 on your view of the Lee-Enfilelds - they are simply lovely rifles :)

-1 on your view about rimmed cartridges !!

The rim of the .303 (and other rimmed cartridges) is probably the best way of maintaining headspace when the rifle is used very briskly.

If the 0.303 magazines are loaded with each cartridge rim forward of the previous, then the magazine action is as fluid as one could desire :)

From my own experience, the 'one up, one down' method of magazine charging has lead to way more falures to feed than the above method.

WRT the No1 MkIII, I have always wanted to shoot a heavy barreled version like the Australian Lithgow target barrels :)

Have fun !

Best regards

Russ

---

I only really say that because I could see me, personally, having a feed issue from nerves, at the worst moment in combat. Although I've never read any soldier that shouldered a Lee-Enfield complain about it. I've never read anything but praise from soldiers, except for the No. 5's. I think possibly the wandering zero problem was more an effect of the recoil and not the rifle itself.

A big +1 on wanting to shoot a heavy barreled Lithgow target model. I had a Lithgow No 1 Mk III with the black witch stamp on the receiver ring. It was a fantastic example of the rifle.

I'm way off topic I know, but I can talk Enfield's all day long.

I used to be a sniper in the Army...When I retired I built the weapon I wanted when I was in......7RemMag, Shilen bull 24 nch barrel, Mcmillon stock, leupold LRT 6.5x20x50mm..Shoots great..heavy as crap...I forgot I got old...

Love the Lee-Enfields. I managed to rescue but one of the 15 or so varietys of Enfield and Lee-Metford rifles my Grandfather had. My Grandmother in all her wisdom decided to give or sell all my G.fathers belongings after years of having them stored away...All his Cut-throats were thrown in the bin at that time too. This all happened when I was living on the other side of the country and I only recently found out that this was what had happened.
My questions regarding the whereabouts of the rifles were always answered evasively on my return all those years ago. He had some beautiful examples of Lee-Enfield. The one I do have is the best rifle in the gun safe! The smoothest action and fastest to fire. How it escaped the purge I don't know, but I'm glad it did.


Mick

Wintchase: I built one simular, but in 300wsm. Need a fourwheeler to take it anywhere and really boring to shoot at closer ranges typical to commercial rifle ranges.

I love the old rifles as well...

As a semi-retired British 1st Airborne Recce WWII reenactor I have a huge soft spot for Enfields as well. My Savage No4 Mk1 asterix is a dream and taught me how to shoot. Sadly it had been sporterized sometime between then and when I got it with the barrell being shortened. Luckily I have a good friend who is a collector of Lee-Enfields (23 different variations or so if I recall right) and is going to hook me up with a proper one so we can get it back into proper shape.

I have a soft spot for the Swiss K31 in 7.5x55mm Swiss caliber. Superbly made and accurate; the straight-pull bolt action is very fast to operate.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Sticky

I have a soft spot for the Swiss K31 in 7.5x55mm Swiss caliber. Superbly made and accurate; the straight-pull bolt action is very fast to operate.

---

That is a remarkable example of a well designed, well made weapons system. The rifle was superb and perfectly augmented with an equally superb caliber.

I wonder if it would have been plagued by similar problems other straight pull bolts had if it had been pressed into war?


The rate of fire, the caliber and the superb craftsmanship and design of the K31 make it one of the truly great battle rifles ever placed in the hands of soldiers, even if it never tasted battle. (At least to my knowledge it didn't.)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Muirtach

As a semi-retired British 1st Airborne Recce WWII reenactor I have a huge soft spot for Enfields as well. My Savage No4 Mk1 asterix is a dream and taught me how to shoot. Sadly it had been sporterized sometime between then and when I got it with the barrell being shortened. Luckily I have a good friend who is a collector of Lee-Enfields (23 different variations or so if I recall right) and is going to hook me up with a proper one so we can get it back into proper shape.

---

I had a Savage No4 Mk1 that had been put through the ringer. It didn't look like much, but it was still accurate and reliable. I often thought about sporterizing it, since it was what I carried on many hikes up the mountain behind my home in case I came across any bears. I carried it, but even with a pretty banged up stock I never could bring myself to cut it up.

The guy i gave it to later still has it and it began his affair with the Lee-Enfield design. He has a very nice Webley and Scott I'd like to get my hands on, such was his like of British small arms after that old Savage No 4 Mk1.

Another reason for the bolt on the Lee-Enfield/Metford being turned down was to allow for faster cycling of the action during the "mad minute." A trained soldier could literally flick the bolt open and closed with his thumb and fore finger. That is, firing 15 aimed shots per minute. As said before, the Hun found out about that at Mons in 1914.

I love the Lee in all of it's variations, but my true love is the US Rifle, Caliber .30, Model 1903.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by GeauxLSU

Another reason for the bolt on the Lee-Enfield/Metford being turned down was to allow for faster cycling of the action during the "mad minute." A trained soldier could literally flick the bolt open and closed with his thumb and fore finger. That is, firing 15 aimed shots per minute. As said before, the Hun found out about that at Mons in 1914.

I love the Lee in all of it's variations, but my true love is the US Rifle, Caliber .30, Model 1903.

---

I have a Remington '03A1 that I have been shooting since I was 9 years old. I am 50 now and have yet to find another rifle with a smoother,more 'buttery' action. It was my father's deer rifle and has a Monte Carlo stock,Lyman peep sight,etc.

The '03A3 was a popular starting point for hunting rifles. At one point, I think you could buy one through the mail for $25.

I've owned probably 40 '03s over the years, all in issue configuration.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by JimmyHAD

When telescopic sights came into more common use the straight bolt handle was modified to allow clearance IIRC.

---

I recall in the 60's a lot of gunsmiths making a good bit of change
cutting off and then modifying and welding the bolt handle so it would clear
the scope.

This is a detail folk should look at when making a purchase decision.
Especially if you are a reloader. Also pay attention to the ejection path.
Some scopes interfere with cartridge ejection.

I have a couple of No1 Mk 1 enfields, both originally with magazine cut offs and long range sights. One is a Sparkbrook action and I have had it made into a brush gun with Lithgow heavy barrel am still working up loads for it. The other one was sporterised in the 1920s by a mate of my late father, I have nailed roos with it at about 300 yds using WW! mk 4 ball, nickle plated and corrosive primers, have to use boiling water to clean the barrel. Amazing old rifle, bore is nearly shot out but still shoots really well.
Back on track, I suspect straight pulls were thought to be faster than the bolt action. The Canadian Ross used to jam in the mud during WW!.
Funny just got a note from a mate in SA here is his Schmidt Rubin straight pull and his first target shot off the bench at 100yds,he is happy as a cat with two tails!!

Cheers all

Heelerau:beer2:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by heelerau

I have a couple of No1 Mk 1 enfields, both originally with magazine cut offs and long range sights. One is a Sparkbrook action and I have had it made into a brush gun with Lithgow heavy barrel am still working up loads for it. The other one was sporterised in the 1920s by a mate of my late father, I have nailed roos with it at about 300 yds using WW! mk 4 ball, nickle plated and corrosive primers, have to use boiling water to clean the barrel. Amazing old rifle, bore is nearly shot out but still shoots really well.
Back on track, I suspect straight pulls were thought to be faster than the bolt action. The Canadian Ross used to jam in the mud during WW!.
Funny just got a note from a mate in SA here is his Schmidt Rubin straight pull and his first target shot off the bench at 100yds,he is happy as a cat with two tails!!

Cheers all

Heelerau:beer2:

---

You bring up a very good point about Enfield's that have barrels that look shot out, yet will shoot pretty damned true. Also I've read of accuracy issues with the standard ball ammunition, but I've never found it to be anything but accurate. I picked up some Israeli ammunition made just after WWII that was absolutely nail drivers in my old No. 4 MkII.

In spite of the critics so-called shortcomings ie. the two part stock, cordite propellent, sight radius (No. I Mk III), rimmed cartridges, etc, the Enfield's, even abused, are reliable and accurate.

This thread has me nostalgic to purchase another.

I should have said, the MK4 ball which is round nosed leaves a fist sized exit wound, so suspect the round tumbles on entry into target, it may be age of the round as well, don't really recommend using such old ammo.


Cheers Heelerau

heelerau,

The 174 gr Mk VII round had a sizable fiber, aluminium or plastic filler plug at the nose of the projectile, and these are known for tumbling after penetrating live tissue :tameshigiri:

Have fun !

Best regards

Russ