Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Mausers and Military Rifles A Modern, Long Range 303 Rifle?

I posted this in the Canada forum, but realized there will be interest here too. These rifles don't need to be 1000 yard shooters.

You can tell when it's hunting season. The email traffic is up. In the past week, I've had three queries about making a long range 303. While I don't think the 303 is the best choice in 2021, it doesn't stop the questions, or the desire to own something that can reach out. For your consideration.

A Modern, Long Range 303 Rifle?

Would have thought a P-14 would work for that. Mb

Do you mean as a LR rifle? Yes, back when there were a lot of surplus rifles floating around, they were remade or rechambered for a number of different cartridges.

Interesting...an article about the Long Range Enfield without a mention of regulating by Fulton

Many shooters discovered that free floating the barrels solved most of their problems. An old mentor used to call it "The Voodoo of Fulton".

.............."The 303 British is not the best at longer ranges. It’s really in its element as a mid range performer like its offspring, the 308 Winchester..........



Interesting. I thought the 308 Winchester was the offspring of the 30-06.

I did a quick scan of online posts/articles about Fulton "Regulated" Enfields, and most approach them from a collector's or mechanic's viewpoint. None really touched on the "why" so I'll share what I know which is non-exhaustive and second hand as they were mostly done by the time I was in the game.

In the days of the Enfield, one of the challenges was the ammo of the day. Quality and consistency was not great with .303 Ball ammo, with vertical dispersion at long range due to velocity variations being a major factor. The ingenious Brits figured out that they could get a rifle barrel to release a bullet at either the high point or low point of it's "whip" by "regulating" the rifle and thus allowing the bullets to converge on a target at 800, 900 or 1000 yards (ranges considered "long range" in traditional full bore shooting). One of the best at "regulating" Enfields was GE Fulton.

How did they do it? You can find the info online...in short they created up pressure in key areas with shims and relieved tension in others. Did it work? In a competitive prone shooting context yes..very well. There are stories of Enfields being shot in matches where issued military ball ammo (either 303 or 308) was shot and beating up on shooters with what we would traditionally think of as Target rifles.

Are they still competitive? I do know there were a few shot in the 92 Palma at Raton. This was the match where the Sierra 155 debuted and the ammo loaded by Bob Jensen was head and shoulders better than any other ammo (usually a good lot of military ball) shot up to that point. The improved ammo theoretically negated the regulated Enfield's benefits. I don't have info on who was shooting the Enfields and how they fared. Shortly after though we saw the Brits shooting Swings/Quadlocks/Quadlights so perhaps that was the swan song of the rear lockers.

I have seen at least one former Palma Team member on this board. Perhaps he'll see this and chime in on his experiences with the Long Range Enfields.

The 7.62x51mm was inspired by the 303 British, with some help from the 300 Savage. In short, it is an updated 303 British. A rimless cartridge that used a lighter bullet and a higher operating pressure. The 303 British was used around the world and had a good track record on the battlefield. Humans copy success stories.

The 7.62 x 51mm shared the same case volume as the 303 British, and the improvements came with a lighter 147 grain bullet than the standard 174 grain British load. The body taper was reduced and the shoulder angle increased. The neck was shortened slightly. A step toward this improvement was apparent with the 300 Savage. More on that shortly.

First, the 30-06

In the 1930s, US experiments with a new cartridge that would replace the 30-06 were stalled with McArthur's appointment as Army Chief of Staff. And a few years later, WWII started. It's probable that McArthur kept the 30-06 cartridge because there were millions of them in warehouses, waiting to be used. The military hoped that a smaller, lighter, easier to pack cartridge with less recoil could be created. The experiments begun by looking at what was presently in use at home and around the world.

The US was looking for something with less bite, and a smaller footprint than the 30-06. One cartridge they examined was the 303. It wasn't as hard on the shoulder and was the most widely used cartridge in the free world at the time, but...


The 30-40 beside the 303 British

With the formation of NATO in 1949, member countries wished to standardize issue military equipment. One of those things was SA ammunition. So why not just use the 303 British? One issue was the rim. But perhaps the most important issue was that it was designed by the Brits. Despite the idea of NATO presenting a unified front against the USSR and other aggressors, individual countries continued experimenting.

In the US, there was also the downsizing of SA cartridges and reducing small arms weight. Starting with BP cartridges the late 1800s, and moving forward to WWII, we saw 50 cal bullets reduced to 45 cal, reduced to 30 cal. And who can forget the US copy of the 303 British - the 30-30 Krag? It might have worked, but the Krag's magazine/feed system was no good.

The shrinkage ended in the mid 1950s with Eugene Stoner's AR-15 and the 5.56 cartridge. But I am getting ahead of myself.

But First, the Early 50s

Where did the 7.62x51mm come from? The military was always experimenting, and one cartridge was thought to be pretty close to ideal - the 300 Savage. It was a good starting point anyway. Why not combine the best of the 303 with the 300 Savage?

The 300 Savage was created in the 1920s and the US military thought it had promise. The 7.62x51mm might have been developed in the 1930s, but there were those two interruptions mentioned earlier - McArthur and WWII. After the war, they picked up where they left off. They re-examined their research from the 1930s, added 20 years of improvements and lessons learned from WWII and Korea. The result? the 7.62x51mm, which has stuck around for 70 years.



Some considerations. The world's militaries are always looking at what the other guys are using and what developments are happening. The US is no different. A lot of it is military espionage.

A few times over the years, the US borrowed from other countries, or infringed on copyrights. The 1903 Springfield was an example. The US had to pay Mauser for that hiccup The 30-40 was another example. You have to remember that the British Empire was the most powerful player on the planet back then, so their equipment and methods would be studied and copied.

After the smoke cleared, the US created a few updated autoloaders that used the 7.62x51mm. This was due, in part, to the Brits, the Germans, the Swiss and some others.

You are referring to pressure points. They were most commonly placed toward the front of the barrel, but also used in the centre, or not at all.

One of the problems using Lee Enfields in competition was that armourers were only allowed to change so much. We had a book to follow. Most competitions had to shoot as issued rifles with only a few authorized changes. If the military fore stock could have been removed and replaced with a a different cradle, it would have helped tremendously.

That's interesting, thanks for the follow up.

I was aware of the 300 Savage and 30-06 connection to the T65 development, but didn't realize the 303 Brit was part of that.

I kind of regret not buying a Lee Enfield 303 decades ago, when the rifles and ammo were plentiful and inexpensive. It's a very distinct rifle with a lot of history.

Here's a nice vid of Rob Ski with the Mk4 No1 (I think) in 303 British, stretching it's legs out to 700 yards.

It looks like he used a Canadian made No 4 (T).

At about 26:45 in the video, you can see the rear of the bolt handle. You can see the L (Long Branch) and what appears to be 0174. This is part of the rifle's serial no. The L designation makes it Canadian. These rifles were fitted and all the parts kept together.

Good to know. Your knowledge of these rifles is obviously very extensive.

Me, I can recognize one, know it's most likely a 303, and know it's of British origin. That's about it.

I wish I could say I knew more. We're all students of these old rifles.

I remember passing on some T models because they were missing the scope and mounts when I was a teenager. No one thought that they were worth anything. They were the same price as the standard issue rifles. Like a lot of gun shops, mixed barrels of old milsurps were scattered around. Prices were $10 to about $30.

I'd love to have an L42A1.

Steve, any other indications of origin? Or model/use? Friend of mines` Dad brought one home from the war, WWII. Friend thinks it has some value. I`ve not seen the rifle...supposed to be in "good" shape. And, supposed to have been a "sniper".
Thanks.

PS have watched Vintage Rifle Shooting Club. Interesting.

Yes, that would be neat!



All the rifle serial nos indicate the country of origin. One visual indication that it might be a T model is that it has been drilled and tapped for a scope mount. Every T model used five or six groove barrels. There have been fakes made over the years, so your friend’s dad would have to take it for an appraisal.

Thanks Steve..

You're welcome. I wish I could help more.

As an aside, having watched and enjoyed the Vintage Rifle Snipershow, is "Rob's" dialect real or the youtube add-on.

Just missed the big TN match the week before I stumbled on the videos.

Too bad the availability has driven prices through the roof.
Years ago we had a guy that shot the British guns with HIGH power add-on scopes just for bug hole groups (100 yds max on that range). If the gun showed no chance to develop into a shooter it was sold and replaced with another.
All with cast projies, so not sure how far the precision would hold. He did take a deer at 185 just to spite a disbelieving FIL.

Fun to watch him develop the best the guns of the "distant" past could do.
Really sorry I did not get to see the big match