LOOKING FOR ...

[CASEY]

I'M LOOKING FOR A ENFIELD TANKERS CARBINE IN .308. ANY IDEAS?  THANKS, CASEY

[Slamfire]

Get an Ishapore and cut it down to the size you want. The Brits had enough trouble with the Mark 5 that they abandoned the project. You might want a different rifle to base your carbine on.  :roll:

[1911crazy]

SOG is offering a britt enfield No4 Mk1 cut down into a jungle carbine right now Its called "Jungle Carbine Sporter" #SLG-JC5SPT   $259.95      303cal  Its fitted in a black sporter stock too.

[S.S.]

I have never fired a Jungle carbine that would hold all of
the shots on a 9 inch paper plate at 100 yards! The reason the Brits
discontinued the project was because of what they called
the "Wandering Zero". In other words, they couldn't hit crap with them
either. I have seen one based on the Number 4 Mk1 action
with a Holland & Holland Barrel that the owner said would clover leaf at 100 meters. I did not have the opportunity to see for myself though as this apparently was a proto type that the owner did not like being shot too often. It was nicely made though.

[Siskiyou]

The true Mark 5s had cuts in the reciever to make them lighter.  Many believe the cuts caused the accuracy problem.  I have a Golden State Jungle carbine.  The fakes do not have these cuts.  

http://www.webpages.uidaho.edu/~stratton/en-page/fakes.htm

[S.B.]

Get an Ishapore and cut it down to the size you want. The Brits had enough trouble with the Mark 5 that they abandoned the project. You might want a different rifle to base your carbine on.  :roll:

The Brits abandoned the Mk5 because of NATO edict that all NATO forces adopt a 7.62 rifle. I've seen it discussed, in print, that there was no actual wandering zero (suppose to be a rumor started by top people in the planning for the adoption of the L1A1s)? Also, I own and shoot a suedo Mk 5, and the vicious recoil talked about with this rifle is non existent.

[Stan in SC]

Just as stated above,the so called wandering zero is mythical.The inability to hit a target can only be traced to firearm defect or shooter error.
The so called "Tanker" Enfield is also mythical having been created by Gibbs Rifle Company.

[S.B.]

By the way, it is possible to convert a No4mk1 to .308 by changing the extractor, magazine, barrel and a few other parts. So, the No5 should convert just as easy? The Brits had these conversions in the works just before being force to going to the L1A1s (politics). Can you remember when the was the last time a politician told you something, you could believe? Their sniper rifles were already  converted to the NATO caliber.

[bbqsnbeer]

I'm not sure about a No5 conversion to 7.62n .
The No5 reciever has been lightened and is probably not strong enough for 7.62n pressures .
The barrel has also been fluted to help lighten the rifle as well .
Here's a photo of the No4 (top ) and the No5 recievers
The barrel fluting is seen here and also note the lightening cut under the rearsight , which is a good , quick way to see if that rifle is a No5 or a "Jungle Carbine "  

[S.B.]

I agree, there were lightening cuts on all  original "Jungle Carbines" but the receivers are basically the same other than that?

[S.S.]

The Brit. War dept. (Through comments in Janes Infantry Weapons)
did indeed claim inaccuracy problems were one of the main causes
for dismissal of the project. The claim was that the MK VII ball needed a longer barrel for best accuracy and instead of redesigning the cartridge, they felt a new weapon was more feasible. This combined with another project they were working on to go to a semi-auto or burst fire weapon. If I remember correctly this other project was called an EM2 They wanted to go to a short .280 cartridge but then the NATO standardization card was played and I believe the FN-FAL was chosen.

[S.B.]

You may have a valid point there, S.Sumner, I've never shot anything but reloads in my fake?

[bbqsnbeer]

Enfields' cool EM2 project