No.4 Lee Enfield >Long-radius aperture sights for precision

>>31546342
Just get an AR15

>>31546342
Eh

>>31546342
Id get one but ammo

>>31546383
AIA's version of No.4 Lee Enfield
>All the God-tier benefits of Lee Enfield, but in .308

That's not a standard-issue Lee Enfield however, but still probably the best iron sighted bolt action you could get on the planet.

>>31546342
Two piece bolt head, weak (relatively speaking) action and lug strength, took 2x as long to reload because you're using 2x as many clips. And it uses rimmed ammo.

Great rifle, better than the Mauser, but not the greatest.

German soldiers often thought they were facing a squad equiped with mg's when they fought the Brits early in the war.

I doubt free floating the barrel helped it with how wild the loadings were across the empire. The clamped barrel would of been more consistent.

Other than mag size it didn't have anything else going for it. Socket bayonet was less then stellar, pull through is trash for clearing stuck cases innetrench setting.

>>31546411
>2x as long to reload

1. Open bolt
2. Grab 2 clips in 1 hand
3. Place first clip on clip guide
4. Push rounds in
5. Place second clip on clip guide after tapping the top of the previous clip backwards to eject
6. Push rounds in
7. Close bolt

>Reloading with 1 clip

1. Open bolt
2. Grab clip
3. Place clip on clip guide
4. Push rounds in
5. Close bolt (if it's a Mosin bolt, first manually remove clip before closing the bolt, so 6 steps instead of 5)

Does not equate to 2x as long to reload. Even if the Lee Enfield reloader only went for one clip at a time, you only open the bolt once and you only close the bolt once, so it's still inherently not 2x as long to reload because you do not open/close the bolt twice.

Good effort, though. The bit about the bolt being 'relatively' weak is true. You cannot rechamber a Lee Enfield for, say, a 7mm WinMag or something like that, but you could PROBABLY get away with it in a Nugget or Mauser. Also, yes, rimmed ammo can definitely be considered a downside even though when reloading properly you don't have much cause to worry about it.

>>31546342
Weak action, even the Mosin is stronger

>>31546508
You also forgot about how the two piece bolt head and weak bolt strength means that Enfields in particular are vulnerable to excessive headspace over the life of the rifle. It's not a unusual thing.

And the complexity of the bolt itself. These factors prevent it from being the BEST. It's 3rd in my eyes, behind the Type 99 (#2) and the Mas 36 (#1), while being tied with the P14/M1917.

>>31546506
"didn't have anything else going for it."

Cock-on-close with 60 degree turn is smoother/faster than cock-on-open with 90 degree turn
>Most bolt actions were cock-on-open with 90 degree turn

Long-radius aperture sights
>Most rifles of the time had short-radius notch-and-post sights

Those are clear and obvious advantages over other bolt actions of the time to go along with the capacity.

The pull-through aspect could be considered valid for the stuck casings bit... except the Kar98k's ramrod was only 1/3rd the proper length of the barrel, and the M91/30's ramrod is also not as long as both the barrel/chamber so would probably not serve well to remove stuck casings.

>>31546545
I believe all the advantages outweigh the disadvantage of not being able to rechamber it for hotter cartridges.

>>31546551
Headspacing is indeed a thing, but in all the Lee Enfields I've ever owned, it's never been an issue.

Type 99 vs No.4 Lee Enfield
>Both sights are aperture but No.4's is long radius
>Both bolts are cock-on-close but Lee Enfield's has 60 degrees rather than 90 degrees
>No.4 has a free floating barrel but I'm not so sure if the Type 99's did

To be fair...

>Type 99's action was FAR stronger allowing it to be rechambered to MUCH hotter cartridges if desired
>Type 99's chrone-lined barrel to prevent wear/tear/corrosion

Again, to be fair...

>Late-war Type 99... 'nuff said...

MAS 36 vs No.4 Lee Enfield

>I admit, I know next to nothing about the MAS 36 except I'd know one if I seen one. Don't know bolt-turn degree, don't know whether it's cock-on-close or cock-on-open, don't know the capacity, but I do recall long radius aperture sights.

P14/M1917 is my personal 2nd place winner because I consider the sights better than the Type 99's, and that reminds me... the bolt is next to the trigger so you can fire without letting go of the bolt. That's a BIG reason why the Lee bolt is so frighteningly fast. The Type 99 does not have the bolt next to the trigger because it sticks straight out. After working the bolt, you must then move your hand down to fire. With the Lee bolt, you don't have to move your hand to fire; fire with your middle finger while still holding the bolt, just like P14/M1917.

Don't know if MAS 36 can be fired without letting go of the bolt.

>>31546342
All the positives of the No 4 are heavily weighted down by its cartridge. The .303 brit cartridge should have been replaced in the 1920's at the latest. It was an antiquated design by the turn of the century.

>>31546698
>7.62x54r
Just because a cartridge is rimmed doesn't make it antiquated. 174gr going 2440 ft/s from the muzzle will ruin someone's day just as quickly as 150gr going 2800 ft/s or 198gr going 2500 ft/s. Well, 'just as quickly' is meant figuratively rather than literally, what with the differences in velocity, but it still applies.

>>31546735
x54R is actually pretty strong, I think modern Russian military loadings outperform even .308

>>31546342
I'm not sure if I'd call it the greatest (mostly because of .303 British), but it's a contender. I certainly love mine.

Others:
>M1917 Enfield - trades some features for being chambered in .30-06, still retains most of the No.4's benefits, hybrid Enfield-Mauser action that takes the best of both
>Early-midwar Type 99 Arisaka - similar features, 7.7x58 has amazing terminal ballistics, god-tier action strength, all those fun toys
>K31 - Probably the most accurate service rifle ever, straight pull action, only really let down by its traditional tangent sights
>Swedish Mauser (specifically the m/1938) - god-tier cartridge, cock-on-close action, otherwise just a really well-made Mauser rifle

>>31546786
No, so wrong

>>31546632
You're forgetting that the Type 99 has better gas mitigation if you peirce a primer (which my Lebel did twice this Saturday) and the famous Mauser claw extractor. Additionally bolt disassembly is also superior.
>Late war Type 99s
I don't count those. Only the best examples of each factor into my personal evaluation. Not that you're wrong for including them.

The Mas 36 is cock on open and and 90 degree turn, but has a short throw thanks to the rear locking lugs, has the simplest bolt design, 5 round capacity of rimless ammo, shorter overall length with the same barrel length, excellent gas mitigation, and the easiest disassembly of any bolt I've seen. Throw in the robustness of the action, the ease of manufacture (compared to its contemporaries), and the caliber itself and to me it cannot be best for a standard issue infantry bolt action rifle.

>>31546735

I am not saying the cartridge was ineffective. And I am not comparing loadings. I was talking about cartridge design having a rim. A rimmed cartridge requires a more complicated magazine to prevent feeding issues. And the more complicated something is the more likely it is to break.

If I could go back in time and influence one thing about the gun, it would be to have them adopt a cartridge with either a rimless or semi rimmed design (most likely just a rimless .303 brit) and utilize a mauser style charging system.

File: Madsen2.jpg (568KB, 2744x1127px) Image search: [Google]

568KB, 2744x1127px

>>31546342
I started out collecting enfields...bought about 14ish of them.

LOVE the guns, but fucking hate rimmed cartridges in repeaters. fucking pleb tier.

I almost exclusively shoot my rimless calibers in my repeaters and use .303 only in my martini mark II rebarrel

P17 Enfield is best bolt action gun

Rimmed cartridges are shit

8x57 master race

>>31546383

There is plenty of new production ammo (and even some surplus) available for the same price as .308 ammo online.

File: 10024_243888.jpg (12KB, 800x241px) Image search: [Google]

12KB, 800x241px

how come the 1903a3 hasn't been mentioned yet?

>>31546786
I agree, but just because .303 British is a little bit weaker doesn't make it any more or less antiquated than 7.62x54r. With the same bullet weights and same barrel lengths, Mk.VII Ball .303 and M80 Ball 7.62 Nato wouldn't have much difference in velocity. So if you pulled the bullets from a Mk.VII and an M80, then gave them both the same weight of bullet, M80 would just BARELY outperform the Mk.VII. That's no slouch for a round that's been HEAVILY used in WWI and WWII.

>>31546791
>M1917
Great rifle, but the bolt is ridiculously long due to the .30-06 cartridge (7.62x63). That coupled with the 90 degree bolt turn, and you've got a noticeably more sluggish/clunky feeling bolt than the No.4 Lee Enfield even though both are cock-on-close and both can be fired without letting go of the bolt. I've not handled a P14 before, just the M1917, but I think I would prefer the P14 over the M1917 because shorter distance to travel resulting in slightly faster boltwork.

>Early-midwar Type 99 Arisaka
Again, great rifle, might even say amazing, however the sights are inferior to both the No.4 and the P14/M1917 in my opinion in spite of the cool AA aspect. Also, bolt strength is all well and good, but when we're talking about standard-strengthed rifle rounds (.303/.308/8mm/7.7 Arisaka/.30-06/7.62x54r/etc.), bolt strength isn't really a big issue. The funky bayonet is pretty cool though, however the monopod is a questionable addition I think.

>K31
Again, great rifle, however the straight-pull action is oddly enough still not as smooth/fast as a Lee bolt as has been demonstrated by IraqVeteran8888 even though he himself initially though the K31 would outperform the Lee Enfield in terms of speed. Indeed, it does deserve better sights than the standard short-radius notch-and-post that is also typical of the Type 38, Mk.III*, M91/30, Kar98k, M1903A1, Mannlicher-Carcano (though they had a cool spin on it), etc.

>Swedish Mauser
No experience but I hear great things.

>>31546913
M1903A3
>Sluggish Cock-on-open
>Sluggish 90 degree bolt turn
>.30-06 makes for a lot of bolt travel being needed
>Typical 5-round mag

Not really a contender for best standard issue Infantry bolt action in the face of the No.4 Lee Enfield.

>>31546879
Reloading my own .303, I can pump rounds out at about 50 cents per shot for powder/primer/bullets.

>>31546833
Lee Enfield's magazine isn't particularly complicated though I admit the feed lips leave something to be desired. Sometimes require adjustment after a lot of use.

Making a rimless .303 Brit would present pretty much all the same difficulties as adopting a brand new cartridge for the No.4 Lee Enfield (which was adopted early on in WWII), and what do you mean by a 'Mauser style charging system'? You mean Mauser style clips? Of course, those are the best types of clips going; FAR better than the Mosin clips, but the .303 clips can be every bit as fast/smooth if you use the right technique. Still, it must be said, no technique is needed to use a Mauser clip. They're inherently buttery smooth. Absolute sex if compared to a Mosin clip... still... I think en bloc clips like those in the Mannlicher-Carcano or M1 Rifle are smoother than stripper/charger clips.

>>31546913
It's not all that special.

File: Arisaka99.jpg (3MB, 3500x2334px) Image search: [Google]

3MB, 3500x2334px

>>31546552
>Cock-on-close with 60 degree turn is smoother/faster than cock-on-open with 90 degree turn
Mostly up to preference. Bolt throw even today varies wildly. Also the Arisaka was cock on closed aswell.
While i agree cock on close is a better design, its also mostly taste.

>Long-radius aperture sights
Many other rifles had them as well.
Mas-36
M1 Carbine
M1 Garand
Remington 1903a3s
Springfield 1903 could flip up the ladder for a rough peep
Arisakas t99 had peeps throughout the war
Swede mausers had an optional aperature.

This is just counting frontline rifles and not machine guns or SMGs.

Many enfields came with just the basic rear peep sight and not the fancy knobs and dials apertures.

>>31546926
>>31547015
>bolt travel

interesting detail. so less bolt travel, like on an intermediate length Mauser action, is preferable?

>>31547065
Generally yes
Less bolt travel = lighter bolt and shorter distance to move bolt, giving a higher rate of fire

Ishapore Enfield 2A Mk1

Iconic No1MkIII styling
Uses all the same accessories, except charging clips
Smooth as silk bolt
12 round magazine
25 inch barrel
7.62x51mm chambering
beat AIA by 40 years.

All the benefits of the Lee Enfield, natively chambered in 7.62 NATO/.308 Win,

>>31547094
Indian quality control tho

>>31547065
If you're trying to fire as fast as possible, yes. Which seems to be one of OPs biggest requirements. Other people, like myself, care about other things more.

All these threads boil down to is preference. All the rifles issued by the major, and even minor, nations are fine. The quibbling about what is better or worse is pretty meaningless. While my first choice would be to take a Mas 36 to war, if I had a Carcano I wouldn't feel under equipped at all.

Tl;Dr pick what you like, or get them all. Your skill as a rifleman matters infinitely more.

>>31547094
And notched rear sights midway along the barrel.


I like me a curry Enfield. but those sights are not good enough to be considered best.

>>31547110

Never had a problem with mine, and she's still as accurate as any other 24"+ .308 I've ever known.

But anyone has a Bell Curve for QC and all that jazz.

>>31547094
The accuracy is pretty shitty though

>>31547040
>60 degree bolt turn smoother/faster than 90 degree bolt turn.
>Mostly up to preference.
Pick one. Yeah they're both cock-on-close, but 60 degrees is smoother than 90 degrees, and if you were referring to cock-on-close vs cock-on-open when you said 'mostly preference', no, a cock-on-close will always be smoother than a cock-on-open. You can close a cock-on-close bolt with authority to COMPLETELY negate resistance. You CANNOT negate the resistance of a cock-on-open bolt action. That stiff cocking action upon initially turning the bolt will ALWAYS be there. It's not mostly taste.

>Long radius aperture sights
>Many other rifles had them as well (at the time)
Pick one. Yeah I said 'rifles' which is a broad term, but we're talking about bolt actions here. Still, let's consider it, even though this is all semantics.

>MAS-36
>France
Was occupied for the vast majority of the war; didn't get much use.

>M1903A3
>Mostly just used to help train troops on the sights of the M1 Rifle because it was becoming standard issue
Did not see much, if any, front line usage.

>Type 99 Arisaka
Short-radius aperture sights... QUITE different from long-radius aperture sights

>Swedish Mausers
I assume those 'optional apertures' were also short-radius

>M1 Carbine
Can hardily call that a 'rifle'. It fires a strong pistol cartridge, not even intermediate (though it's close

>M1 Rifle
Indeed, long-radius aperture sights... but you're bringing up a semi-auto in a threat about standard-issue Infantry BOLT ACTIONS.

>MGs/SMGs
I did have those in mind when I made my statement, but it would make about as much sense to bring up those as it would semi-auto rifles.

>Many enfields came with just the basic rear peep sight and not the fancy knobs and dials apertures.
What are you even talking about? Fancy knobs and dials? Do you mean the ladder sight for 200-800m shooting discluding the 100m battle sight? yeah, that's mostlly a post-war thing. In WWII it was flip sight; 300m/600m.

File: 387234.jpg (80KB, 880x660px) Image search: [Google]

80KB, 880x660px

>>31547145

Addley Precision scope mounts. No Drill/Tap for No4/5, Tap+Drill for No1 and 2A series. rock solid, Canukistan mfg, and those maple drinkers know their Enfields, if you wanna scope the bitch, if not, there's a great Ghost Ring sight upgrade out there for the Mosin and the No1MkIII/2A that is absolutely wonderful.

>>31547094
Great rifle... but...

>No floating barrel
>Barrel not as thick as No.4 or AIA
>short radius notch-and-post sights

The 12 round mag, Mauser-style clips, and 7.62 Nato ARE benefits, but there are still drawbacks in the face of the No.4 Lee Enfield. Good rifle to bring up, though! Damn good!

>>31547125
The faster you work that bolt, the faster you can get your sights back on target, the faster you can get a follow-up shot. Yes, shooting fast is advantageous, but that doesn't necessarily mean that you must shoot inaccurately or that a fast bolt has no advantage over a slow when when shooting accurately.

Yes, pretty much all standard-issue Infantry bolt actions are not just fine, but great. They will all serve their respective owners well... but I think the No.4 is the best. That doesn't mean the others are shit, it just means I think the No.4 is the better one to have. Still love the Nugget and Carcano. Just love the No.4 Lee Enfield more.

>>31547170


>Many enfields came with just the basic rear peep sight and not the fancy knobs and dials apertures.
What are you even talking about? Fancy knobs and dials? Do you mean the ladder sight for 200-800m shooting discluding the 100m battle sight? yeah, that's mostlly a post-war thing. In WWII it was flip sight; 300m/600m.

Nope, the 300/600m flip sight was for the No4MkII, the 50's era shit. all my war-issue Enfields have the click-micrometer ladder sight. No 4's had up to 1300m, No 5's had out to 800.

>>31547211
That funky Angel stock for the Mosin rifles is pretty damn sexy, I must say... but I believe true riflemen will not leave their rifle without iron sights available. A rifle without irons, in my eyes (to each their own), is neutered. Yeah I know, the chances of losing zero or breaking a lens is almost laughable, but still... irons.

>Simo Hayha

>>31547263
Meant to click
>>31547040

>>31547235
The barrel can be made to float, with a neoprene gasket to keep gunk outta the wood, yet still allow the barrel to vibrate freely.

You'd need to mill out the nosecap a little, and shave the wood a few thou, but it can be done.

The barrel stock used was made to No1MkIII spec, so overall the barrel wall to muzzle ratio is similar or slightly better than the No4 series.

The shorter sight radius, yeah, kinda shitty, but still ~20"

>>31547015
>Making a rimless .303 Brit would present pretty much all the same difficulties as adopting a brand new cartridge for the No.4 Lee Enfield
You could use all the same loadings, and modify the tooling for manufacturing ammo. The most expensive part would be modifying existing rifles to the new standard, which would require reeming a new chamber, changing the bolt head (and extractor) and modify the stripper clip guide.

>You mean Mauser style clips
Yes I do. That is half the reason the Mauser rifles dominated the world.

Today OP was not a fag. I also think the No.4 was the best of the WW2 bolt actions. Post war sporting capabilities don't really factor in and neither do rifles of neutral countries.

>>31547015
>Reloading my own .303, I can pump rounds out at about 50 cents per shot for powder/primer/bullets.

Sounds about right. Wolf makes ammo for around 49-50 cents a round.

>>31547322
You don't need to mill out anything; the No.4 Lee Enfield has a free floating barrel. OH! You're talking about the Mk.III*? Yeah, you can make pretty much ANY bolt action 'free floating', I imagine, but the Mk.III* is going to be a pain in the ass specifically because of that nose cap. The No.4 has a thicker barrel however, giving improved accuracy over the Mk.III* even if both are free-floating.

>>31547335
Modifying existing rifles... perhaps an easy thing to do if it weren't for the whole, you know, 1941 thing. Same reason why Britain didn't go with the funky cartridge of the P13 (P14 is basically the P13 but rechambered to .303 British) at the onset of WWI. They already had MILLIONS of rounds of .303 British in stock, and all their troops were outfitted/trained on it. to introduce an ENTIRELY new cartridge at such a time would have only put a strain on logistics, like with Japan having to juggle both 7.7 and 6.5 in WWII. It perhaps wasn't a dealbreaker or a gamechanger, but it made things more complicated than they needed to be. If we were talking, say, 1931 instead of 1941, then yeah, No.4 should have gotten a rimless cartridge, but the time it was adopted did not allow the luxury. Millions of rounds already in stock of .303 British, not a good time to adopt a new cartridge, rechamber existing rifles, and start producing millions of rounds of .303l British (.303L because rimLess; I made it up, aren't I clever?).

By the way, you can use Mauser-style clips without having a Mauser rifle. SKS uses a Mauser-style clip even though it's thinner due to 7.62x39 and longer for 10 rounds. Mauser-style clips were used for 7.62 Nato.

File: 1475218974834.jpg (186KB, 534x1236px) Image search: [Google]

186KB, 534x1236px

>>31546551

>Mas 36
>better than lee enfield

My favorite part about the MAS 36 is that it doesn't matter that the sights aren't adjustable because it's less accurate than a 91/30.

>>31547463
If such is your belief, share more information; I don't know much about the MAS 36. Why aren't the sights adjustable? What makes it less accurate than the M91/30 (there must be a reason).

>>31547463
Try shooting a pre-armistice.

File: M96_target_elit-vi.jpg (59KB, 510x330px) Image search: [Google]

59KB, 510x330px

>>31547170
>60 degree bolt turn
the degree of bolt turn doesn't effect smoothness, that all depends on how well the surfaces were polished and honed and is open to preference as 60* turn will only help in speed of reloading. If you wre specifically looking for a mad minute rifle then sure, it would be superior, but a marksman won't give a minimal shit.

Cock on close or open is preference also. I personally prefer cock on close because it makes extraction that much easier with a dirty chamber. Cock on open is hell to turn the bolt to cock while trying to extract. But a cock on close always has the firing pin extended when feeding cartridges, slam to hard forward and you could theoretically set it off, and you can't really feel if your ammo is too tight, the caming action will just shove it into the breech.

>Mas-36
Thats a piss poor excuse. The mas-36 was still used and issued for many years afterwards anyway.

>1903
Saw just as much frontline use as the Garand, it just wasn't top priority for replacement rifles. Arguable it made the better marksman rifle.

>Swedish Mausers
>I assume those 'optional apertures' were also short-radius
Nope. pic related. I'm not sure how much actual war time use they saw with sweden doing sweden things. But their rifle was pretty high end for the time. In all fairness they usually only had the standard ladder or vasteras rear sight.


>knobs and dials
Generally speaking, the difference between a peep sight and an aperature is the adjustment means. peeps tend to be fixed and the front sight has to be drifted or filed to adjust poi, where aperatures have the adjustment knobs and windages. The savage made enfields just have a 300/600 flip rear sight, while most the british ones have the adjustable version.

M1917 Enfield is the best bolt action service rifle.

The only down side is theasy weight.

>>31547490
The sights aren't adjustable outside of the armory. The reason is two fold. One, the French didn't want them to get knocked from zero. And two, they didn't expect their soldiers to be adjusting sights on the fly in combat.

As for accuracy, they're perfectly accurate, unless you fucked with the bedding.

>>31546342
Good rifle, upset that they only made spike bayonets for them instead of the knife bayonets like with the old ones.

>>31547577

Google the No 9 (south african) bayonet for the No 4.

>>31547502
>"the degree of bolt turn doesn't effect smoothness"
Stopped reading there.

>>31547506
>The only down side (of the M1917 Enfield) is theasy weight.
Not quite. It has a 90 degree bolt turn which is a downside compared to the Lee's 60 degree turn. Anyone who has handled Lee bolts and other bolt actions extensively will hear and feel the difference in handling. A Lee bolt being worked properly sounds like a straight pull; clack-clack. Bolt actions with a 90 degree cock-on-close bolt will sound more like cla-clack-clack. Meanwhile, bolt actions with a 90 degree cock-on-open bolts sound more like clack-clack-clack.

Another downside is the bolt is a bit sketchy to disassemble. Typically the method I use, and I think is used by most, is by putting a penny between the cocking piece and the bolt body. I'm always paranoid that the penny will slip out and the firing pin will become a flying dart.

It also has a longer bolt throw than the P14 due to the ridiculously huge nature of the .30-06. I definitely consider that round overkill considering it's just an infantry cartridge. 7.62x63; the casing is over a centimeter longer than 7.62x51 Nato's. Literally about half an inch in difference!

>>31547576
Having non-adjustable sights outside of the armoury is a big downside for me... can't say the MAS is anywhere close to beating the No.4 Lee Enfield in my books based on that alone.

>>31547577
I rather like the cruciform "pig-sticker" bayonet... though I see the appeal to having a bayonet that you have the option to 'swing' with rather than just thrust.

>>31547636
7.62x63; the casing is over a centimeter longer than 7.62x51 Nato's. Literally about half an inch in difference!

yeah, but look at this:
if you have an '06, a Mauser, a .308, and a .45, just trim and form until you get to .45 if the necks split or anneal. assume 5 reloads until anneal, thats 20 rrounds out of 1 casing!

File: 1368661639178.jpg (106KB, 554x439px) Image search: [Google]

106KB, 554x439px

>>31547636
>Stopped reading there.
You must of never used a Steyr-Manlicher or any of the Swiss Schmidt–Rubins


But you keep being you, self entitled brat.

>>31547663
To clarify, the Mas 36 sights are not adjustable for windage outside of the armory. Elevation is still easy and quick.

>>31546411
>2x for 2 clips
Just load one clip and have the equivalent 5 rounds the enemy probably does?

>>31548212
Then you negate the larger capacity as an advantage.

>>31547759
Oh, well windage adjustability isn't really a huge issue generally unless you're going REALLY long range. I should think that guestimating windage is just a part of training.

>>31548212
It would take twice as long to reload with 2 clips as it would 1 if you were to open and close the bolt twice. Meaning open the bolt, load a clip, close the bolt, then open the bolt again, go for another clip, load, and close the bolt again. Because reloading a Lee Enfield with 2 clips involves only ONE opening of the bolt, ONE closing of the bolt, and ONE grasping for ammo (if you grab 2 clips at once), then it does NOT take twice as long to reload a Lee Enfield as it does, say, a Kar98k. Takes longer, sure, but not twice as long. Under similar circumstances, if the Kar98k took 3 seconds to reload, then a Lee Enfield would likely take about 4 seconds to reload. Maybe 4.5 seconds. I myself can reload a Lee Enfield from empty in less than 5 seconds if the clips are readily available, and it's not like I'm a mid-20th century Commonwealth soldier who must live and die by the Lee.