[JB White]

It’s been going on 20 years since AIA released the M10 Enfield rifles in 308 and 7.62x39.
Those were in the $1000 +/- range back then.

DAMKO more recently offering new made Martini action rifles starting in the $2000 range. A much more simple rifle with fewer parts.

How much actual buying power does an inflated BidenBuck have now?

 

[BrianR]

When we discuss the cost of manufacturing the Lee Enfield in todays cost are we also considering the cost of tooling up fr such a production run?
What would it cost to set up the tools and dies to made the individual parts to makeup a rifle?

 

[Mk VII]

Production engineering has changed so much since even the 1940s that costing the same operations would pointless - we wouldn't even try to do it that way. Anymore than we would use middle-aged men in soupstrainer mustaches to make the components.

 

[87mustang]

Even if they were made in the huge numbers like back in the day, and on modern machining equipment.....hard to see how they could be made for less than at least a grand....considering the generally good quality of workmanship and materials used.

Well for comparison, I bought a savage Axis II 6 months ago for 360 dollars. Not sure if that's comparable but better build rifles today are cheaper.

 

[caerlonie]

There is no comparison in quality, between a Savage axis and a Lee Enfield.Neither in quality of manufacture or materials used.

 

[87mustang]

There is no comparison in quality, between a Savage axis and a Lee Enfield.Neither in quality of manufacture or materials used.

In what way?

 

[caerlonie]

Axis is a cheaply made contraption to sell at big-box stores at the lowest price possible.....the Lee enfield is made out of much better materials and is designed to stand up to the rigours of military service over a long period of time, with way more machining time and hand fitting spent on its construction.They are just completely different kinds of rifles, one made to a price point and the other made about as well as it could be with the technology of the time....

 

[87mustang]

Axis is a cheaply made contraption to sell at big-box stores at the lowest price possible.....the Lee enfield is made out of much better materials and is designed to stand up to the rigours of military service over a long period of time, with way more machining time and hand fitting spent on its construction.They are just completely different kinds of rifles, one made to a price point and the other made about as well as it could be with the technology of the time....

Fair enough, I can see that. I have a 110A I bought years ago and it's a great quality highly reliable rifle. I will say I do like it better than the axis, and for everyday civilian use I'll take the 110A over the enfield. I can't down the new made ones as I haven't shot one though, I am just basing it on what I own now. I'd like to have a .315 sporter!

 

[john.k]

May be great quality ,but recievers are made of bar ,bolts made of up to three pieces ,including investment castings,trigger assys of pressed powder and folded sheetmetal bits.......every tiny piece of a smelly action was drop forged and machined,except the screws and springs.........and every piece was tested by an inspector with a set of gauges ..........This why the US arms industry could not make European rifles that passed inspection .

 

[Bmbrpilot]

Just an extrapolation on the conversation….we see 1911’s still,produced today….even M1 carbines reproduced, i wonder how high values will have to go before we see new reproduction Enfields, K98k’s and Garands.

 

[87mustang]

May be great quality ,but recievers are made of bar ,bolts made of up to three pieces ,including investment castings,trigger assys of pressed powder and folded sheetmetal bits.......every tiny piece of a smelly action was drop forged and machined,except the screws.........and every piece was tested by an inspector with a set of gauges ..........This why the US arms industry could not make European rifles that passed inspection .

Didn't Remington and Westinghouse make Mosins? Didn't Savage produce No. 4's and Remington and Winchester make Pattern 14's? Did something cause them to not pass European inspection?

 

[Lyman1903]

I seem to recall we had a thread in the past on new Ishapore made firearms

so,

Directorate of Ordnance (Coordination and Services) | Government of India

Directorate of Ordnance (Coordination and Services), 0.315" Sporting Rifle

ddpdoo.gov.in

current exchange into USD is $995

 

[Beetlegeuse]

I'd just love to have access to some .315 ammo. Production is state owned, if only an importer could get some for all the hungry austro hungarian guns in the US.

 

[87mustang]

I'd just love to have access to some .315 ammo. Production is state owned, if only an importer could get some for all the hungry austro hungarian guns in the US.

.315 Sporter is 8x50R Mannlicher I believe. You can make it out of 8x56R if you are into reloading. You can also use 7.62x54R... Otherwise, yep we'd be just about SOL.
I have spent my youth making 8x52R for my Siamese mauser and forming shells for my Martini Henry both in 577/450 and .310 cadet. If I were to have one, Id just start stocking up on what I need to convert it (brass cases that is)
I am thinking of getting a Steyr M95 in that caliber anyway for my WW1 collection.

 

[caerlonie]

I have worked on many savage 110 type rifles as well as the axis....re-barrelled them etc.They serve a purpose,they are fairly light and easy to carry and fit a scope to.....for occasional hunting use they are fine.But mechanically not in the same league as most military bolt action rifles, which have to be very durable and mechanically tough to give good service in a military environment.It is a pity the Indians do not seem inclined to export either their .315 Enfield rifles or the ammo.....I can only think domestic demand means they just have no interest in exports.Maybe that may change in future.

 

[john.k]

The Indians are/were one of the main sponsors of the 2008 and 2012 UN bans on small arms exports ,and the protocol for the destruction of all military surplus small arms .......You have ITAR courtesy of the Indians.....do you really think they will export arms or ammunition .for sale to private individuals .

 

[panzerfaust44]

The Indians are/were one of the main sponsors of the 2008 and 2012 UN bans on small arms exports ,and the protocol for the destruction of all military surplus small arms .......You have ITAR courtesy of the Indians.....do you really think they will export arms or ammunition .for sale to private individuals .

You just brought up an interesting question.


We've heard from NZ,AU, CA, and British members about firearm ownership in their countries. BUT......what about India??? What are their laws/regulations pertaining to gun ownership?? I dont think we have any board members on here from India to answer that question.

 

[caerlonie]

The Indians are/were one of the main sponsors of the 2008 and 2012 UN bans on small arms exports ,and the protocol for the destruction of all military surplus small arms .......You have ITAR courtesy of the Indians.....do you really think they will export arms or ammunition .for sale to private individuals .

For money....sure,if it suited them.

 

[caerlonie]

You just brought up an interesting question.


We've heard from NZ,AU, CA, and British members about firearm ownership in their countries. BUT......what about India??? What are their laws/regulations pertaining to gun ownership?? I dont think we have any board members on here from India to answer that question.

Very restrictive.....form what I have read.

 

[Alan De Enfield]

The Indians are/were one of the main sponsors of the 2008 and 2012 UN bans on small arms exports ,and the protocol for the destruction of all military surplus small arms .......You have ITAR courtesy of the Indians.....do you really think they will export arms or ammunition .for sale to private individuals .

It may well have been sponsored by India, but if it hadn't been supported by other countries it would not have been 'passed'.

Under Barak Obama, the State Department allegedly signalling a change of policy here, its first move being to announce that export licenses will not be issued for any barrel chambered for 5.56 or 7.62 NATO destined for a commercial end-user.
The likes of Brian Dic k now have a huge paperwork trail to follow to export to 'non-government users'.

Now the BATFE will now only allow an overseas private commercial buyer to buy, as long as the buyer agrees that they can only ever sell the firearm (within 10 years) if the BATFE agree to the sale and to the buyer. (Presumably they want to do background checks on the Buyer).
I tried to buy a rifle from the US and the seller came up with this 'rubbish', saying he would not be granted an export licence until I signed the relevant documents - but I checked with Brian Dic k and it is true.

As a Brit in Britain and complying with British laws, I cannot sell a rifle without getting the approval of the BATFE. Madness !

I didn't go ahead with the purchase.

Things may get ‘worse’ too in that the proposed UN conventions seek to ban the manufacture of arms and ammunition of ANY type and ANY calibre, except by government licensed concerns which must be closely regulated. Quite right too you might think, but remember that your gunsmith is an ‘arms constructor’, and you are an ‘ammunition' manufacturer’ if you hand load.