MLU FORUM

MLU FORUM (http://www.mapleleafup.net/forums/index.php)
-   The Carrier Forum (http://www.mapleleafup.net/forums/forumdisplay.php?f=6)
-   -   Boys Anti Tank rifles for the Carriers (http://www.mapleleafup.net/forums/showthread.php?t=21642)

kevin powles 11-02-14 22:10

Boys Anti Tank rifles for the Carriers
 
5 Attachment(s)
Hi, I have been working on a project to get my two desert carriers kitted out with Boys Anti Tank rifles, After looking for these guns for the last five years it seems 3 have come my way at once, I have managed to pick up a alive fire which someone is holding on my behalf and a complete lower frame, the third is on loan from a guy.

I picked up this week three replica barrels I have had machined, next step is to have the breeches cast in resin patterned from an original, will keep you posted as the project progresses. I also have some left over Boys rifle parts if anyone is interested, (see last picture), on a first come first served basis.

RichardT10829 11-02-14 22:38

Nice work
 
What cal. Are they ? 50 ? I have a sec.1 licence would love to send a few rounds down range out of one of those things !

kevin powles 11-02-14 22:46

Quote:

Originally Posted by RichardT10829 (Post 191684)
What cal. Are they ? 50 ? I have a sec.1 licence would love to send a few rounds down range out of one of those things !

Richard, From what I can make out original 0.55, I wouldn't want to fire it as its not been fired in many years and probably needs to go to a gunsmith for complete overhaul, plan is to use the lower frame from it and make a replica breech with one of the new barrels so I can take it on the 'show circuit', with original breech and barrel safely locked away.

kevin.

cletrac (RIP) 12-02-14 01:36

Some guys make a 50 cal US machine gun barrel fit then bullets are a mere $8 or so apiece. I have to stop at a friends' place in the Alberta badlands and try his out. I've seen a few videos of guys shooting them from a standing position.
You tube videos

rob love 12-02-14 04:38

I had one modified to 50 cal by using a mint M2HB barrel. That was a PITA, especially since the barrels are chrome lined. Much cheaper and easier to simply use a 50 cal barrel blank, which is what I did on my present rifle.

I changed mine for the exact reason that cletrac mentions: I can get 50 BMG for around $5 a round, whereas what little Boys 55 ammo that is still out there will command from $25 to $50 a round these days, and there is not enough of it around to satisfy dragging the heavy bugger to the range.

shaun 12-02-14 08:39

I had a live one when I was 20 . Fired it many times on the range but never more than 5 rounds a day . We use to shoot 50 gallon drums filled with water , it would rattle your teeth with very round down range. FUN !

kevin powles 12-02-14 17:37

Boys Barrels coated
 
4 Attachment(s)
Hi,

I have treated the three barrels today with some special 'reactor black' carbon primer. Firstly they were sand blasted, this special paint used on nuclear reactor components is applied by wiping it on with some wire wool, it's dry in seconds so you have to be quick, after five minutes you can wire wool it to bring up the edges and blend the finish, further coats can be applied to darken the finish. The coat is wafer thin and will not chip or flake and to me looks the same as any heat applied gun finish. A coating of machine oil will be applied later.

Kev.

Jordan Baker 12-02-14 17:45

Very nice Kevin.

kevin powles 28-02-14 14:33

Barrel Trunnion
 
1 Attachment(s)
Finished making a Boys barrel trunnion from scratch, this started off as hexagon nut.

I have a barrel available if anyone else is doing a similar project.

Kevin.

eddy8men 28-02-14 20:45

kev that's some nice work there but when are we going to get a day on the ranges with that gun of yours :no4:.

Jim Burrill 28-02-14 23:22

In the states, a unmolested .55 Boyes is considered a Destructive Device, like any tank main gun. And needing papers. Many have converted them to .50 for lacking the paperwork requirements first, then the cheaper cost of the ammo.

There is a shop nearby that has a Boyes in .55 and asking some US$ 3,500.00 for one.

They do look impressive sticking out the front of a bren carrier!

rob love 01-03-14 02:19

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jim Burrill (Post 192342)
In the states, a unmolested .55 Boyes is considered a Destructive Device, like any tank main gun. And needing papers. Many have converted them to .50 for lacking the paperwork requirements first, then the cheaper cost of the ammo.

There is a shop nearby that has a Boyes in .55 and asking some US$ 3,500.00 for one.

They do look impressive sticking out the front of a bren carrier!

$3500 is a bargain for one these days. Here in Canada they can go for 3 times that.

Scrivo18 01-03-14 05:54

Mounts
 
What sort of mount are you going to use??

I have a legal boyes in Australai and the carrier to put it on.. Have one mount that clips to the side armour but would like to mount in the front as well..


Tim

kevin powles 01-03-14 12:16

Mount
 
Hi Tim, I have an early 'T' monopod, on both guns, I was just going to poke it through the front hole, on a MK1 there is a special breech rest with rubber strap and another on the gun port at the front.

I am looking for the 'V' style rest, I have half of one but want to borrow one to copy, I believe it's this style of rest which is stored under the rear battery box on a mk1.

Kevin.

Scrivo18 01-03-14 13:21

:-)
 
Hmm

Had not thought of that..

Will have a look see next week..

Ben 01-03-14 20:04

There's a Boys mount listed in the parts book for the Scout, I suspect its similar to the later MK 1 style slot rest. It mounts on the four holes under the slot (different to later carriers) sadly it was removed before Phillip found it. It may even be missing from the 40's.

rob love 01-03-14 21:44

I have had a Boys rifle with the V type bipod and it does not fit into those mk1 clips either. I would be interested to see the mount Ben is talking about. It seems many of the brackets and stowage on the mk1s were throwbacks from the earlier versions.

Bruce Parker (RIP) 16-06-14 23:32

Boye Rifle fit question
 
3 Attachment(s)
Kevin, I'm assuming you've tried to fit your Boys into the back of your Mk.1 carrier. If so, how did it go? I tried mine and think it can only fit if you remove the monopod (which we already knew) and also the wooden cheek rest?

The fit in the front is perfect and the rear bracket looks like it was made to fit the carriage and cheekrest.

kevin powles 17-06-14 00:01

Bruce.
 
1 Attachment(s)
Bruce, I have not tried it in the back, the tank hunter does not have the fittings, I have all the fitting for the standard stowage carrier but have not mocked it up as yet, I would say the rifle must fit complete and I am sure I have seen an official picture with it stowed complete, regarding the mystery rear clips under the radio battery box, could this be for a mk 1 bren gun front support legs, the extendable type?.

I have received back two metal cast receivers which are being drilled and machined this week, hope to have one near ready for War and Peace., still looking for a front site if you can help.

kevin powles 17-06-14 00:06

Barrels
 
I have two cast barrels available, not the prettiest castings but a starting point for a replica rifle, they are £20 each if anyone is interested.

Kevin.

Bruce Parker (RIP) 17-06-14 00:31

1 Attachment(s)
I've got more checking to do. My first problem is that the felt at the front is so hard the muzzle doesn't want to slide all the way forward. If I guess where the butt would be if it did it doesn't appear it would sit nicely on the narrow bracket at the back. The monopod may swivel sideways and drop down beside the tool box. I'll play some more and report back.

Here's a closer pic of my receiver. I won't tell where the repairs are...

Quote:

Originally Posted by kevin powles (Post 196662)
Bruce, I have not tried it in the back, the tank hunter does not have the fittings, I have all the fitting for the standard stowage carrier but have not mocked it up as yet, I would say the rifle must fit complete and I am sure I have seen an official picture with it stowed complete, regarding the mystery rear clips under the radio battery box, could this be for a mk 1 bren gun front support legs, the extendable type?.

I have received back two metal cast receivers which are being drilled and machined this week, hope to have one near ready for War and Peace., still looking for a front site if you can help.


kevin powles 17-06-14 17:39

Stowage
 
1 Attachment(s)
Bruce, if you could gets some pictures of one stowed that would be great, are the three components for stowage original?. I would say it should be stowed with receiver cover and muzzle cover fitted also.

Nice work on restoring your receiver it all looks original to me.

Kev.

rob love 17-06-14 22:32

I used to stow my mk1 Boys rifle in it's holders without any major issue. The only issues I had earlier were the use of the flat style muzzle break, which does not fit into the carrier, but I know both Kevin and Bruce have that problem licked.

I am nearing completion of my current carrier, so hopefully in the next month I can verify the fit of my current Boys rifle in my current carrier.

I would love to solve the mystery behind what exactly went into those little stowage clips on the back deck of the carrier. The carrier was designed for the earlier Boys rifle, so they will not be for the two legged V bipod. Peter Laidler is supposed to have a small book on the Boys rifle available at some point. Perhaps I'll contact him on another forum and see what light he can shed on it.

Bruce Parker (RIP) 17-06-14 22:38

Quote:

Originally Posted by rob love (Post 196692)

I would love to solve the mystery behind what exactly went into those little stowage clips on the back deck of the carrier. The carrier was designed for the earlier Boys rifle, so they will not be for the two legged V bipod. Peter Laidler is supposed to have a small book on the Boys rifle available at some point. Perhaps I'll contact him on another forum and see what light he can shed on it.

That mystery is even more confounding if the Boys is stowed 'ready for use' (ie with the monopod attached).

Bruce Parker (RIP) 18-06-14 00:46

Cheek rest has to go.
 
5 Attachment(s)
I tried the fit again. The bracket at the back is 2" wide and falls 54" to 57" from the division plate muzzle bracket, which means it coincides with the rifle wooden cheek piece. The problem is that the cheek piece plus the rifle at that point is over 4" wide.

No fit.

I thought that maybe the bracket was meant to hold the cheek rest and left hand carriage rail of the Boys only, with the buffer tube and right rail hanging off the bracket inwards. This worked at the rear end but the barrel was too far to the right to fit the middle support bracket. So I took off the cheek piece and it clicked into place. The rubber strap won't work with the stud on the right and I think the stud would be better positioned on the bottom of the bracket. Mine is on the side because I think it originally took a web strap that used a buckle at the top: the stud being the anchor for the strap (similar to the way the web strap works out the front of the commander's position).

Note how the monopod sits nicely in the space forward of the cooker trays.

The odd thing is that there is room on the left side of the rear bracket so why didn't they make it wide enough to hold all 4" of the rifle without removing anything? The butt bracket in the front is wide so why not the rear one?

And of course, what DO those clips under the batter box hold? My guess (assuming they hold a Canadian Boys bipod at all) is that that is exactly what they are for. If you were unlucky enough to be issued a Canadian Boys I don't think the bipod would fit as neatly as the British monopod. In that case it may have been necessary to remove it, like it or not. Did early British carriers have these clips?

rob love 18-06-14 01:25

I have the earlier monopod on mine. I thought I had checked it for fit before, and it did not. I'l try it again next time I head out to the shop.

I can't see them making the operator remove the cheekrest in order to stow the rifle. Anytime you have an operator un-do screws, you lose them. They would have to have a stowage bin filled with the screws, along with bandaids for the damage the screwdriver will inevitably cause to their fingertips.

Bruce Parker (RIP) 18-06-14 01:55

1 Attachment(s)
Quote:

Originally Posted by rob love (Post 196703)
I have the earlier monopod on mine. I thought I had checked it for fit before, and it did not. I'l try it again next time I head out to the shop.

I can't see them making the operator remove the cheekrest in order to stow the rifle. Anytime you have an operator un-do screws, you lose them. They would have to have a stowage bin filled with the screws, along with bandaids for the damage the screwdriver will inevitably cause to their fingertips.

I agree, it doesn't make sense to take things apart for stowage unless there's a conflict and absolutely no other choice. Not great when you want to deploy the weapon in a hurry too. The problem is that I have the original brackets and the rifle just doesn't fit otherwise. I've considered trying it upside down with the pointy side of the cheek rest sitting on the bracket felt but I expect the cast butt piece will conflict. There would be no problem with the monopod however...

Here's pic of a similar Mk.1 carrier so I think the rear bracket is correct. Front and middle came with the carrier and can only go on one way.

Bruce Parker (RIP) 18-06-14 02:20

OK, final theory (yet untested):

What about sitting the rifle on it's right side? Muzzle and middle support would work (the front even better because the foresight rubs against the stowage locker when the rifle is upright). The side of the right carriage rail would sit comfortably on the felt as it's only 1-5/8" tall. The bottom of the rifle and cheek rest would sit against the tall, left side of the bracket, explaining why it is taller than the right. The butt piece and wood grip are nicely out of the way.

By rotating the rifle on its right side the monopod might conflict with the stowage box, hence requiring storage under the battery box??? Or maybe the monopod would sit above/rest on the stowage box, but the Canadian bipod would not, hence the battery box clips?

Nice theory, but again it begs the question why, given that a small change in the bracket would allow the rifle to remain whole and accessible.

kevin powles 18-06-14 02:48

Gents, I'm sure in one of Nigel's books there is a picture of it stowed, I will look later today, I'm sure it is either stowed mounted upside down or on its side. That monopod will most defiantly not fit in the clips under the battery box.

kevin powles 18-06-14 10:03

Rifle stowed position
 
1 Attachment(s)
Gents, page 231 of vol 1 Nigel's book. Comments say cover on mag out. Also noting from the picture, monopod removed.


All times are GMT +2. The time now is 12:25.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright © Maple Leaf Up, 2003-2016