The Firing Line Forums

Go Back   The Firing Line Forums > The North Corral > Curios and Relics

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old February 22, 2019, 05:58 PM   #1
'88Scrat
Senior Member
 
Join Date: July 11, 2011
Location: Kansas
Posts: 422
The Enfield Confusion

Can someone school me on the headspacing thing that seems to be all over the internet regarding Enfield pattern rifles? There is info everywhere but I'm not sure who to trust.

Something about SAMMI headspace gauges differing from those used by the UK? Also something about changing bolt heads. This is all very confusing.

I've got a No.4 Mk1 that I think has a #2 bolt head but I'm not 100% on that.

Thanks!

Edit: Just realized I post A LOT of questions in the C&R area of the Forums here...
__________________
BOOM
'88Scrat is offline  
Old February 22, 2019, 07:27 PM   #2
Scorch
Senior Member
 
Join Date: February 13, 2006
Location: Washington state
Posts: 13,688
Confusion about Enfields:
* A Lee-Enfield (No 1 Mk3, No 4 Mk 1, etc) is not an Enfield rifle, it is a Lee rifle with Enfield type rifling as opposed to the earlier Metford type rifling. The Lee-Metford and Lee-Enfield rifles are built on an action designed by James Paris Lee, a Canadian inventor. So, NOT Enfield rifles, although this is often the type people mean when they say "Enfield".

* The Enfield rifle was designed at the Enfield arsenal and called the Pattern 14 rifle, and was chambered for the British 303 service cartridge.. It was essentially a copy of the 1892 Mauser rifle (staggered box magazine, twin opposed locking lugs, cock on closing). It was adopted in 1914 as the Pattern 14 rifle (P14) about the time WW1 got under way. Built primarily by American arms factories because the British were busy building as many Lee-Enfield rifles as they could, the rifle was quickly adopted by the US Army as the M1917 (chambered in 30-06) when the USA entered WW1 in 1917 because the US armories could not make enough 1903 rifles. Notice that the US did not call the rifle adopted a Pattern 17 (P17), so you should ridicule anyone you hear using that terminology as there is no such thing. They should be along very soon.

As far as headspace gauges go, SAAMI is a US standards advisory company that tests ammunition and issues standards related to firearms and ammunition for the USA. The European company that does the same thing for the EU is called CIP. Although the standards are relatively similar, they are often quite different. Headspace gauges should be close to the same for the 303 British cartridge. The primary confusion that srises is the differences betwwe a go-no go gauge set (used for setting barrel headspace when a new barrel is fitted to a rifle) and a Field gauge (used to test a rifle for excessive headspace developed in use). The replaceable bolt heads on your Lee-Enfield rifle were a way to compensate for wear during service use.
__________________
Never try to educate someone who resists knowledge at all costs.
But what do I know?
Summit Arms Services
Taylor Machine

Last edited by Scorch; February 22, 2019 at 07:33 PM.
Scorch is offline  
Old February 22, 2019, 11:25 PM   #3
F. Guffey
Senior Member
 
Join Date: July 18, 2008
Posts: 7,195
Quote:
Can someone school me on the headspacing thing that seems to be all over the internet regarding Enfield pattern rifles? There is info everywhere but I'm not sure who to trust.

Something about SAMMI headspace gauges differing from those used by the UK? Also something about changing bolt heads. This is all very confusing.
It is not possible; if reloaders were capable of understanding head space your questions would have been answered years ago.

F. Guffey
F. Guffey is offline  
Old February 23, 2019, 02:52 AM   #4
10-96
Senior Member
 
Join Date: October 19, 2005
Location: Tx Panhandle Territory
Posts: 3,840
"88, This place might give you some more insight to your bolthead questions...
https://www.enfield-rifles.com/no4-n...topic5019.html
__________________
Rednecks... Keeping the woods critter-free since March 2, 1836. (TX Independence Day)

I'm going to use the words "clip" and "Long Colt" every chance I get. It grinds my gears to see new members attacked when we all know dang good and well what's being refered to.
10-96 is offline  
Old February 23, 2019, 03:53 AM   #5
moose fat
Senior Member
 
Join Date: June 20, 2006
Location: Alaska, Yukon R. delta
Posts: 396
A very good forum that can answer your questions on things 303 is www.milsurps.com
It is a Canadian forum.
Cheers!
moose fat is offline  
Old February 23, 2019, 10:34 AM   #6
Jim Watson
Senior Member
 
Join Date: October 25, 2001
Location: Alabama
Posts: 15,675
Quote:
Confusion about Enfields:
* A Lee-Enfield (No 1 Mk3, No 4 Mk 1, etc) is not an Enfield rifle, it is a Lee rifle with Enfield type rifling as opposed to the earlier Metford type rifling. The Lee-Metford and Lee-Enfield rifles are built on an action designed by James Paris Lee, a Canadian inventor. So, NOT Enfield rifles, although this is often the type people mean when they say "Enfield".

* The Enfield rifle was designed at the Enfield arsenal and called the Pattern 14 rifle, and was chambered for the British 303 service cartridge..
The No 4 was a considerable redesign and there is some resistance to calling it a Lee. It isn't a SMLE.

The all-Enfield Mauser derivative was designed as the Pattern 13 for the high velocity .276 Enfield (not to be confused with the Amerian .276 Pedersen.) The British wisely converted it to .303 and had it built in the Colonies to supplement No 1 production. When they got caught up, we changed it to .30-06.

Seems like nobody much liked the P14-1917. We used a lot of 1917s but the entrenched military bureaucracy stayed with the 1903.
The British warehoused the P14s until WWII, same story, when No 4s met the need, the No 3s, as they were designated by then, were shunted aside.


Headspace is not the only or even main problem with the various .303s. Even if you have a suitable No 1 or No 4 bolthead, you will likely run into reloading problems due to the large chambers.
Jim Watson is offline  
Old February 23, 2019, 02:08 PM   #7
T. O'Heir
Senior Member
 
Join Date: February 13, 2002
Location: Canada
Posts: 11,218
"...The Enfield rifle was designed at the Enfield arsenal and called the Pattern 14..." You're just adding to '88Scrat's confusion. A Pattern 14 is only called an Enfield by Americans. And isn't remotely like any Lee-Enfield. It's a Mauser derivative like the 1903.
And Jimmy Lee was working at the Royal Small Arms Factory in Enfield when he designed the bolt for the No. 1.
The head space issue is caused primarily by the thousands of No. 1 and No. 4 Lee-Enfields that have been assembled out of parts bins with no QC by places like Century Arms, but also by non-factory guys sporterizing 'em.
A No. 4 Rifle's bolt should have a number on the bolt head. No. 1 Lee-Enfields do not have any number and is a totally different design. Means that if you check the head space and it's bad(bolt closes completely on a No-Go and a Field) you can try one number up(0 to 3 with rumours of there being a #4. Never seen one myself.) with proper head space gauges(no bits of tape, chewing gum or any of the other daft things seen on line. Head space isn't measured either. The gauges check tolerance only.) on a No. 4(if you can find one. Some numbers, usually the higher ones, are kind of scarce these days.), but you need a handful of bolt heads to try with gauges for a No. 1.
The only difference between SAAMI(and Australian) head space gauges and Canadian or Brit gauges is the No-Go measures .070" with the ours/Brit gauge vs .067" for the SAAMI. Either set will do and you'll have a safe rifle though. CF weapons techs did not use the Field gauge at all. If the bolt closed on a No-Go the rifle was taken out of service until it was fixed.
"...It isn't a SMLE..." Yeah! Only a No. 1 Lee-Enfield is an SMLE.
__________________
Spelling and grammar count!
T. O'Heir is offline  
Old February 23, 2019, 03:43 PM   #8
RC20
Senior Member
 
Join Date: April 10, 2008
Location: Alaska
Posts: 6,100
Quote:
It is not possible; if reloaders were capable of understanding head space your questions would have been answered years ago.
Are you telling me I don't understand head space? Or I don't buy your version of it?
__________________
Science and Facts are True whether you believe it or not
RC20 is offline  
Old February 23, 2019, 03:45 PM   #9
RC20
Senior Member
 
Join Date: April 10, 2008
Location: Alaska
Posts: 6,100
Hey guys, if it has a Number 2 bolt head and its a Mk 4, then its not a Pattern 13 or 14!

Those did not have replaceable bolt heads, the various SMLE (generic and not nit pick generic) did. Different rifles entirely (other than the caliber of 303 and the P13 was not 303 either - more like 30-06 in 276 with rebated rim etc.
__________________
Science and Facts are True whether you believe it or not
RC20 is offline  
Old February 23, 2019, 03:48 PM   #10
RC20
Senior Member
 
Join Date: April 10, 2008
Location: Alaska
Posts: 6,100
88Scrat:

I am just vaguely familiar with the SMLE various. They do have 4 heads as I recall to tune the head-space rather than have the mfg process tight enough to ensure its right.

So what do you need to know? Mil surp forum may be able to better answer specifics. Its a very loose chamber and the cases don't last long in it. I don't know of any 303 head space issues gauge wise. Its not SAMI but they should do what is needed to get it as right as it gets.

Its an oddity as the rimmed 303 should set head space not the bolt head. but they do have different bolt heads.

I think in reality it adjusted the bolt face to the rim section and really had nothing to do with head space.

Enfield is a somewhat loose term as they did mfg a totally different rifle from the SMLE pre WWI (most mfg done in the US for the 303 version)


I think we need to clarify the use of the term "headspace" as it is being used in this thread.
With a rimmed case like the .303 the headspace is the thickness of the space between the bolt face & the rear chamber face occupied by the RIM of a loaded case exclusively. The measurements of ALL OTHER dimensions, while effecting case expansion & possible failure are chamber dimensions to be sure, but are NOT "Headspace".

If we use a rimless case, like the 7.62mm conversion, then the distances within the chamber do become both critical & part of the "Headspace" for that round.

Quote:
There has been a great deal of confusion on this point so I feel it's a good idea to remind everyone of the actual term "headspace" & it's usage as it applies to the rimmed .303 British case.
If you have truly "Excessive Headspace" the case can weaken & may well rupture, if you have correct headspace & a "sloppy chamber" it may well beat up your brass, effect accuracy negatively, & allow brass to stretch to the point of failure, but it STILL is not "Headspace"
__________________
Science and Facts are True whether you believe it or not

Last edited by RC20; February 23, 2019 at 09:05 PM.
RC20 is offline  
Old February 23, 2019, 04:00 PM   #11
mikejonestkd
Senior Member
 
Join Date: January 3, 2006
Location: Brockport, NY
Posts: 3,267
Just a quick aside on case life. I have two No4 MK1s that I reload for.

to the OP- get the RCBS neck die, it'll greatly increase your case life. keep your reloads on the low end of the scale and that'll also help keep your cases in good shape longer.

I typically neck resize 5 times, FL resize once, then neck resize 5 times again. I have some brass that is approaching 15 reloads following this method, and there are no signs of case failure yet.
__________________
You are the bows from which your children as living arrows are sent forth.
mikejonestkd is offline  
Old February 23, 2019, 07:11 PM   #12
44 AMP
Staff
 
Join Date: March 11, 2006
Location: Upper US
Posts: 19,983
Quote:
They do have 4 heads as I recall to tune the head-space rather than have the mfg process tight enough to ensure its right.
The manufacturing process was fine and "tight" to get it right. Rifles came from the maker properly headspaced to the bolt. (and remember on this round, headspace is from the bolt face to the chamber ledge where the rim seats.

The 4 different "size" (length) bolt heads were not to make up for factory sloppiness, they were so that armorers in the field could easily return a worn rifle to proper headspace.

Since the action locks up at the rear, bolt heads could be swapped without the need to remove, machine, and reinstall the barrel the way it would need to be done with a Mauser etc.
__________________
All else being equal (and it almost never is) bigger bullets tend to work better.
44 AMP is offline  
Old February 23, 2019, 09:02 PM   #13
RC20
Senior Member
 
Join Date: April 10, 2008
Location: Alaska
Posts: 6,100
Hmmm, logic stays the rim does not wear down on the receiver.

The bolt does not wear down.

Me thinks its a mfg issue and easier to do bolt heads. Certainly could be wrong.

Its an interesting aspect of head space (or no head space)

Quote:
That why "Head Gap" is a better way of diagnosing a potential problem, especially when rimmed cartridges are involved.
Head Gap being distance between the breechface or bolt face and the base of the cartridge when as far forwards as it can get in the chamber.
A thicker than average rim helps take up some slack, but a thinner than average rim makes the situation worse.

Mass production of cartridge cases under wartime pressures proved very difficult during WW1. Normal pre war production had caused a few problems but nothing like the problems that developed when cartridge manufacturers were called on to produce cartridges in the hundreds of millions rather than in millions. Some producers had never manufactured the .303 before then, and others had made only limited runs earlier on.

Machinegunners soon found that rim thicknesses could vary wildly, and learned to gauge rims before accepting ammo for MG use in combat. Aerial guns were especially prone to jams in combat, jams that often couldn't be cleared in time and cost lives. Ammunition that met the standard specifications most closely would be marked by cartons with a Green Cross or Green spot, and later specially made batches were made for RAF use and marked with a red spot.
__________________
Science and Facts are True whether you believe it or not
RC20 is offline  
Old February 23, 2019, 09:11 PM   #14
RC20
Senior Member
 
Join Date: April 10, 2008
Location: Alaska
Posts: 6,100
Not quite Unclenick but this is good and includes the CDN and SAMI refences.

http://www.303british.com/id28.html
__________________
Science and Facts are True whether you believe it or not
RC20 is offline  
Old February 24, 2019, 11:29 AM   #15
Tidewater_Kid
Senior Member
 
Join Date: July 3, 2005
Location: Alabama
Posts: 883
I have always thought this was a good explanation on the .303 headspace discussion.

https://www.tapatalk.com/groups/para...361.html#p3018
Tidewater_Kid is offline  
Old February 24, 2019, 11:48 AM   #16
F. Guffey
Senior Member
 
Join Date: July 18, 2008
Posts: 7,195
Quote:
I think we need to clarify the use of the term "headspace" as it is being used in this thread.
With a rimmed case like the .303 the headspace is the thickness of the space between the bolt face & the rear chamber face occupied by the RIM of a loaded case exclusively. The measurements of ALL OTHER dimensions, while effecting case expansion & possible failure are chamber dimensions to be sure, but are NOT "Headspace".
I said it is not possible; I can not imagine you guys getting involved in something you do not understand and make it better. SAMMI does not list head space for the case in their drawings. And now? You have case head space, case head space gages etc. It is your way or no way.

I have said component manufacturers do not make cases for reloaders that know/understand what they are doing. Years ago I sorted 303 cases by rim thickness. Being a reloader I had no interest in new, over the counter factory loaded ammo so I turned down all opportunities to purchased British 303 SMLEs. I worked out a way to thicken the rim but the British rifle had rear locking lugs; I understand most do not have a clue but I thought the rear locking lugs were a problem because of the 'humping' bolt, meaning no matter what effort was made there was a problem with case head separation.

I have rifles with 303 British chambers, one is a 303 1905 Ross, a most accurate rifle and I have P14s, one is a 308 Norma mag and another is a 30/06 and I have P14s that will be 308 W bench rest type rifles and 8MM bench rest rifles. None of them have problems with case head separation because none of them have 303 British chambers because they do not have rear locking lugs. Every opportunity I had to purchases a SMLE I choose something else like the Turkish Mauser.


F. Guffey
F. Guffey is offline  
Old February 24, 2019, 12:37 PM   #17
F. Guffey
Senior Member
 
Join Date: July 18, 2008
Posts: 7,195
Long before the Internet and it's members trying to reinvent everything reloading component manufacturers had to design ways to hold the case to the rear of the chamber. They had no clue some reloaders would declare the firing pin would hit the primer and drive the case, powder, bullet forward to hit the shoulder of the chamber. Back then the case had too much tapper.

There only interest was to hold the case to the ream with something like the rim and then came the belt. The belt was far from perfect because the component manufacturers did not make belts with different thickness; meaning one belt fit all chambers and again, they had little to no interest in what happens to the case ahead of the belt. the case body was designed to fill the chamber with little regard for the fit between the shoulder of the case and shoulder of the chamber. The best thing to ever happen to long tapered cases was P.O. Ackley.

Before the belt there was the 7MM57 and the 8MM57 with the rim. Today I chamber ammo with .127" clearance, I pull the trigger and then eject a case that did not experience case head separation or stretch between the case head and case body.

And then there was Hatcher, Hatcher suspected there was a problem with the ammo or the rifle so he increased the length of the chamber .065", (+/- ?). He chambered common ordinary everyday 30/06 ammo and pulled the trigger. He did not experience case head separation even thought as you guys describe it "he had too much head space"; and I would describe all of the extra space as clearance. And I am the fan of cutting down on all that clearance, I use the length of the case from the shoulder of the case to the case head to off set the length of the chamber from the shoulder to the bolt face.

I know, there is not one person on this forum that understands what I just said but I had a builder of magnificent rifles call me with rifles he built. He said he had 5 case head separations out of the first 10 rounds he fired. He made the reamer, cut the chamber and built the rifles.

I told him had he called me I could have checked the rifle before he left the shop to determine if that would happen, I told him I could have met him at the range to correct the problem long enough for him to form his cases. The 4 rifles he used to build his magnificent rifles were built from non issued 03 and 03A3s.

F. Guffey
F. Guffey is offline  
Old February 24, 2019, 02:20 PM   #18
RC20
Senior Member
 
Join Date: April 10, 2008
Location: Alaska
Posts: 6,100
WWI ammunition was horrible for its quality. More reading and the machine gunners would pre select their rims for consistency.

How would you setup a rifle in the field? (or what would you set it for?)

Not being a 303 user, my guess is it made no difference.

The only wear area would be the lug recess in the receiver and head space would not work for that an you have to condemn the receiver if those are worn.

Unfortunate, before the internet there were a lot of p[people that passed on erroneous information as well. The internet just made it more wide spread (ad noted in the bore discussion and the wrong info on the 1917 having a .311 bore.

Some challenge data, calling the 1917 an Enfield when in fact a US Army publication did call it that. Interestingly its purpose was to clarify the history and the gun as there was all sorts of rumors that were wrong.

If Mr. G thinks that rumors did not roar through the military he is totally wrong.

Things like the Sherman tank was a death trap. While each one was a deep loss to their family and nation, something like 1800 tankers died from Africa onto the demise of Germany.

Large numbers of Shermans were shot up and disabled, most were repaired. The crews survived. Hardly a death trap. All tanks burned, the Sherman solved most of that with better ammo storage.

I worked on the AK Pipeline. The rumors that roared through the camps were hilarious (the favorite one was that the government was going to take over the whole thing). Or the conspiracy when they inventoried equipment and put marks on it. Highly entertaining.

Why would you mark equipment like that? So you did not have to inventory it again because we moved stuff up and down 50 miles of any given section from day to day.

Mr. G can look up the date of the Ak Pipeline build, he will find it well before the Internet was even thought of. Yep, I walked 10 miles to school each day and it was uphill both ways and -20. Yes ser ree Bob.
__________________
Science and Facts are True whether you believe it or not
RC20 is offline  
Old February 24, 2019, 02:22 PM   #19
RC20
Senior Member
 
Join Date: April 10, 2008
Location: Alaska
Posts: 6,100
Quote:
I have always thought this was a good explanation on the .303 headspace discussion.
Really good one. Well done.

You do know that is on the evil internet that has simply ruined reloading don't you?

While I was chewing on the OP question, I had thought that maybe this was a good place for neck sizing to stop the case loss you hear about.

Lo and behold it is. Makes sense. While not something I want to do if I do not have to (and I don't even despite the fact I am an internet re-loader who does not understand head space) I just move my shoulder back each time as small a distance as I can mange. Havn't lost a case in I can't remember how long (3-4 years)
__________________
Science and Facts are True whether you believe it or not

Last edited by RC20; February 24, 2019 at 02:29 PM.
RC20 is offline  
Old February 24, 2019, 07:13 PM   #20
Jim Watson
Senior Member
 
Join Date: October 25, 2001
Location: Alabama
Posts: 15,675
Gee, Guff, last I looked, the "rim" on an 8x57 Mauser was strictly to give the extractor something to pull on. No effect on chambering. At one time proof cartridges were made without extractor grooves.
Everybody since has sucked up to P. P. Mauser and the rimless cartridges it takes to make his magazine work right.

Quote:
the wrong info on the 1917 having a .311 bore.
That is certainly wrong, the 1917 has nominal .300" bore, just like a 1903.
Jim Watson is offline  
Old February 24, 2019, 08:59 PM   #21
RC20
Senior Member
 
Join Date: April 10, 2008
Location: Alaska
Posts: 6,100
Quote:
That is certainly wrong, the 1917 has nominal .300" bore, just like a 1903.
Yep but look in the comment about bore size and a guy has repeated the old myth.

Its not that there was no wrong info, there always was.

Stuff like the Germans waiting to hear the ping of the en-bloc to attack. Realy? All that nonsense. Yes in basic training they teach us enblock choreography just for that reason.
__________________
Science and Facts are True whether you believe it or not
RC20 is offline  
Old February 24, 2019, 10:33 PM   #22
44 AMP
Staff
 
Join Date: March 11, 2006
Location: Upper US
Posts: 19,983
Quote:
The only wear area would be the lug recess in the receiver and head space would not work for that an you have to condemn the receiver if those are worn.
In a Mauser type rifle this would be correct, but the SMLE is different. Wear in the locking areas of the bolt and receiver results in the bolt getting "shorter" meaning the bolt face is further away from the barrel when the action is locked, resulting in what we call excess headspace.

In a front locking Mauser type gun, there is no way to make the bolt "longer" but in the SMLE, there is. Installing a longer bolt head brings the bolt fact back into its proper place in relation to the barrel, returning the gun back to correct headspace, extending the service life of the rifle.

At the risk of contributing to thread drift, if you think the Sherman wasn't a death trap, I strongly suggest you read "Death Traps" by Belton Cooper. He was there, an officer in tank recovery during the European campaign. Happy to discuss this in detail in PM, if you like.
__________________
All else being equal (and it almost never is) bigger bullets tend to work better.
44 AMP is offline  
Old February 24, 2019, 11:31 PM   #23
Dufus
Senior Member
 
Join Date: December 10, 2014
Location: Texas
Posts: 1,759
Posted by Jim Watson

Quote:
Gee, Guff, last I looked, the "rim" on an 8x57 Mauser was strictly to give the extractor something to pull on. No effect on chambering. At one time proof cartridges were made without extractor grooves.
Everybody since has sucked up to P. P. Mauser and the rimless cartridges it takes to make his magazine work right.

Quote:
the wrong info on the 1917 having a .311 bore.
That is certainly wrong, the 1917 has nominal .300" bore, just like a 1903.
There are rimmed versions of both the 7x57 and the 8x57.

I am assuming that Mr Guffey was referring to those.
Dufus is offline  
Old February 25, 2019, 10:22 AM   #24
Jim Watson
Senior Member
 
Join Date: October 25, 2001
Location: Alabama
Posts: 15,675
True, but the real rimless cartridges actually predate the rimmed which were added for break action sporting guns. The 8x57R did not drive any development that I know of. The 8x57 Mauser definitely did, other than the digression to the Hollands belt, almost all later cartridges were of its form and many of its same head size.
Jim Watson is offline  
Old February 25, 2019, 11:27 AM   #25
ernie8
Member
 
Join Date: October 9, 2018
Posts: 51
The Enfield locks on the receiver bridge . The action was just strong enough to hold the weak .303 loading . There was a reason every other military dropped the bridge locker . The long front of the bolt will compress over time , compared to a Mauser with the lugs at the front . Locking only on one side near the middle would let the receiver also stretch . They knew that and made longer boltheads to keep a rifle in service longer . When you ran out of boltheads the rifle was done . Cooper was the worlds smartest 20 year old LT , smarter than all the generals [ kind of like aoc today ] . He was so smart he went the whole war with out a promotion . All he did was pick up knocked out tanks , so that was all he saw . Like an undertaker , all he sees is the dead . Most of the tanks were back in service soon . Only 1400 US tankers were killed by all causes in the ETO in WWII . A Tiger in a hidden ambush with a know range would have knocked out a Tiger . The Sherman was a great tank in 1941 , the German could not stop it . It was better than the early T-34 . A problem was we had shipped a lot of very early [ not as good ] Shermans to England for the " 42 invasion " that did not happen till years later . They were there , so they used them . Even in 44 an updated model was as good as a MK IV . Tigers were few and most ran out of gas , broke down or could not cross a bridge . Look at real facts .
ernie8 is offline  
Reply

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 04:53 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
This site and contents, including all posts, Copyright © 1998-2018 S.W.A.T. Magazine
Copyright Complaints: Please direct DMCA Takedown Notices to the registered agent: thefiringline.com
Contact Us
Page generated in 0.10104 seconds with 8 queries