It wasn't so much wood as it was several different, lighter-weight materials. The used aluminum, a cellulose-based plastic or wood pulp, depending on what was available at the time. And then encased the whole thing in a metal jacket. But you are right, it didn't effect the accuracy, but then caused the bullet to tumble when it hit, making really nasty wounds. The problem is finding the older milsurp rounds that are made that way. Most modern .303 Brit bullets are of conventional design. The last batch I found that had that set-up was some old Iraqi ammo, loaded with cordite and a replica of the British ball ammo.hotlead wrote:Of the three, I think the SMLE is the superior battle rifle. Twice the onboard capacity, a very fast bolt once you get used to cock on closing, sights could be better but are perfectly fine for the purpose, plenty accurate, and .303 ball actually had a wooden plug in the nose giving great accuracy potential but also gave devastating terminal ballistics on soft targets. The only negative would be that of the three, the smelly is the only one susceptible to rim lock. If .303 was rimless, and it used receiver mounted peep sights, then I couldn't think of a more perfect bolt action battle rifle.
MNs are fun, I have a few, but certainly wouldn't be my first choice. The Mausers controlled feed fixed extractor precludes loading right into the chamber, for whatever that means to you. I'd like the option.
I vote SMLE.
Funny thing about your wanting a rimless version with a peep sight. That is not the first time somebody has thought of that. The Japanese thought exactly the same thing right before WWII. The 7.7 Arisaka rifle and cartridge were designed to do exactly that. And while most loadings post WWII put the 7.7 into the .308/.30-06 range, the original loadings were nearly identical to the .303 British. They viewed the ballistics as more than adequate for fighting the kind of war they were anticipating.