That's a terrific response and explanation of the differences between the modern manufactured repros vs the originals. If we throw Parker-Hale into the mix, does this gun conform to the original machining of the barrel and rifling?
My experience is dated, I was an avid shooter and reenactor over twenty-five years ago. I held on to my original pieces until about ten years ago, when after several business-related moves, I realized they were simply collecting dust or were being exposed to possible damage or loss.
I have more experience in shooting for accuracy and hunting with percussion and flintlock Kentucky and sporting rifles. Most of my firing of repro military arms was at reenactments with blank loads and when I did shoot for accuracy it was more an informal thing directed at tree trunks or man-size targets within 100 yards.
In my original question, should I purchase a repro, defarbed Enfield I'm hoping you and other experts can direct me to a weapon that I know, whether hanging on the wall, used in a competition or resold to a serious reenactor or competitor is as near to "authentic", as possible, and can honestly be represented as such.
Your response has added a great deal of information to my understanding of the construction of the original guns vs the reproductions. In my "day job" I sell machine-tools, so my understanding of machining processes is on a professional level. If you've got a drawing or side-view of the profile of the barrel on an original Enfield and on the repros, I'd love to see it. I'd also like to know more about the actual machining process for the barrels and rifling, in fact, for all of the metal parts on the 1853 Enfield. If you can respond here, by email or direct me to such information online or in book form, I'd be very interested.
Thanks for the reply,