More Camera Work = More rifle Pics

[Schuetzenman]

Ok here are my two No. 4 series Lee Enfields. The top is a Savage No. 4 Mk. I. Bottom rifle with sling is a No. 4 Mk. II and spike bayonet.

http://album.gunsnet.net/data/schuetzenm/full_60_p230.jpg (http://)

[Schuetzenman]

Here is a close up of the "US Property" markings of the Savage Arms manufactured No. 4 MK I SMLE.

http://album.gunsnet.net/data/schuetzenm/full_60_p220.jpg (http://)

[neilwest]

1. WAH!!!!!!!!!:cryeyes:

2. COME ON LICENSE:mad: :mad:

[JES AR15]

which Enfields are the most WWII accurate ?

[NC_Rebel]

Originally posted by JES AR15
which Enfields are the most WWII accurate ? No.4 Mk.II's are the most "evolved" Enfields. Those that were made by Savage are probably the most collectable and most accurate. The No.4 Mk.IIT is the sniper version. My No.4 Mk.I Longbranch isn't as accurate as Schuetzenman's No.4 Mk.II either. One reason is the rear sight on the Mk.II is better.

[JES AR15]

i didn't ask my ? correct again .
which model was the most common during WWII ?

[Schuetzenman]

Jes,
The No. 4 Mk I model was the one during WWII. I don't believe the MK II's came along until after the war. They have an imporvement in how the trigger is done. All prior models of Enfield have the trigger as mounted to the magazine / trigger guard . The Mk II's have the trigger assembly attached to the receiver which is the way that Mausers are built. So, the MK II's have a better trigger pull and one that does not change depending on humidity sometimes as prior models could.

[NC_Rebel]

Schuetzenman is correct (like that's news to you, right?) but he left something out. Yes, the No.4 was the rifle produced by the British for WWII, however, most Commonwealth forces and the Home Guard did not carry the No.4. Troops from Australia, New Zealand, South Africa and India relied on their old warhorse, the No.1 Mk.III*. In fact, Australia never produced the No.4 rifle. The No.1 Mk.III* is the same rifle that the Home Guard (civilians in England) carried as they patrolled the beaches during the time that Hitler was planning Operation Sealion. You'll also see a few P1917 Enfields being used by Home Guard, Chinese Nationalists and some Indian volunteers in WWII photos.

[JES AR15]

so, the No.4 MkI was the one used in Europe ? if so what are they going for these days and who has them ?

[Schuetzenman]

Originally posted by JES AR15
so, the No.4 MkI was the one used in Europe ? if so what are they going for these days and who has them ?

Well, Navy Arms has quite a lot of No. 4 Mk I's that look really nice because somebody has sanded the stocks and redone the finish on the metal. :rolleyes: Only reservations I have is bore quality can be hit or miss on these rifles.

Springield Sporters has them but they will not have been prettied up. That's where my Savage No. 4 Mk I came from . I did replace the upper hand guards and buttstock on it to the Beech wood. The original stock is the part that runs from the band at the wrist to the nosecap. It has the serial number of the receiver stamped into it and one can tell that it's original. Those darker looking spots on the stock especially easy to see in the close ups are some kind of discolorations. Really the stock itself is not dented up as bad as you might think a 1940's issued rifle would be.

The buttstock is attached by means of a long stock bolt that goes in a hole uder the buttplate. This screws into a threaded hole at that band looking area, which is solid BTW. The stock that came on this rifle was not the original as it was a rather ok looking Walnut unit. It just didn't look wright with the beechwood main stock piece. Same with the hand guards. They were replacement walnut units from some time in the rifles past. So, I got some new Enfiled beechwood parts from Springfield sporters and then matched them to the color of the original stock that is that reddish looking color as seen in the photos.

The No 4 Mk II is as purchased, and unaltered. Then again it is a 1955 or 56 vintage arm. It probably didn't see combat, just training and storage. I'd rate it as NRA Excellent grade. No import marks on it either! :cool: Really the best looking Enfield I've seen short of the ones that were on the market in 93 in Mummy wrap paper. Those were Mk II's found in an Irsh arsenal in storage since 56. Still kicking myself in the ass for not getting 2 of them when they were only $178 bucks. Now those rifles are in the mid $300's.

On the whole though to get back to your question on who has them SOG (Southern Ohio Gun) has them I believe. However, caveat Eperator (buyer beware). They suck! Also don't expect to find real minty looking Enfields like the ones I posted here. As stated, I had to fix up the one and the other is a fluke IMO. I just happened to be in the right place at the right time to find this cherry! Not what one usually finds available when encountering the average SMLE rifle.

[JES AR15]

thanx again. yours look real nice.

[Schuetzenman]

Originally posted by NC_Rebel
Schuetzenman is correct (like that's news to you, right?) but he left something out. Yes, the No.4 was the rifle produced by the British for WWII, however, most Commonwealth forces and the Home Guard did not carry the No.4. Troops from Australia, New Zealand, South Africa and India relied on their old warhorse, the No.1 Mk.III*. In fact, Australia never produced the No.4 rifle. The No.1 Mk.III* is the same rifle that the Home Guard (civilians in England) carried as they patrolled the beaches during the time that Hitler was planning Operation Sealion. You'll also see a few P1917 Enfields being used by Home Guard, Chinese Nationalists and some Indian volunteers in WWII photos.

Real good imput on the SMLE history here NC! On the Aussies and the Indians I always wondered why they didn't switchover to the No. 4 version of SMLE. Maybe it was just a matter of economics. They would have had to change their tooling to produce the different recievers and rear sight systems.

[zouavexx]

Man I love Enfields! :) Nice!!!

[Schuetzenman]

bump;)