I got this rifle about 10 years ago. It's a sporterized No 4 Mark 1 and very well done. I will never know but I speculate it was a project rifle for a gunsmith school. The wood was replaced with plain but nice straight grained walnut which was finished well. All markings on the butt-stock iron and the Nocks form and all steel was buffed off and highly blued. Barrel shortened and front sight was replaced with a commercial sight. Rear sight is an early Mark 1 sight, machined rather than stamped, like the later ones. And the bore, which is brilliant, has 5 grooves, unusual. Later ones had 2 grooves. And has a 5-round mag.

I got this gun off the net, cheap. Can't remember how much, but $200-250,plus shipping. The gun arrived at my door; I think the seller shipped to my credit card address rather than my FFL. Included was a side scope mount with rings.

I like it; accurate and handy.

That is a beauty! Really like the cut-down magazine. You got a very nice rifle at a great price.

I like it! Many moons ago I owned a sporterized Enfield No. 4 or two. The one I remember the most clearly had a scope. Like yours it had a pistol grip commercial sporter stock.

The gunsmith who I used in the 1980s liked to tell how in the 1960s he bought surplus No. 4s, sporterized them then sold them for $60. He prefered leaving sanding and oiling the wood to the customer. That kept the price down while only leaving the customer a simple project.

Speculating that yours was a gunsmithing school project is a stretch. The schools are more interested in teaching how to rebarrel and bed a Mauser or Mauser derived action. That better trains students to work on commercial rifles. Also the sporterizing on yours would not have taught use of metal lathes or milling machines.

Excepting those made after WW II all the English made No. 4s I owned had over size chambers and groove diameters. with a little common sense reloader can work around those obstacles and make them shoot very well. The reduced capacity magazine was a desirable addition. It makes them easier to shoot off sand bags.

Reading the details on how it arrived, I'm curious how you addressed that to legally complete the transfer.

Took it to the FFL dealer the next day. So it's recorded on my end.

As for the gunsmith school speculation, I can't imagine anyone spending all that time and machine-tool work and expense on an Enfield. Too much work for no profit. Who's going to buy a dolled up one? (Except me.)

A long time ago, asmith who went to the one in Colorado back in the 60s, he told me that when he was there, he had to submit a work exhibiting his skill in order to graduate. All this info is why I made the inference.
With a commercial rifle, what are you going to do to show your skill? Just about everything has already been done. I don't know how they do it now, but I understand using lathes and milling machinery is still taught rather than merely replacing parts.

I believe the original rifle was built in 1939 or 40 because no obvious wartime shortcuts are seen. The multi-rifled barrel seems to indicate this.

But it's all speculation. I'll never know the facts and only know that right now I have a very nice rifle in a caliber I like, and I'm satisfied with that.

Did they buff out the serial number on the wirst? That would identify the factory it came from.

Not all late No.4s had 2-groove barrels. My 1950 Long Branch is a 5-groove, and 6-groove barrels are known. 2-groove barrels seems to turn up all over. I even have a BSA so fitted, probably during refurb.

Believe it or not, the only groove count that the Brits didn't produce was 3, but they did experiment with it. Legend has it that 6-groove barrels were used when only Bren barrels were available.

__________________
Release the Kraken

Yep, all buffed out except a faint No 4 and a broad arrow on the socket, if that's what it's called. A serial number is on the left side of the Nocks form. I don't know it is original or added later.

I think the 2-groove barrels were a war-time expedient. I didn't know if they continued this after WW2, apparently they didn't. Did they go back to the milled rear sights as well? They say 2-grooves didn't affect accuracy. Mine may have 6 grooves, I can't remember exactly. I know it has at least 5. I threw away the bore patches I used, looked for them in the trash but couldn't find them.

All the videos I've seen are about WW2 era guns. I've never seen anything on post-War guns.

IIRC, the British produced rifles post WWII went to a milled sight again, but not the Canadian examples. The Canadian guns have a pressed steel adjustable aperture sight. My Pakistani No.4 Mk2 has a milled sight, which makes sense because they were given the entire Fazakerley factory plant. The post-war British rifles all had 5-groove barrels and all the refurbs of that period I have seen are also so equipped.

__________________
Release the Kraken

That's called a hobby. Our member steelslaver turns perfectly good S&W revolvers into different configuration and different caliber revolvers with no collector value all the time just because he can. It gets cold in Montana and he's got to do something inside until spring. Many of us without the machinery and skill pay good money to have unjustifiable projects made. Eventually smarter men buy them for a fraction of what they cost.

Here's examples of both. In 1985 I turned a 1917 .30-06 that I bought for $75 into a, counting its scope, $700 6.5-06 hunting rifle. About 1990 I bought a nicely reblued Arisaka that had been rebarrled to .300 Savage and bedded into a fancy walnut sporter stock. As he accepted my $100 the seller said his father who had the work done was probably rolling over in his grave.

before I went into the air force I bought an unfinished sporter stock from Herter's for my Enfield. when I got out in 1973 I decided to finish it. I'm not sure if my patience or determination was going to run out first. I did get it finished but I learned that stock makers deserve all the money they get when doing stock work

That's especially true of the SMLE, No.4 and No.5 rifles. The way the wood fits was clearly designed by the cabinet makers' union. Arcane is the most polite description I can come up with for the way the wood fits into the draws. There just had to be an easier way.

__________________
Release the Kraken

Speaking about enfields I have two. A 1949 Faz #4MKII and a 1942 Long Branch that now is a Parker Hale rework done after the war. Barrel has been cut to 21.5 ",front forend cut back so basically as low budget sporter. But still has the military ladder sight and a marked Parkier Hale ramp front sight thet will tame the military front sight inserts. Came with a 5 round mag but couldn;t get it to work properly. Stuck in a 12 rounder ithat I know does work. Since the original forend has been cut down I have another that I have been playing with these last few weeks. Got most if not all scars,dings,dents and sanded it down with 100 grip paper. Also bought a snipers cheek rest from Sarco so I can see through the scope I plan on installing. A barrel band with swivels and sling hangar, and a upper handguard. Than disassemble everything and glass bed the complete action and first1.5" of the barrel.Nay not look like much but since I cannot hunt anymore more for my pleasure than anything else. And I plan on shooting cast bullets in it. Frank

There is a lot of info on Enfields on YouTube. I got re-interested in them from watching a series on the Great War and eventually the SMLE and et al. They're better than I and I think a lot of us in the US give them credit for.

Maybe because they were so cheap back when they first started being imported in numbers back in the 60s. I remember then at a local hardware store in my small town they had a barrel full of SMLEs at $15 each. Deer hunting was just getting kicked off back then (deer were very scarce in GA) and a lot of folks bought one.

Same thing applies to the Arisaka being devalued because it was cheap and available in huge numbers. They're excellent rifles, but unlike a Mauser, you can't make them pretty. Even the Last Ditch ones are strong, I've read, though crude. I think P.O. Ackley worked up a lot of his Improved cartridges with that action.

Can't make a Mosin-Nagant pretty, either. I think shooters realize that today and accept them for what they are-ugly, sturdy, accurate-enough battle rifles.

The Enfields can be fired extremely quickly by working the bolt with the thumb and middle finger and using the middle finger to pull the trigger. And, unlike Mausers or Springfields, you don't have to come off the stock or sights to fire, you stay lined up.

That's not at all important to us, but was important to soldiers.

Quick question: Did the 5 round mag come with any stripper clips, or chargers as the English called them? If so, were they shortened to accommodate the shorter mag?

__________________
Why duck?? It's a 9mm!

The No4 MK I British Enfield is my idea of a proper tactical rifle , you can keep your black plastic AR - whatever .
I paid $20.00 for it in 1967 ... never did get around to "sporterizing it" so last year I refinished the military wood in tung oil .
made in 1942 , BSA Ltd , Birmingham England manufactured ... a really nice one with a tight bore and chamber. Got reloading dies and bullet moulds , it's a sweet shooter .
We all ready for action .
Gary

__________________
Certified Cajun
NRA Member

No, the chargers only hold 5 rounds so there was no reason to modify it. To load the original rifles took two chargers of 5. The short mag loads fine with a charger, so long as you stagger the rounds in the charger to avoid rim lock.

DON'T "sporterze" these. Collectors want them in military form, and so many were modded that nice clean originals have increased enormously in price.

Very nice! I have a sporterized one, too, but it is not nearly so nice. It is my favorite rifle.

Exactly right. If left original, the rifle would have been worth a lot more. Now, mine is a nice example of what shouldn't be done to a warhorse. It's tempting when the originals are plentiful and cheap, and a lot of hunters cut them down because they're heavy for hunting but decades later any value as a collector is gone.

Back when they were plentiful and cheap very few people collected them, and for me, in that era and my area, fewer people could afford to be a collector. Unmolested military rifles, especially with matching numbers are hard to find and bring high prices.

Sporterizing is especially hard to take when it is done to a rifle like this.

WWII Unicorn rifle

I was in a gun shop when I found another No.4 with a cut down forend but everything else intact. Grumbling about folk who had hacksaws, I took a look. @#$%^&***!!!! The rifle was a Maltby built gun that was part of an unusual mismarked batch. They were marked as a No.4 Mk1* when they were clearly good old Mk1s. To make matters worse, it had been upgraded with the Mk2 trigger and remarked No.4 Mk1*/3 as if it were a real Mk1*. The conversion had been done using the original forend modified to take the Mk2 trigger instead of new Mk2 wood. I was fit to be tied.

__________________
Release the Kraken

There's plenty of already sporterized Military rifles around in various states of quality of work. Chose one of those if you want to go ahead and finish a sporter up on one.
Some of them are even good candidates to restore to their orig Military configuration.
It can be expensive to go in either direction, but rewarding when the finished product is in hand.

Nice looking #4 rifle.
Looks like it might have been a preturn stock from someplace like Bishop or Fajen. But who ever did the work took extra care and had the talent to finish it up very nicely.

I just finished up a sporter on a Krag someone else made probably back in the 50's or 60's using a preturned stock. Lots of terrible things they did in making it but it probably served as a great deer rifle for years.
I put much more time into it and it's sad piece of wood and orig excavation type inletting work than it probably deserved. But it was way past putting it back to Military spec.
Better than watching TV

That's a nice rifle there and in great shape. Forgotten Weapons has a good video on the No 1 Mark 6. Is it marked as such on the socket? Might want to check the date on your post...looks like a typo.

The OP has a nice rifle.
But thanks Guys! Here I am thinking about not pulling the trigger on an inexpensive sporterized 30-40 Krag. The action has always fascinated me and the cartridge is a proven deer slayer. The price is low and it comes with ammo and reloading dies.
Already have a beater Swedish Mauser that fills the roll of a bad weather rifle. It came to me as a parts gun with mismatch bolt. I lightened it up and put on better sights. Also have my granddads P17 Winchester that he trimmed down after WWII. I know that one was like new when he got it.
Come to think of it, I also have an 1873 marked trapdoor carbine that has seen some custom work by unknown persons. Oh, and wait, there's that Remington #5 Roller that yours truly had rebuilt into a 38-55 sporter. They all shoot well and fulfill their role.
I agree that knowingly taking a pristine old military rifle and reworking it these days is a fools errand. Especially when they can be sold or traded for a true sporting rifle better suited to the task. But back when they brought a few bucks, as that $11 P17 of granddads... well the Remington model 30, built on the same action, would have cost him 5 times as much. I have no problem with military sporters. Besides, they make the unaltered ones worth so much more!
Now... what to do about that $250 Krag?

John

Back in the early 1970's I got a "sporterized #4 Long Branch from Woolworth's five and dime store for $19.95. The "sporterizing amounted to cutting off the stock and removing the forearm and hardware. It appeared to be an unissued gun and its not import marked.

Shortly afterwards I found a new unissued stock set at Springfield Sporters in PA for another $20 or so. It came with all the hardware as well. It was not serial numbered, but it was also a Long Branch.
That was probably my cheapest but brand new all original milsurp.

Not sure which date you mean. Harry the Grinder at the Fazakerley obliterated the original receiver marks, sadly.

__________________
Release the Kraken

Sorry...my mistake. No problem at all. I misread.

Well playing around with a #4MKI* with two groove barrel, made at Long Branch in 1942. Then after the war Parker Hale converted it to what they call a Parker Hale sporter. Mine is the lowest grade they made at the time. Chop the barrel,chop the forend install a sporting ramp front sight and left the military one alone.Will be giving both the forend and the rear hanguard an acetone bath tomorrow. The draws were badly cut and caused the back or the forend to crack. I'll make up a dutchman and epoxy it in place. That takes care of the crack. However the draws require some planning on my part.Going to chisel out the oil soaked wood until I get to good and one piece of walnut will take care of the draws. Have to do some creative sanding with mu little Harbor Freight sander to match the angle of the mating surfaces of the draws on the action body.Then glass that area as well.And finally glass bed the whole action body, and the first inch or so of the barrel. May put in a pressure point don't know as yet. This quarantine being in the house for 3 weeks is driving me stir crazy have to do something to keep the brain cells occupied. Frank

I agree that TODAY at 75 yrs old with 60 years experience added to the 15 years old when I actually purchased (from Sears - mail order) my first real "big bore" rifle, I would never consider a "sporterized" Milsurp……………..but...…….

The Sears Enfield sporters of 1960 were really nice rifles, professionally done somewhere, and in my opinion were not "bubba" homemade chop jobs.

They were $20.00 cheaper than a 1903 A3, or a Mauser. Mine was less than $40.00 and although it no longer has a "space of honor" in the safe, it still stands along side more valuable rifles with pride.

Still very accurate with Williams rear peep. and can still take whitetail where nothing under .30 cal is allowed during rifle season. The Fagen Monte Carlo stock isn't any slouch either for fit and looks.

I am sure that literally thousands of these type commercial sporters were produced and I still believe that they have a place in American history among us still alive, or our fathers, uncles, etc. who just could not afford a branny new Winchester Model 70, or a Remington off the shelf.

Enjoy yours OP...…………..I still do mine (PS. at least around here 303 ammo is available and priced right).

Attached Images

	Sears 1962 rifles.jpg (79.8 KB, 39 views)
	303 British -1.jpg (222.2 KB, 40 views)
	303 British -4.jpg (217.3 KB, 36 views)
	303 British -5.jpg (108.9 KB, 37 views)
	303 British -6.jpg (54.3 KB, 33 views)

__________________
Charlie B
SWCA#3083, SWHF#570

As you are presumably aware, you have a No.1 MK III sporter, not a No. 4. Actually, a prettier sporter.

Nice looking rifle.

Does VA require .30 caliber or more for deer?! That means that you could hunt with a 7.62X39 and not a .270 or 7mm. ???!!!

Good Lord, you could use a puny .30 Carbine!

Hello Texas Star;

I haven't hunted in years. I enjoy the venison I do receive from many friends who do hunt Virginia during Bow, Muzzleloader, and Shotgun/Rifle season. These days the State has all sorts of very confusing rules and regulation, such as: (2019-2020 Firearms regulation and ordnances)...paraphrasing and emphasis mine:

Ordnance 24: Unlawful to hunt with rifles OVER 22 cal. except groundhogs from March 1 to August 31.

Ordnance 28: No cal LARGER than 22 during deer season

Ordnance 60: It shall be LAWFUL to hunt deer and bear from a tree stand elevated 10 feet from the ground, or a 10 foot radius from a fixed point while ground hunting, with a .23 or LARGER caliber.

The above are only 3 taken out of the pages and pages which are published and on top of those there may be (probably are) numerous additional local laws and rules. Most of my friends belong to "private hunt clubs" that have permanently leased or own, several hundred acre properties.

I believe that private property is exempt from some of the rulings, as I know of nursery owners, small farmers around here can and do take crop eating deer anytime, with any caliber, but they have special permits entitling them to do so.

I have lived in States where rules were quite different but that was years ago.....I remember Ohio in the 80's where 30 cal & up was the "rule" where I lived, BUT....the catch was "straight wall cartridges only"....Anybody who had a 30-40 Krag was OK!

West of the Blue Ridge here in Virginia I had a friend who hunted with Win Model 94 in 30-30 but that was also years ago.

PS. Yep...……...I know now what my SMLE is but I sure didn't know back then. All I knew was that the GR over the crown, stood for George Rex.....aka "King George"

__________________
Charlie B
SWCA#3083, SWHF#570

Yes, King George V. Your rifle was made by BSA, a famous contractor that also made SMLE rifles commercially as well as nice Mauser and other sporting rifles.
I had a .30-06 built on their own Mauser-like action in the 1980's. I didn't have their BESA recoil reducing cuts near the muzzle and did kick. But was very reliable and accurate.

Charlie, that's a good-looking SMLE. Looks like a lot of work was done to it. Is that the original barrel, refinished?

Hello GeneL;

As far as I know the barrel is original, cut down, very professionally recrowned and a nice ramp front sight added. There are a ton of stampings on both sides of the barrel (see poor quality pics) and numbers, fonts, etc. match the receiver.

The finish is something else, even after sessions in the wet woods and rain, regular clean and oil before putting away and I've never spotted any rust forming whatsoever.

It appears like a bright Parkerizing of some sort. Very durable.

The entire rifle is just the way it came from Sears Roebuck (by train no less) to the small farming town I turned 15 in. Mom had to pick it up and we only had one car which was with pop the day it came in. Also it came in a flimsy pasteboard box which fell apart in the very small Sears catalog counter, so Mom really was "mildly "amused" to say the least.....walking 6 blocks to our house with that rifle slung over her shoulder!

I am always amazed by the members and posters on this Forum. I know it is all about Smith & Wesson, but to so many others that enjoy the same things as I do is just a daily treat.

Keep on enjoying your milsurps...be they original, combat scarred, rebuilt, whacked on...…….they ALL have some story to tell, and I love it when people tell them.

Attached Images

	303 British -8.jpg (126.8 KB, 20 views)
	303 British-9.jpg (112.9 KB, 23 views)
	Enfield 3.jpg (57.7 KB, 21 views)
	Enfield 4.jpg (50.8 KB, 19 views)

__________________
Charlie B
SWCA#3083, SWHF#570

I have dad’s deer-getter, much like the OP’s. Dad used a 1943 Lithgow. Bought from K-Mart or Gibson’s or some place like that. His dad used to buy them by the crate, and give them away as gifts. Dad shot a lot of deer with this gun.

Dad’s was sportered by an old-time smith. Really, the only thing done was to cut down the stock and sand off the markings on the wood. The wood is reddish like old Guns from back in the day. Dad asked me not to replace the wood because the smith literally bled on it when he broke his bottle of wood stain on it. Odd, but I’ll honor the request.

Last night, I was fooling around with mine, practicing reloading, and found it won't eject loaded rounds. It will eject empties fine. Went to the web, got an immediate answer...my ejector screw is missing. Fortunately Sarco has them for $3. Ordered one last night.

The ruination of a fine fightsman’s bolt gun.

How many military veterans have been butchered by Bubba’s Dremel or the rusty hacksaw?

When or if our local club gets another outdoor range open I plan to complete the "ruination" of a few more "fightsman's" bolt rifles. I want a bolt action in .30-40 Krag with the chamber end of it's rifling cut to my ideal for cast bullets. Also I want a .35 caliber rifle chambered for belted magnum case with the capacity of a .35 .30-06 combined with a very long neck to cover up all the grease grooves in a 320 grain bullet. It also needs my ideal lead. The big factories are never going to mass produce either of those.

Sporterizing retired "fightsman's" bolt rifles is not all about getting a less expensive hunting rifle. We can have rifles built to our unusual tastes. Also some of us prefer the feel and function of our favorite old action. My favorite happens to be the US 1917 or for rimmed or belted magnum cases the British Pattern 14 it was derived from.

They made something like 17 million Lee Enfields, so they're not like Patterson Colts and rare. While they have some collector interest today, they didn't always. The people I know of who cut them did so when there were a lot of LE around and they didn't have much money and used them hunting guns. If I or those guys had prescience, we would have picked primo examples and stored them away unaltered and made money on them.

I used to hunt on my Uncles dairy farm back in '67 when I got out of the navy. Most of the local hunters almost to a man carried military Surplus pr sporterized ones. I had a 1949 M70 in 30-06. It looked like a military rifle show and tell. Didn't get a deer that week but could always count on my aunt having a fresh pot of coffee on the stove. In later years I used a sporterized jungle carbine and a Ruger 77 in 308. And in the summer would go yo my uncles place and shoot ground hogs. My uncle who never hunter bought a stevens 340 in 222 rem and made a boot out of leather so he could attach it to his tractor.Frank

Frank--The Savage was a fav of mine when a kid. Liked the looks, and cost was low enough that i could dream of having one. Finally got a pre-68 (no SN) in 30-30 w/Dockendorf sight. Your uncle's in .222 would be a great gun to play with--tho I fear years on the tractor would leave their marks!

The 5-round mag on mine isn't cut down; it's a Santa Fe magazine, which were made in Japan. I had to bend the lips very slightly to get it to feed the last round instead of poking up. Took time and trial and error to get it right. The LE needs a firm stroke to get it to feed from the mag, no gentle loading.

Someone changed from a "fightsman" to a "huntsman."