top- Enfield Mk.1 #4 Long Branch 1945/52 #86L8596

middle- Enfield Mk.1 #3 #3C38 Viking number on Bayonet Stud #1423

bottom- Enfield Mk.1 #5 0/47 #2997

Glad to see someone who appreciates the worlds best bolt action battle rifels! Get yourself a Ishy in 7.62 Nato if you dont already have one!

__________________
Stay safe people!

Great rifles! I used to have a Lithgow, but sold it. I kept this one though.

SMLE #1, MkIII*, 1917, SSA (Standard Sporting Arms) with Wilkinson bayonet (have scabbard for it).

The bore is in great shape, action is tight. It is an excellent shooter w/ .311" Sierra jacketed 150s and about any reasonable powder charge.
1

__________________
" I said, good DAY! "

Very nice SMLE's. I have a 1914 BSA. Great rifle. Have two Ishapore .308 and would love to add a Longbranch and Savage to the collection.

I think you may mean Birmingham Small Arms. Never heard of Standard. The "B" may be worn on your rifle.

T-Star

Great looking rifles, I have always liked the SMLE. It must have worked well because the Brits used it so long, I like the bolt feel and the handling of them.

__________________
Stan

Very nice pictures. These are great rifles and still seem to be underappreciated in the market place.

You don't have a No. 3 (Pattern 1914), so that's one to keep an eye out for. I will try to get a picture of my Winchester built P14 ... so watch this space!

{...insert P14 picture here...}

__________________
You're shy a few manners.

I have but one Enfield. It's a "U.S. Property" - marked No. 4 Mk I* made in 1942 by Savage/Stevens in Chicopee, Mass, complete with matching Savage-marked spike bayonet. I also have an original unopened GI box of .303 ammo made by Winchester, which I am told was produced specifically for the U.S.-made Enfields. This rifle was lend-leased to the British during WWII. Interestingly, it has the micrometer-adjustable rear sight. I don't know if that could be original to the rifle, or if it was put on in later years. Perhaps someone here more up on their Enfields than I could shed some light on this?

__________________
- Cogito, ergo armatus sum -

And the "Lee" in Lee-Enfield was an American (OK, Scottish Born) James Paris Lee.

My only Enfield, a No.4 Mk2 in .303. Its in like new condition and an extremely accurate shooter.

Charlie

Attached Images

	En1.jpg (20.7 KB, 402 views)
	En2.jpg (15.3 KB, 737 views)
	En3.jpg (13.3 KB, 633 views)

Wow Charlie. Is that in great Shape!

Nice guns! Thank you for the pictures. I found a mint Ishapore for $240 and went to my wallet to whip out the cash and found no cash but a note from my wife = "You don't need to be buying any guns - have fun at the show!". Needless to say, he sold the Ishapore later that day.

Perhaps the most fitting tribute line for this old war horse actually was uttered unintentionally in the movie "Young Guns"?
Where, when one of the characters referring to a grizzled foe the gang just encountered said, "he's killed more people than small pox"!
That about describes the British SMLE, doesn't it?

At long last ... here is the Pattern of 1914 Picture I promised:


Made by Winchester, in .303 British. The Brits were going to replace the SMLE with this Mauser-based design, but WWI broke out and the change-over never did occur. It's hard to take good handgun pictures, but really hard to take good rifle pictures!

__________________
You're shy a few manners.

Savage produced both the Mark I sight (what you have, the micrometer type) and the Mark II sight (the much simpler "L" or flip sight).

Savage went to the Mk II sight, along with other simplifications, some time in 1942 to speed up production. Rifles with these production shortcuts were marked as yours is, "No. 4 Mk I*". So it would be logical to conclude that yours left the factory with the flip sight and at some later time was upgraded.

Of course, you never know. Does your sight have a squared-off looking "S" stamped on it (possibly inside a square)? If so, it is was made by Savage. That still doesn't prove anything, as Savage supplied England with spare parts. But I'm sure that in war-time production, almost anything is possible, so maybe some spare Mk I sights went on Mk I* rifles (?)

__________________
You're shy a few manners.

Nope, the SSA stamp is very well marked. Receiver bluing is still >90%. However, I did incorrectly identify it ... it should have been Standard Small Arms. It's obviously easy to confuse the 2 names! SSA and NRF rifles are not particularly common as SMLEs go.

From different sources:
"SSA" and "NRF" markings are sometimes encountered on First World War-dated SMLE Mk III* rifles. These stand for "Standard Small Arms" and "National Rifle Factory", respectively. Rifles so marked were assembled using parts from various other manufacturers, as part of a scheme during the First World War to boost rifle production in the UK. Only SMLE Mk III* rifles are known to have been assembled under this program. These rifles became known as "peddled scheme" rifles as neither SSA nor NRF actually produced rifles from start to finish but rather assembled them from delivered parts. Standard Small Arms (SSA) made parts and rifles from 1916 thru mid 1918 and is reported to have either 1) closed due to bankruptcy, or 2) was taken over by the government because of their inability to produce complete rifles and became the NRF No2. Total production of receivers was ~200,000.

Attached Images

	HPIM4459.jpg (87.0 KB, 128 views)
	HPIM4449.jpg (81.5 KB, 128 views)

__________________
" I said, good DAY! "

VAdoublegunner that's a really sharp SMELLY!!

Here's a couple pics of my son shooting our Lithgow trainer SMLE in 22 caliber.






Still looking for a nice Mk III 303.

For Paladin,
Sounds very nice what you have. If the micrometer sight is adjustable in half minute increments of angle for both elevation as well as windage then it is likely a Parker-Hale target sight and should be marked as such. There should be about 5 or 6 different diameter apertures available on a wheel you can turn. My Dad bought me a No4 with this sight on at Fulton's of Bisley,in England when I was 14 years old.I'm 70 now,but competed with that rifle at Bisley in the early 60's with military FMJacket ammunition but only up to 600 yards. The rifle with that sight will group to 5" at 200 yards if I do my job. The aiming mark at that range was 12'' with a 5'' bull inside. The aiming marks at all ranges were half-moon blacks calculated to cover the exact width of the blade type foresight. There were flags at about 50 yard intervals all down the ranges so you could instantly adjust the windage without comeing off aim in order to squeeze a shot off before the wind changed again. I was taught to shoot by an old military gentleman at Bisley who was in his eighties using his No.III S.M.L.E. I was 14 years old. This thread has brought back many happy memories to an old Brit. now living in Canada.Thank you.

I had a Savaga-made No. 4 and it had the micrometer sight. Same style as on my No. 4 MK 2, made in 1952.

The asterisk doesn't designate the type of sight, but the method of bolt removal. This is simplified on the MK I *, which was made in Canada and the USA.

T-Star

VAdoublegunner-

What is marked on the steel socket when you lift the bolt handle of your rifle? Is SSA also there? It should have the maker's mark and year, plus info about George V being king then. GR= George Regina.

T-Star

Hello T-Star,
You can see a little of the socket marking in the bayonet photo. It has the Crown w/ G.R., 1917, Sht LE, and III*. I can take a photo to post if you'd like.The SSA's only have the maker marked on the left rear of the receiver rather than the wrist, at least the few I've seen and from what I was able to find out on several websites/forums. An Enfield inspection stamp is above SSA, numbers all match. I remember walking into the shop that day about 20 years ago, the guy said "I'll bet you've never seen an SMLE like this." -- "Nope ... get the paper."

__________________
" I said, good DAY! "

Here's hoping Paladin is still reading this thread and will respond with the marks (if any) he sees on his rear sight. If there is a mark, but it's not Savage's mark, that should be pretty good evidence that the sight was replaced after the rifle left the factory.

__________________
You're shy a few manners.

Thanks. This seems to be an interesting rifle!

T-Star

Anyone interested in Lee Enfields needs to get "The Lee Enfield Story" by Ian Skennerton.

Here's a picture of my mint No4 MkII I bought that about 15 years ago. It is one of the "Irish" No4's that was still wrapped in cosmoline and cheesecloth when I got it.

__________________
- Change it back -

This is the first milsurp that I purchased. I have since (18 years ago) purchased additional Enfields but, the first is special.

I am not that good of a photographer and so, to better show the detail in the wood grain, I am posting this one in two frames.

It is a matching, #4 Mk2 (F) from 1952. It cost me $119 in 1991. Those were the days!

It's always nice to see posts from other Enfield fans.

__________________
" I don't recall, senator."

Just for informational purposes, you have your sling on backwards in the picture. I didn't know these slings had a front and back myself until a retired British soldier once told me the shiney brass tabs on the end face towards the rifle, not away from it.

__________________
- Change it back -

Here is my contribution to the Enfield 303's

Top to Bottom

1944 No.5 Shirley
1943 No.4 ROF Fazakerely
1942 No.4 Savage
1942 No.1 MkIII* Lithgow
1915 No.1 MkIII*

Thanks for the heads-up.

__________________
" I don't recall, senator."

I have one made in England. Does any one know how I can tell if it was made by BSA? I have 2 martini rifles, one a 12/15 in .22. The other is a .310. They both shoot great. Larry

Larry:

For No 4 or No 5 rifles, look for one of these codes:
M47A ... B.S.A. Small Heath
M47B ... B.S.A. Redditch
M47C ... B.S.A. Shirley
85B ...... B.S.A. Shirley

If it's one of the earlier rifles, it should have some variation of "B.S.A." stamped on it.

{Taken from Skennerton, The British Service Lee}

If the above doesn't answer your question, you could reply with what markings it does have, and someone here can probably help with their meanings.

__________________
You're shy a few manners.

Thanks jack, I'll check for those codes on the gun. Where are they normally located? It was made in 1942 and has a "B" above the date. The ser no is Ko230. Ckeck back tomorrow nite, Larry.

Look on the receiver and the butt socket (attaches the butt to the rest of the rifle, near the receiver).

__________________
You're shy a few manners.

Jack Flash -

I looked at the micrometer rear sight on my Savage Enfield. At the very top, there are two marks, an "F" and the broad arrow stamp. Again, I'm no expert on "smelly" marks; perhaps someone such as you can shed some light on this.

Here's a pic:

__________________
- Cogito, ergo armatus sum -

The Broad Arrow denotes UK government ownership, have to check out Skennerton to
learn what the "F" stands for. One thing to remember with WWII Lee Enfields is that many of the small parts were made by subcontractors and many of those rifles are "mixmasters",
Royal Army Ordnance-like US Army Ordnance-was more concerned with getting a rifle back in action than keeping it "correct">

The "F" is the manufacturer's code for the Royal Ordnance Factory at Fazakerley (near Liverpool). According to Charles Stratton, Fazakerley produced No 4s from 1941 to 1956.

This evidence indicates that your rifle left the Savage factory with an "L" type sight which was upgraded at some later date. My best guess anyways.

__________________
You're shy a few manners.

Jack, none of the codes you gave were on the gun for BSA. The butt socket only had the ser no and #4 mkt 1. Is the butt stock the round piece of metal at the rear of the reciever? The muzzle end of the bbl has TOPIS?ERW and 2-222". (The ? looked like a P.) On the metal at the front of the handguard There is CEW and in the same area MB13. Thanks for your help. I used a magnifying glass to look at it. The ser no on the metal band was very hard to see and the #4mk1 looked like an engraving pen was used. Thanks, Larry SWCA1761

.303 2.222”
18.5 TONS PER □ “

The British stamped the above markings on rifles to be sold for surplus. The first line is simply a description of the service cartridge – caliber .303, case length 2.222”. The second line is the proof pressure. (The last two symbols being read "square inch").

I wonder if this is at least part of what you’re seeing on the muzzle. It may be that these markings have been obscured or partially obliterated or overstamped by the US importer (?).

Some smaller parts were subcontracted out to other manufacturers. Per Skennerton, CEW is for C.E. Welstead and MB is Metal Box Company. Both companies were subcontractors who made No. 4 & 5 components.

Could you list your serial number? XX out the last couple of digits if you like. Stratton lists a partial table of serial numbers assigned to the different makers, so that may be a way to determine if it was BSA or some other.

The buttsocket is the round socket at the rear of the receiver as you describe. You have to lift the bolt handle to read the markings on the right side of the buttsocket.

__________________
You're shy a few manners.

Jack Flash -

Thanks for the info in the micrometer sight. It appears it was not original with the Savage rifle. I appreciate your knowledge on this.

John

__________________
- Cogito, ergo armatus sum -

I had a Savage, and I believe that it had an S stamp. I think Savage did make some micrometer sights.

T-Star

Jack, the ser is K0230. Just ran down and took the bolt out. I can't make out the markings on some flat areas. Under the bolt handle is nothing. Larry

Here's my 1942 Longbranch.New Zealand marked.

__________________
U.S. Army Viet Nam Vet '68-69'

Larry,
I went through every book I have and could not find the necessary serial number information. Here’s what I did find –

The closest serial number to yours that Stratton lists is
“Single Letter” then four digit number in the range 1000 to 9999
Obviously, your s/n starts with a single letter, but is outside this numeric range. BTW, Stratton gives this range for early rifles made at BSA’s Shirley factory.

The only other thing I can say is that Skennerton talks at great length about the development of the No 4, which was originally designated the No. 1 Mark VI. They built at least 1,000 of these before they went to the No. 4 Mark I designation. In the 1930s, they built several thousand of early No 4s for field testing as well as for trying out modern manufacturing techniques.

It’s interesting to note that the British Army fought the first two+ years of WWII armed with the No. 1 rifle. Per Skennerton, “The first wartime No. 4 rifles did not become available until mid-1941.” … “It was not until later the following year that the No. 4 was issued to the front line troops, who were still armed with the No. 1 rifle.”

Here are some more Skennerton quotes that may be helpful:
“With the shortage of rifles at the outbreak of World War 2, heightened by the losses at Dunkirk, some No. 1 Mark VI and No. 4 Mark I trials unfinished receivers were built up into completed rifles. Usually, there are none of the original style trials markings, and the finish is not of the early quality.
…
Most of the No. 1 Mark VI and trials type No. 4 Mark I rifles were later rebuilt as No. 4 service patterns or converted to sniper rifles during the early years of World War 2. About 2,000 were rebuilt as No. 4 rifles (including most of the No. 1 Mark VI) and 1,400 as No. 4 snipers. A number of the unfinished, early receivers were completed at Enfield, as previously mentioned, and built up into No. 4 Mark I rifles, readily distinguished by a rougher finish.”

Since yours seems to lack markings, along with its fairly low serial number, I wonder if it was one of these prototype or trials rifles that was built up into a No. 4 Mk I. It is interesting that yours is not marked with a “star”, ie, it has the original bolt release like one of these would have. Does it have the micrometer rear sight? Does it seem to have a “rougher finish”?

I suppose that it is also possible that this just could be an Afghan copy of a No. 4, as there is quite a thriving cottage gun manufacturing industry there. I would expect one of those to have a closer imitation of the original markings, however.

You may be able to get some more information asking for help on these forums:
http://www.jouster.com/forumdisplay.php?f=72
http://www.jouster.com/forumdisplay.php?f=82

Hope that this has been of some use.

__________________
You're shy a few manners.

Thanks Jack, you've been so helpfull. Gotta love this forum. Larry

What is that screw for. I have a #4 and its there but appears to do nothing!

TIA, Dave

__________________
14 S&W Revs none with locks!

Take it out and try ejecting a cartridge!

__________________
"I also cook."

The screw on the left side of the receiver is the "Ejector Screw". Flips out the cartridges. Simple yet effective, just like the rest of the rifle.
Ken

Quote s&wchad ''Take it out and try ejecting a cartridge!



Thanks for the quick info. I just went and checked the rifle again, that screw only protrudes a very small amount into the bolt raceway. Can hardly feel it with a fingernail pass... You would need a caliper to even get a measurement, but it seems to work real well. I just ran a few rounds through the gun all was well.

__________________
14 S&W Revs none with locks!

I tried to clean up Jack Flash's picture of his Pattern 14, because a friend has one similar to his that is marked ERA as the manufacturer. What does ERA stand for? I know of an old British ERA racing car, but I doubt tht they had the manufacturing abilities to make rifles.

Attached Images

Pattern_14.jpg (21.3 KB, 23 views)

ERA is the mark for Eddystone, which was a Remington Arms division in Pennsylvania. Winchester, Remington and the Eddystone facility were producing P-14's for the British - that's why they were able to quickly produce the US Model 1917 Rifle when we got involved in WWI.

__________________
"I also cook."