ATI Scope base for a No4 mk2. Any good? Other options?

There are several after market mounts available if you take the time to use your search engine. One thing about any of them though is that you NEED a cheek rest if you have a stock that doesn't include a riser.

The SKB mount is also very good and once tightened is very solid.

I have made lots of angle iron mounts for my own use and for others. They work very well. Weaver makes a flat Picatinny style mount to fit onto it cheaper than I can make one. There are other mounts out there to put onto the flat top as well. They all suffer from the same malady. Way to high for proper cheek weld. Mind you, some folks seem to like that.
 
Everyone was right! And hey, does this mean my rifle is super rare and therefore insanely valuable now? LOL

Seems like this thing is a real mutt. From doing a bit of research MK1* were supposedly longbranch enfields but this one has the number 1 on the wrist indicating it was made at the Maltby plant. And it has the milled micrometer sight.
 
Last edited:
mikeystew said:
Everyone was right! And hey, does this mean my rifle is super rare and therefore insanely valuable now? LOL

Seems like this thing is a real mutt. From doing a bit of research MK1* were supposedly longbranch enfields but this one has the number 1 on the wrist indicating it was made at the Maltby plant. And it has the milled micrometer sight.
Click to expand...

ha: Only if it is a great pocket power for bear defense, and or can shoot into outer space. If Smellie taught me anything through all of his threads, it would be that there are almost no hard and fast rules where the Lee Enfield is concerned. (I am however highly suspect anyone aside from factory touched your rifle with an electropencil).
The milled sight is earlier and sought after (because they are well done).
The aspect that No4Mk1* rifles are all Longbranch rifles is a claim I can't help you with, everytime I believe I have my head around what Longbranch was producing during the war, something else pops up. I've learned to reserve comment due to this fact.
The 1 million internets question is how does it shoot? Do you reload and cast?
 
plinker 777 said:
ha: Only if it is a great pocket power for bear defense, and or can shoot into outer space. If Smellie taught me anything through all of his threads, it would be that there are almost no hard and fast rules where the Lee Enfield is concerned. (I am however highly suspect anyone aside from factory touched your rifle with an electropencil).
The milled sight is earlier and sought after (because they are well done).
The aspect that No4Mk1* rifles are all Longbranch rifles is a claim I can't help you with, everytime I believe I have my head around what Longbranch was producing during the war, something else pops up. I've learned to reserve comment due to this fact.
The 1 million internets question is how does it shoot? Do you reload and cast?
Click to expand...

I used to reload and cast quite a bit. But never had time for it and went through a phase of not shooting much. Sold all my gear, but I plan to get back into reloading again. Part of why I stopped though was because I couldn't find .303 bullets reliably. I only made cast for my 444.

As for how it shoots, amazingly. Even with the micrometer sight I was able to keep groups between 1-1.5" at 100m with hand loads using 125 grain Sierra game king (light bullets I know, but I couldn't argue with the accuracy I got from them. 180 grain did almost as well but not quite) over R15. Don't recall the charge I used though, 43 grains pops into my head but I can't be sure.
I also bedded the stock either side of the wrist and under the Knox form and put a 7 pound pressure bed under the barrel at the tip of the forestock. It seriously shoots the lights out. Sort of the reason I want to try scoping it.
 
plinker 777 said:
ha: Only if it is a great pocket power for bear defense, and or can shoot into outer space. If Smellie taught me anything through all of his threads, it would be that there are almost no hard and fast rules where the Lee Enfield is concerned. (I am however highly suspect anyone aside from factory touched your rifle with an electropencil).
The milled sight is earlier and sought after (because they are well done).
The aspect that No4Mk1* rifles are all Longbranch rifles is a claim I can't help you with, everytime I believe I have my head around what Longbranch was producing during the war, something else pops up. I've learned to reserve comment due to this fact.
The 1 million internets question is how does it shoot? Do you reload and cast?
Click to expand...

I've heard it that Longbranch came up with the variation indicated by the * but Savage also adopted it. British factories never did so they only produced Mk.1 (until Mk.2 was introduced and only ROF Faz made those until the design and machinery was sold to POF.)
 
TheTooner said:
I've heard it that Longbranch came up with the variation indicated by the * but Savage also adopted it. British factories never did so they only produced Mk.1 (until Mk.2 was introduced and only ROF Faz made those until the design and machinery was sold to POF.)
Click to expand...

Which would make my No4 Mk1* Maltby pretty unusual. Even more so considering it's also marked No4 Mk1/2(F)
 
Lol... I feel sorry for anyone who tries to fully understand Enfield rifles. These things are a riddle wrapped In a mystery inside an enigma.

Ah well... It looks pretty and It shoots. That's all I care about.
 
I think I have forgotten more then I remember about enfields.

I have Skennerton's "The Lee Enfield" and "The Lee Enfield Story" and have read them both cover to cover. I have a few other sources as well and have owned a fair number of rifles over the years.

The basic rules on production fit 95% of rifles out there then there are the 5% that are oddballs due to various reasons. This one is odd and I suspect it was mis-marked.
 
mikeystew said:
I used to reload and cast quite a bit. But never had time for it and went through a phase of not shooting much. Sold all my gear, but I plan to get back into reloading again. Part of why I stopped though was because I couldn't find .303 bullets reliably. I only made cast for my 444.

As for how it shoots, amazingly. Even with the micrometer sight I was able to keep groups between 1-1.5" at 100m with hand loads using 125 grain Sierra game king (light bullets I know, but I couldn't argue with the accuracy I got from them. 180 grain did almost as well but not quite) over R15. Don't recall the charge I used though, 43 grains pops into my head but I can't be sure.
I also bedded the stock either side of the wrist and under the Knox form and put a 7 pound pressure bed under the barrel at the tip of the forestock. It seriously shoots the lights out. Sort of the reason I want to try scoping it.
Click to expand...

I don't buy into any rarity or misprinted argument whatsoever-bunk I say-However, that rifle seems to shoot therefore never sell it! :p
 
plinker 777 said:
I don't buy into any rarity or misprinted argument whatsoever-bunk I say-However, that rifle seems to shoot therefore never sell it! :p
Click to expand...

Well... I don't know enough about enfields to discount anything but honestly I don't really care either way. This rifle was gifted to me by an old man I highly respect who mentored me in my profession when I was just getting my foot in the door. I'll never sell it. Too much sentimental value.
 
mikeystew said:
Which would make my No4 Mk1* Maltby pretty unusual. Even more so considering it's also marked No4 Mk1/2(F)
Click to expand...

Yes. I don't think that's the first Maltby I've heard of that contradicts the N.American production only for No.4Mk.1*. But is your Maltby correctly marked? I.e. does it have the No.4Mk.1 bolt release lever between the rear sight and the charger bridge, or does it have the No.4Mk.1* bolt release gap?
 
TheTooner said:
Yes. I don't think that's the first Maltby I've heard of that contradicts the N.American production only for No.4Mk.1*. But is your Maltby correctly marked? I.e. does it have the No.4Mk.1 bolt release lever between the rear sight and the charger bridge, or does it have the No.4Mk.1* bolt release gap?
Click to expand...

Interesting. It has the bolt release between the sight and charger bridge. So it's likely incorrectly marked as a No4 Mk1* when it was actually just a No4 Mk1. Strange thing to mark wrong...
 
I'm pretty sure I remember seeing this once before on this forum. We were wondering why a Brit rifle had a star marked.

The amazing thing would be if the rail has the * cut, which apparently this one does not.
 
It would be even more curious if it had the cut as a Mk.1* and the Mk.1's release mechanism. And also a conundrum: If there was such a rifle, would you call it a No.4Mk.1 that was marked incorrectly, or a No.4Mk.1* that was built wrong?
 
TheTooner said:
It would be even more curious if it had the cut as a Mk.1* and the Mk.1's release mechanism. And also a conundrum: If there was such a rifle, would you call it a No.4Mk.1 that was marked incorrectly, or a No.4Mk.1* that was built wrong?
Click to expand...

...neither. You ask how's it shoot, and if the answer is positive, you call it 'shooter'.:)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom