Enfield No 1s and No4s Barbarized.

[RememberTheSomme]

A thread with a nice looking No4 spoter here has got me to thinking. My Grndfather spoterized many No4s in the 1950s paying $4.00 and then reselling in his store for $10.00. He was a Carpenter and not a gunsmith. I saw a coworker 30 years or so ago shooting an No1 MkIII* sporter that was separating completely every second round and the ones stayed intact were bend just above the rim it looked like 15 degrees.

What were the rules for the condition of Milsurp enfields released to the public in regards to safety condition. Could a No1 sporter be a between the World Wars sporter?
I thought my Grand dad said alot of the No4s were unfired, packed in grease. I know the one he kept for himself was a longbranch with the bolt retaining plunger i thought said 1942. But ive seen so many poor condition No 1s what gives. Who if any was responsible for safe condition of these firearms in days long gone by?

 

[smellie]

Remember that right after the War, the Army was not disposing of its brand-new, front-line battle rifles packed in grease. These have only come onto the market in the last 20 years.

The first ones to be disposed of as surplus were precisely that: SURPLUS to military needs. This means that a lot of them were war-wearies which would not be cost-effective to FTR and would just take up badly-needed storage space which did not exist anyway. So they were dumped on the civilian market as 'surplus' and the Army washed their hands of the things. There were no 'liability suit' lawyers at that time and, if there had been, likely they would have been well and properly killed as a public service. The schools still taught Latin and everyone knew what CAVEAT EMPTOR meant.

The Army got rid of its junk, first. After that, better quality stuff became surplus as new rifles were made, then better yet as new designs entered production: FAL and C7/8.

But a lot of the rifles released right after the war were about one step away from junk, ammunition was Cordite/corrosive and nobody knew anything about military rifles, which is why the awful myths about headspace and suchlike bugaboos got started in the first place. The junk rifles sold quickly and very cheaply to a public which had not been able to afford a rifle for the previous 16 years. Only afterwards did the decent stuff start to show its heads, with the decent Lees coming onto the market only AFTER replacement by the FAL was well underway.

Hope this helps.
.
PS: your buddy REALLY needed a new bolt-head!!!!!
.

 

[purple]

Once disposed of, a rifle left military technical surveillance and control. In civvy hands the sky is the limit and various owners have had years to #### with them, swap parts, and otherwise abuse and mis-use them as they liked. The Brits re-proofed and marked their No4s prior to disposal. I do not know what the Canadian standards were on disposal, but rifles which were unservicable and beyond repair were scrapped.

For foreign militaries, who knows. The Danes and Swedes, for example, appear to have maintained good technical control of their rifles up to the time of disposal. For the mountains of various Enfields, Mausers and Garands and Springfields recovered from a wide array of 3rd world armies, it was/is a crap shoot. I've seen some mightly crappy looking pieces in use by foreign troops in various corners of the world and many of these have made their way into the surplus stream. Some vendors made the effort to grade and inspect them prior to sale, but the extent of this is unknown. Headpace checks would have been prudent, but this would have involved extra time and expense.

Over the years I have seen the full spectrum of condition and servicability ranging from junk/cracked receivers, sewer pipe barrels, and cracked/split stocks up to mint, pristine specimens in un-issued or arsenal refurbished to new condition. I can still remember seeing barrel full of the grungiest, grottiest No5 Jungle Carbines you could imagine back in 1960. Having said that I bought one in un-issued condition for $18 in 1962 and still have it. There were a lot of immaculate No4s around back then, so nobody needed to bother with the ones in beater condition. The No1 MkIIIs tended to have been "sporterized" to one extent or another.

For the MILSURP buyer nowadays, buy the rifle and not the story and things like headspace gauges and bore erosion gauges are a wise investment.

 

[RememberTheSomme]

Thanks for the info guys. My grandfather passed away in 2000 so if he had some in the grease what he thought was un-used it would be late 50s early 60s then? The early 50s was my guess. My mom worked in his store in the early 50s so i'll see if i can get any date info.

 

[bearhunter]

Lots of rifles were packed in grease for storage, that were well used but still in spec. Just because they were packed in grease, isn't an indication of being factory fresh. It is usually a darn good indication that the rifle is in VG+ condition and fit for service duty.

 

[RememberTheSomme]

Lots of rifles were packed in grease for storage, that were well used but still in spec. Just because they were packed in grease, isn't an indication of being factory fresh. It is usually a darn good indication that the rifle is in VG+ condition and fit for service duty.

Thankyou. He would have not known, i understand now, not having been a soldier.

 

[RememberTheSomme]

Remember that right after the War, the Army was not disposing of its brand-new, front-line battle rifles packed in grease. These have only come onto the market in the last 20 years.

The first ones to be disposed of as surplus were precisely that: SURPLUS to military needs. This means that a lot of them were war-wearies which would not be cost-effective to FTR and would just take up badly-needed storage space which did not exist anyway. So they were dumped on the civilian market as 'surplus' and the Army washed their hands of the things. There were no 'liability suit' lawyers at that time and, if there had been, likely they would have been well and properly killed as a public service. The schools still taught Latin and everyone knew what CAVEAT EMPTOR meant.

The Army got rid of its junk, first. After that, better quality stuff became surplus as new rifles were made, then better yet as new designs entered production: FAL and C7/8.

But a lot of the rifles released right after the war were about one step away from junk, ammunition was Cordite/corrosive and nobody knew anything about military rifles, which is why the awful myths about headspace and suchlike bugaboos got started in the first place. The junk rifles sold quickly and very cheaply to a public which had not been able to afford a rifle for the previous 16 years. Only afterwards did the decent stuff start to show its heads, with the decent Lees coming onto the market only AFTER replacement by the FAL was well underway.

Hope this helps.
.
PS: your buddy REALLY needed a new bolt-head!!!!!
.

Could a No1 be fitted the same as a No4 with longer bolt head?