Sht 22 MK II Enfield

M

MarkdevCanada

CGN Regular
Rating - 100%
48   0   0
Location
Wet-Coast
Hello all:

I just picked up this Sht 22 Mk II Enfield from epps.
Sht22MKII.JPG

This is a Long lee that was converted 22LR and shortened to mimic a SMLE for training purposes. It’s my 5th or 6th 22cal Enfield. So far I am quite happy with it, however I have a couple of questions.

Nose1.JPG

1st This is missing nose sling swivel. Unfortunately I’m not sure what the right one looks like and where to get one. Does anyone have an idea?


IMG_8194.JPG

2) The barrel appears to be bit thinner than my long lees. I presume this is correct? In any case there is slight gap between the band and the barrel. A guy on ebay, who I’ve been in contact with, has what he says is the correct band. His band appear to be long lee band which has had a thin spacer (silver soldered?) on the inside and has a “22” stamped on the outside. While this sounds reasonable to me, I’ve never seen the right bands and am not sure, does this sound correct?

Receiver3.JPG

3) It may appear to be the result of a poor photo, but the magazine really is gold in colour. I think its brass. I have never heard of a brass Enfield magazine. Is this some sort of far east thing? I’d really like one of those Hithcock-Parker (sp?) magazines, but I know they are rarer than hens teeth and cost more than I can afford, so for now I’ll just dream about finding one. 

4) My research indicates that all or most (depending who I listen to) of the cutoffs were removed. As I have a couple of Long Lee cut offs and screws, I’m thinking of reinstalling one. Does that seam reasonable?

5) There is no dust cover on this rifle, nor is there one in Ian Stennerton’s book, however a google search does show one rifle with a dust cover. Should this rifle have one? Even if not, I have a couple of long lees and a carbine that are missing them one so I am looking for some. Anyone have an idea on where to get a couple?

5) This rifle does not have a safely and the cocking piece looks to be from a #4. Unfortunately I can’t tell from the photo’s in Ian’s book or from a google search if the it should have a long lee cocking/safely or a SMLE type. Does anyone know?

Thanks for the feedback every one, cheers
Mark Devries
 
Last edited:
Why would want to install the cutoff? I would guess there is no spring or follower in the magazine, so the fired cases drop into it, This keeps the range tidy:D
 
John:

You are correct the mag is empty, I just have the parts and they are not beeing used so....

Also the narrow barrel makes me think the stock was made for this rifle and not adapted from a long lee or there would be a gap between the barrel and the forestock. Anyway, IF this forestock was made for this rifle, then why make the forestock which fits a cutoff unless it was supposed to be there?

Cheers
Mark
 
Purpose made as it is. You will find a "N" on the left side of the butt socket. No cut off, No mag follower and No volley sights as well as NO stacking swivel is correct.
 
Uses standard vel 22 LR.
The fore end is a converted Long Rifle with a liner to make up the difference of the lighter SMLE dimensioned 22 barrel.
 
Some observations on these neat little naval trainer rifles. They were rebuild conversions using common parts found in the bins. There does seem to be some variations in how they are equipped. But who knows after many years in service and many more in private hands what has been fitted or removed. You yourself mentioned the fitting of a cut off and a dust cover

IMG_4065.jpg
IMG_4064.jpg

There is probably a sealed pattern in the pattern room, this would be definitive way to see how they should be kitted out.

IMG_4061.jpg


The dust cover was removed and a Sht LE cocking piece, two stage sear and trigger were fitted. Some have the flat sided cocking piece, some have the knob style.

Many have a second pattern Sht LE trigger guard that has the sling mounting lugs just behind the front guard screw, used for mounting a sling swivel for a hasty target sling. The nosecap was used for mounting a piling hook for stacking rifles in a tripod, not a sling swivel. The front swivel mounted to the lower barrel band.

The mag was just the long Lee body for use as an empty shell catcher, some have Sht LE. #4 mag body, like yours. No cut off was fitted.

IMG_4067.jpg

The barrel band on ebay with the shim brazed in, is for the Sht 22 Mk.I, a rifle similar but built on a Mk.I Lee Metford, the band is different. It will fit with encouragement, but it aint correct, you won't be able to mount a sling swivel on that band. Every Mk.II I have seen has had just a regular long Lee band fitted with clearance over the barrel. The nosecap seems to hold everything down in place. The nosecap was special to this rifle also, it was a purpose made unit, not a regular one modified.

IMG_3628.jpg


The barrel is Sht LE profile with a .22 liner, the woodwork was modified by hogging out the barrel channel and fitting a wooden liner suited for the smaller diam barrel. Look for a seam both sides running along the edge the entire length of the barrel channel, visible directly from above the barrel, and from the front.

Although built around 1912, many have been rebarreled with a barrel dated in the late thirties, early fourties.

Some retain their volley sights. Some have their front pointer removed and the rear peep arm bobbed off leaving it to act as a spacer, the dog bone spring being retained. Some have the spring and screws completely removed.

Hardest part to find for restoration is the rear handguard with Mk.I Sht LE style rear sight protector built in. With that and the bunny ears on the front ramp, the sight picture is pretty much the same as that on a Sht LE, with the eye lining up the sights between the sight protectors.

Mine needed a bit of TLC and still needs a handguard to finish it off. So because variations are all over the place, I am not worried about originality. Whatever works for you.

They can be very accurate and are a hoot to shoot. I can plink all day for twenty bucks.
 
Last edited:
wheaty said:
Purpose made as it is. You will find a "N" on the left side of the butt socket. No cut off, No mag follower and No volley sights as well as NO stacking swivel is correct.
Click to expand...
This one does have the "N" on it. What does that mean?
This one has both front and rear volley sights. So other than this you mean this is more or less correct as is?
How about the #4 cocking peice?. This is for sure different from the photo in Ian's book.


wheaty said:
The brass mag is certainly not standard and in fact you will probably find it is just plated. Try a magnet on it.
Click to expand...
I'll give it a try.

Doug2500 said:
I have always wondered whether these shoot conventional .22 long rifle ammo, is do you have to find specialty ammo for it?
Click to expand...

I've shot 22LR in this rifle and my IV*, with no problerm. One of the reasons I like the 22cal enfields is that they are cheap to shoot. I can shoot all day for less than $20.


green said:
Uses standard vel 22 LR.
The fore end is a converted Long Rifle with a liner to make up the difference of the lighter SMLE dimensioned 22 barrel.
Click to expand...
I presume you mean the barrel is lined or "parkered" as I think its called.. I don't think so , the barrel is for sure thinner than my long lees barrel, but I'll double check.


In Ian's skennerton's book there is a rear handguard. Should this one have it?
Sorry so many question.

Mark.
 
N for Navy

The N marked on the left butt socket denotes it as a Naval rifle, these were navy trainers, not army.

The barrel has a .22 liner. 'Parkerifled' is the word that you are looking for. Later barrels were made one piece with no liner.

The flat sided cocking piece first appeared around 1916 on the Sht. LE Mk.III* as a manufacturing concession, easier to make. So I guess for a 1912 built rifle, a knob style would be correct.
 
Thanks guys. Lots of good information here. I'll grab a knob style cocking peice from my parts bin and replace the flat sided one.

re the brass mag. I tried the magnet as suggested and also as suggest it was just plated steel.

Long and short of all this information is that the rifle appears to be more correct/complete that I had thought. I this means I got an even better deal than I thought. :)

thanks everyone, cheers
Mark
 
englishman_ca said:
The N marked on the left butt socket denotes it as a Naval rifle, these were navy trainers, not army.

......
Click to expand...

Correct for the "N" is for navy, only a 1,000 where converted for the namvy. Also supposed to be Long lee, registered as such, but I am not convinced that either are a Long lee conversions, as I think the back sights are SMLE sights. Mine is missing the wood behind the sights, but otherwise the same.

Mine is a .22 short, not sure on using LR in them.

Don't change any thing until 100% sure, a rare rifle.

Lee22.jpg
 
I presume you mean the barrel is lined or "parkered" as I think its called.. I don't think so , the barrel is for sure thinner than my long lees barrel, but I'll double ch

No the fore end stock had a wood liner fitted during conversion to make up the difference in the barrel diameters.
Mark.[/QUOTE]
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom