Need to know the Value of this Enfield?

I must say that this thread rubbed me the wrong way last night and well it hasn't changed by this morning. Buffdog gave an assessment of the gun based on the pictures presented, he wasn't rude in any way in what he said. Then there's rude post after rude post about him needing glasses and stupid remarks like that.

I have met Buffdog on several occasions, his knowledge is staggering. He's taken the time on many occaisions to teach me a young collector about milsurps. He's also assessed my guns, helped me with load data, shooting technique and even bought me a reloading book at the last show we were at.

He's a good man, and I consider it a privilege to call him my friend. If guys like him stop posting on this forum it will be a great loss. Both him and Smellie have been collecting and shooting these guns for upwards of 50 years. I think doing something for 50 years would classify someone as an expert in my books. The funny thing is that you'll never hear Buffdog refer to himself as one and infact there's times when I may message him about something that I found or happened on the range and he listens because he is a student first and a teacher second.

I respect Buffdog and Smellie so much, I even file info they send me for both my and other people's future use. These guys are getting up there in age and I think it would be wise if some of you spent more time reading and less time making smarta** comments.

I also thought it looked like rust or finish flaking off of that gun. Might I add that I don't wear glasses, I do know how to clean a gun and I collect and buy milsurp guns exclusively. There is NO way I would pay $800-$1000 for a no4 with paint peeling off!! Sorry but that's the way the cookie crumbles, to get top dollar for a gun it needs to be in top shape.

Rant over

Tinman204
 
Well, well.......lots of speculation over motives, and off topic as usual which seems to be the case in 90% of threads on here.

I didn't want to start a ####e storm on here, next time I guess I'll just post pictures of fluffy clouds and ask what animals people see in them. lol

Thanks again for the revelant info posted here and not so much to the others who just posted for sheer entertainment value.
 
Boy, I didn't think I could raise some hackles by giving an honest opinion in answer to a question. Perhaps if people do not want honest opinions, then they should not ask questions? Based on the pictures and my training, it does look like there is a bit of rust, blemishes or otherwise that should not be there. Now if this is merely "oil" as some people contend, then perhaps the OP can simply wipe it off with a rag and give us some more, detailed, close up pictures of the area.

Now, as an "old fart", I was actually trained on the Number 4 Lee Enfield while it was still in front line service in Canada. It was also featured in an Armourers Course that I had the good fortune to be sent on. I do know of an Sergeant-Armourer Instructor who would ask questions about a rifle such as one based on the pictures of the action as presented here, and I also know of a Regimental Sergeant Major who would give a person a personal weight reduction program by chewing on his lower posterior, and who would find or invent ingenious "tasks" for that unfortunate individual to perform, if that said Sergeant Major found a personal, issued, rifle in a condition as shown in the picture.

To those Members who have made those complementary posts, thank you. Alas, at 72 I am too old to change my ways, so I will continue to give the best and, based on the pictures and facts provided at the time, my honest opinions. To those who have suggested that I need new glasses, I do have an appointment with the Optometrist next week, and I may or may not need new glasses. I think, however, that my new glasses will probably not change my opinion, so far, on this thread, and certainly they will not change my view on answers to questions. However, a good cleaning might provide us with a better view of the area in the original picture, and could illuminate a better condition

So, wipe the bloody thing off with a rag, and submit some new, more detailed pictures. That should settle the question.
.
 
Last edited:
Easy buffdog, down boy. lol

I'll take a few more pictures later. The ones I posted were when the gun was taken out of an old case that had oil impregnated into the sponge, and in turn transferred to the rifle.

Stand easy, old friend.
 
H4831 said:
There was a good wartime, full wood Lee Enfield, on a table at the recent Kamloops gun show. It originally was priced at $500, but Sunday afternoon it sold for $375.
Click to expand...

$375 seems good, especially if it was a Brit rifle and not a an LB. The last few years have seen them climb in price.
 
A few more pics, can't seem to get a decent bore shot, my photographic skills are lacking. Slight rust on barrell exterior.
IMG_5042_zps55c1abbe.jpg
IMG_5044_zps998cb0d1.jpg
IMG_5045_zpsfebe7850.jpg

IMG_5046_zps50b71f51.jpg
IMG_5049_zps18c26c92.jpg
IMG_5041_zps5e7b0c68.jpg
 
Last edited:
That looks much better. A bit of cleaning before taking photographs is the way to go if you want the best evaluation of something. We can only go by what we see in a photograph, and have to make a valuation on what we see in that particular photo. Looks like you got a good one, used a bit but not abused.
 
so no rust! and it was/is quite obvious from the first pictures, and this even for my old eyes looking through glasses!

Now guys tell me, what is all the fuzz about? Can't you take it, when I jokingly write your glasses suck?

That means "your glasses" suck, not you! Got it?

If you are so sensitive, better hurry and grow yourself a skin.
 
if you did not want an evaluation from the first pics you put up, maybe you should have cleaned it up. Not call names after then clean it. and i feel that i gave an evaluation based on the pic which did show as if there was rust as others seen too and took the same view. We did not have the gun in hand , and could only go by YOUR pics.
 
polaris said:
so no rust! and it was/is quite obvious from the first pictures, and this even for my old eyes looking through glasses!

Now guys tell me, what is all the fuzz about? Can't you take it, when I jokingly write your glasses suck?

That means "your glasses" suck, not you! Got it?

If you are so sensitive, better hurry and grow yourself a skin.
Click to expand...

Actually I am glad to see that there is no rust on the rifle. However, from the areas that I indicated in the picture, I pointed out my concerns, and noted that if it was oil, then better pictures and a good cleaning would be in order. The OP has done just that, cleaned it up, and posted more pictures.

I disagree with your statement that it was/is quite obvious. When we are looking at a slightly out of focus picture that shows something that should not be there, and are thousands of miles away without the actual rifle in front of us, then what looks like a typical case of rust/corrosion in that picture is something that we notice. Firearms packed away, especially in cases in environments that are moist, tend to develop pitting and rust quite easily and fast. So, when we have a picture that shows spots, blemishes, and things that look like pitting, rust or wear, we are going to say so. As I said, I am glad that a good cleaning and better pictures showed that this was not a concern, as the furniture and rest of the metal seems much better condition in the subsequent pictures. The OP has stated that there is some minor rust on the barrel, and judicious LIGHT use of extra fine steel wool, WITHOUT oil, should take care of that. After it is removed, then oil can be applied to the area.

Perhaps one lesson learned here is that good pictures should be submitted, and a light cleaning before hand can show the object in it's best condition.
 
Winnipeg Toymaker said:
if you did not want an evaluation from the first pics you put up, maybe you should have cleaned it up. Not call names after then clean it. and i feel that i gave an evaluation based on the pic which did show as if there was rust as others seen too and took the same view. We did not have the gun in hand , and could only go by YOUR pics.
Click to expand...

sure, you had it all under control from the beginning. Just don't admit that you were wrong, never. It might be perceived as a sign of weakness.

Admit nothing, deny everything, launch counterattack!
 
Last edited:
polaris said:
sure, you had it all under control from the beginning. Just don't admit that you were wrong, never. It might be perceived as a sign of weakness.

Admit nothing, deny everything, launch counterattack!
Click to expand...


Looks like you just have to put your little two cents worth in, no matter how slanted and incorrect your opinion is.

READ MY ORIGINAL POSTS WITH THE PICTURES. The picture shows something that is NOT supposed to be there.

As far as my opinions on a question that is asked, I give them based on the facts that someone presents, what a picture shows, and about 60 years of experience. I was Military trained, Armour trained, and have shot in competition since the 1960s. I have fired everything I could get my hands on from the .22 rimfire C7 to the 25 pounder and the 105 mm Howitzer.

I have a 2000 square foot shop, a 10x36 inch metal lathe, several welders and two 7 inch metal shapers. I regularly build obsolete gun parts and re-barrel and rechamber rifles.

I will tell you right now that I was also trained to give an honest answer to a question or situation, not dress it all up with a ribbon around it. If you show me a picture of your baby, and it looks like there is a wart on it's nose, you are going to get told that your baby has warts, plain and simple.

What are your qualifications?

I am not stating that I am never wrong, or trying to cover something up as an act of weakness. If you take a GOOD look at the side picture that the OP posted, and a GOOD look at the areas I indicated, there are things there that should NOT be there.

Below is the picture and comment that I posted. IF THIS IS OIL, THEN PERHAPS A GOOD CLEANING IS IN ORDER.
.

.
But then again, maybe I don't know anything at all. Maybe I don't know how to shoot these rifles below. There are 20 SWEDISH m/96 FSR target rifles in the picture, (with another 8 still in boxes,) along with a CG-63 in 6.5x55 and a CG-63E, (one of 500 made in 762x51 -(.308)) Of course, this does not show the SMLE rifles, the Lee Enfields, the Ross rifles, the Spanish and Portugese Mausers, the Carcanos, the various Russians, a few Germans and Americans, and a dozen or so of those wonderfully accurate SWISS Schmidt-Rubins and k-31s. Not to mention the Sporting and hunting rifles, varmint rifles, lots of shotguns, and I don't know how many .22 rimfires.

Really, I just keep them around for when I need to use something for a boat anchor!Laugh2
.
 
Last edited:
buffdog said:
Looks like you just have to put your little two cents worth in, no matter how slanted and incorrect your opinion is.


Admit nothing, deny everything, launch counterattack! here we go again


READ MY ORIGINAL POSTS WITH THE PICTURES. The picture shows something that is NOT supposed to be there.

As far as my opinions on a question that is asked, I give them based on the facts that someone presents, what a picture shows, and about 60 years of experience. I was Military trained, Armour trained, and have shot in competition since the 1960s. I have fired everything I could get my hands on from the .22 rimfire C7 to the 25 pounder and the 105 mm Howitzer.

I have a 2000 square foot shop, a 10x36 inch metal lathe, several welders and two 7 inch metal shapers. I regularly build obsolete gun parts and re-barrel and rechamber rifles.

I will tell you right now that I was also trained to give an honest answer to a question or situation, not dress it all up with a ribbon around it. If you show me a picture of your baby, and it looks like there is a wart on it's nose, you are going to get told that your baby has warts, plain and simple.

What are your qualifications? For starters, I am qualified to distinguish between rust and gun oil. You are NOT!

I am not stating that I am never wrong, or trying to cover something up as an act of weakness. If you take a GOOD look at the side picture that the OP posted, and a GOOD look at the areas I indicated, there are things there that should NOT be there.

Below is the picture and comment that I posted. IF THIS IS OIL, THEN PERHAPS A GOOD CLEANING IS IN ORDER.
.

.
But then again, maybe I don't know anything at all. Maybe I don't know how to shoot these rifles below. There are 20 SWEDISH m/96 FSR target rifles in the picture, (with another 8 still in boxes,) along with a CG-63 in 6.5x55 and a CG-63E, (one of 500 made in 762x51 -(.308)) Of course, this does not show the SMLE rifles, the Lee Enfields, the Ross rifles, the Spanish and Portugese Mausers, the Carcanos, the various Russians, a few Germans and Americans, and a dozen or so of those wonderfully accurate SWISS Schmidt-Rubins and k-31s. Not to mention the Sporting and hunting rifles, varmint rifles, lots of shotguns, and I don't know how many .22 rimfires.

Really, I just keep them around for when I need to use something for a boat anchor!Laugh2
Click to expand...


And what does this all have to do with the fact that you were wrong?

I am not impressed, a man bragging about all his experience, his lathe and his welders, a man who confuses gun oil with rust tse, tse, tse Laugh2

Not impressive at all...


Maybe you should read this quote and see for yourself where you stand:

"It takes a big man to admit he's wrong; It takes a bigger man to do something about it."
 
Last edited:
C'mon boys, let's just all get along now, to start an argument was not my intention by posting here. A little unity is surely welcomed, especially with fellow "nutters".

Nice collection there buffdog. I picked up a nice K-31 last week, have yet to get out and shoot it, the gun still looks new.
 
.
I think I am coming around to SMELLIE's thoughts of the Internet. He once said that sometimes giving out factual information was like the old adage of "casting pearls before swine."

Getting a bit long of tooth, at 72 years old, I find that my tolerance of mild irritants, such as Mosquitos, Black Flies, Wood Ticks, ex-wives, small yappy dogs, and small yappy minds, to name a few, is actually getting better and is of much less consequence.

When I was younger, when a good looking, well shaped Woman walked by, I used to look at her rear end, and think, "WOW - what an A**!"

Now that I am older, I still think the same thing ---"Wow - what an A**!", but usually I am looking at someone's face, or their POSTS ON THE INTERNET.
.
 
Last edited:
Buffdog, it doesn't take 72 years to see that. They have a word for people like that here on the internet. Troll.

Everyone is being caught up on their interpretation of things. A picture is worth a thousand words but those words differ from person to person. It's not about who is right or who is wrong. Everyone here put forth their opinion on their perspective of the gun but the problem came when those opinions weren't respected by others.

We all need to strive to respect others opinions. You may not agree with them, but we need to communicate that productively, and not go on the offensive right away.
 
To the OP:

I'll throw my 2cents in. This looks like one of the original mummy-wrapped examples that someone just had to un-wrap and shoot. I'm not saying it is but it just has that look to it. If it were still wrapped I'd say you would have a $950.00 to $1100.00 Enfield. As it sits now you have a very nice rifle with no war history and that is no longer mint so $650.00 to $800.00.
 
dannyd123 said:
Buffdog, it doesn't take 72 years to see that. They have a word for people like that here on the internet. Troll.

Everyone is being caught up on their interpretation of things. A picture is worth a thousand words but those words differ from person to person. It's not about who is right or who is wrong. Everyone here put forth their opinion on their perspective of the gun but the problem came when those opinions weren't respected by others.

We all need to strive to respect others opinions. You may not agree with them, but we need to communicate that productively, and not go on the offensive right away.
Click to expand...

That's how I look at it, not to mention the picture clearly reads "if this is oil perhaps a good cleaning is in order".

Anyhow, OP very nice gun and it shows well in the second pictures. I also thought it had rust or damage in the first pics but the second shows a gun in tip top shape. I'd be happy to have a gun like that in my rack that's for sure.

Thanks for posting.

I was going to comment on Polaris' post but I won't waste my breath!!
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom