1915 bsa smle

Demonical

Demonical

CGN Ultra frequent flyer
Rating - 100%
22   0   0
Location
Whitecourt, Alberta
SMLE033.jpg


SMLE032.jpg


SMLE031.jpg


SMLE030.jpg


SMLE028.jpg


My 1915 BSA SMLE No.1 MkIII*.

It would be fascinating to know what this rifle has been through; Belgium-Flanders, the Somme, who knows? It certainly has 'handling marks'...

I have a 1907 Sanderson bayonet coming, that I bought off eBay, which I cannot wait to get.

I bought these to commemorate my Great-Uncle, who was killed in action at Passchendaele, Oct 23 1917. I made a point of buying both the SMLE & the period correct bayonet, that were manufactured prior to his time in the Canadian Expeditionary Force. Chronologically speaking, my Great-Uncle could have carried these exact weapons (Of course I know he did not).

Need a Brodie helmet now...



P.S. This rifle is going black bear hunting in May-June. :canadaFlag:
 
^ Umm, don't think so. For one thing, I've got like a 7-3/4" hat size and I've never seen a milsurp hat that would fit my melon. And I'm probably going on another solo hunt, for the week anyway.

I wear an ugly oil-skin cowboy hat because it rains so much up where I go (but I'm certainly no cowboy...'fraid of horses actually).
 
When I was looking at this rifle I was told by the seller that it was "all matching". It is certainly complete military config', but from what I've checked, none of the numbers match. I'm also ceratin that the butt stock is not original, and the butt plate is also not even original to the butt stock.

The problem is, since the numbers don't match up, it throws into question everything that buddy told me about the gun; I have to give it a thorough examination to be sure of the action and bore. I was told it was a great shooter...

Bought the thing sight unseen... whatya gonna do?
 
Bayonet fixed while bear hunting? I doubt the bears will be impressed...haha.

It's still a cool rifle. The thing screams character. I like milsurps in mint shape, but I think I respect and appreciate the ones with 'handling marks' even more.

Hope you knock down a brute with it!
 
About what I said Re: the numbers not matching;

I did a comparison with the old .303Brit I got from the father-in-law (also a BSA, 1918 manufacture date). After doing that check then I re-examined the rifle serial numbers and the bolt, receiver & barrel, all those do match and I guess those are the numbers that matter. Only the nose cap has a different serial number, but it could be an arsenal-wartime refurb'.

I can say that whoever stamped the numbers was sure in a hurry, very haphazard job! In fact, it's the careless way the numbers are stamped that made me think they did not match.

So now I'm back 360 degrees and I decided the stock is likely original, and if it was changed, maybe a refurb' done same time the nose cap was changed.

FWIW, it's a 4 digit serial number. The No.1 MkIII* was introduced in 1915, so is this an early one? It's a low number...
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

As to the bear hunting thing, I'm thinking of buying some Speer Hot-cor 180 gr bullets, Privi brass. Gonna give a bruin one of those Speers from 20 yards.

That 17" bayonet could be handy at close quarters, eh? :eek:
 
The rifle was probably redone at least once. In 1915, they were making mostly Mk. III rifles with magazine cutoffs and long range sights. This forend never had provisions for these. Has a * been added beside the III? A four digit number, by itself is odd. Is there a letter above the number? It is part of the serial. Were III* rifles serialed separately from IIIs?
Remove the rear handguard, and check the serial number on the breech of the barrel. See if it matches the receiver. Date?
SMLEs were numbered on the right of the receiver ring, right breech of barrel, rear of bolt handle, front of bayonet boss, bottom of forend behind nosecap, magazine, bottom of rear sight leaf.
Not at all unusual for rifles which have seen service to have been repaired/restored with m/m or renumbered parts.
 
Serial number has the letter N in it; on the bolt & rear sight, it is N****, the receiver the N is above the numbers. The barrel has never been removed, I'm certain of that. I tried wiggling the rear hand guard off but couldn't get it, so I left it.

It is marked with the Crown emblem, I think it has G.R. stamped below the crown. BSA Co. SMLE No1 MkIII*, on the receiver ring.

The serial numbers on the bolt, receiver, rear sight are all correct.


Edit to add: Oh, the number on the nose cap, while different, is also only 4 digits.
 
Last edited:
I have a 1915 BSA MkIII* with no cutoff slot, matching numbers to the forend & nosecap complete with volley sights.
While the changes to the MkIII & the introduction of the MkIII* occured in 1916, EFD & BSA both produced MkIII*s in 1915
There is no reason to believe the 1915 MkIII*s were made without volley sights as the LoC of 1916 states the MkIII* is the same as the MkIII but has no cutoff or slot but may embody the modifications layed out in part 1 of the LoC which covers the deletion of the volley sights etc.
 
I have a 1915 BSA MkIII* with no cutoff slot, matching numbers to the forend & nosecap complete with volley sights.
While the changes to the MkIII & the introduction of the MkIII* occured in 1916, EFD & BSA both produced MkIII*s in 1915
There is no reason to believe the 1915 MkIII*s were made without volley sights as the LoC of 1916 states the MkIII* is the same as the MkIII but has no cutoff or slot but may embody the modifications layed out in part 1 of the LoC which covers the deletion of the volley sights etc.
 
I have a 1915 BSA MkIII* with no cutoff slot, matching numbers to the forend & nosecap complete with volley sights.
While the changes to the MkIII & the introduction of the MkIII* occured in 1916, EFD & BSA both produced MkIII*s in 1915
There is no reason to believe the 1915 MkIII*s were made without volley sights as the LoC of 1916 states the MkIII* is the same as the MkIII but has no cutoff or slot but may embody the modifications layed out in part 1 of the LoC which covers the deletion of the volley sights etc.
 
I bought these to commemorate my Great-Uncle, who was killed in action at Passchendaele, Oct 23 1917
Click to expand...

Do you have any information that you can share about your Great Uncle?

Name - service # - Battalion

These are always interesting and amazing what you can find.
 
Gentlemen, at that time they were involved in a WAR.

Manufacturing shortcuts were approved verbally and in memo form long before they appeared in the List of Changes.

This is one instance in which the List of Changes merely CAUGHT UP with what was ALREADY HAPPENING at Factory level.

They were RUSHED for production.
.
 
Here's a similar old girl in the Knowledge Library and it should look like this, if all correct and all matching. The MKL example includes an installed "Flanders Flap" ...

1917 ShtLE (Short Lee-Enfield) No.1 MkIII*
(Mfg by BSA - Birmingham Small Arms)

Does the rifle have a dent in the wood? I can't really tell from the pics, but I think it should have one with that date, if it's the original wood.....

In the 1917 example above, note the large dent shown in the side of the forestock in a few of the pics of the photo virtual tour. At first glance it appears to be wood damage from some kind of impact, when in reality, it actually indicates that the stock of this rifle was from old supplies that had already been cut-out, in preparation for installing the front volley sight. By the time this rifle had been manufactured in 1917, the use of front and rear volley sights on No.1 rifles had been discontinued, as of January 1916.


(Click PIC to Enlarge)

Regards,
Doug
 
cigar_man said:
Do you have any information that you can share about your Great Uncle?

Name - service # - Battalion

These are always interesting and amazing what you can find.
Click to expand...



Actually I can. This is his brief story from 4CMR, 4th Canadian Mounted Rifles (hope the link works).

http://www.4cmr.com/urquhart.htm

He is obviously the soldier, home on his last leave, spring of 1917. The 14 year old girl to his right, was my grandmother, me Dad's mum.
The picture was taken in the somewhere up Timmins area, But I don't think it's Timmins.

Great uncle was a logger. Imagine how tough those guys were. He worked with his dad (and maybe brothers) on a logging crew. They went to the bush in Oct and stayed away in a logging camp until March time period, then they'd come out of the bush.
We are so f**king soft and lazy today...

If you want to read some good stuff on the Canadian Exp. Force in WWI, check out these 2 books:
At the Sharp End: Canadians Fighting the Great War 1914-1916 by Tim Cook
Shock Troops: Canadians Fighting The Great War 1917-18 by Tim Cook
 
BadgerDog, I know for sure the nose cap isn't original, so who knows? the stock may have been changed any number of times, or once...

It definitely doesn't have the cutout for the magazine cutoff, or the indent in the stock that you picture.

It shot some 'Jerrys' though... :sniper:
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom