1942 No.1 mkIII Magazine question

Winchester-1897

Winchester-1897

CGN Ultra frequent flyer
Rating - 100%
98   0   0
Location
Newmarket,Ontario
I met an elderly fellow that I took to my gun club where he wanted to try out his 1942 Long Branch Lee Enfield No.1 mkIII. When we got to the range we learned that he had forgotten to bring his magazine for the rifle and the key to unlock the trigger lock.

Anyway it looks like a real nice clean rifle that he has personally never fired and he has owned it for about 40 years. Anyway he told me the mag that he forgot to bring didn't fit anyway and the way he explained it was that it seemed to wide and without seeing it I can't say more. He did say he bought the mag at a gun show and it sounds like it may be for a different Lee Enfield, maybe a No.4 mk1.

I guess my question is, are the No.1 mkIII and the No.4 mk1 different? I have only ever owned a couple of No.4 mk1's so I haven't a clue.
 
I look forward to see if we can find a No. 1 Mk III made at Long Branch... is it me or they made only No. 4 Mk. I?!

Martin
 
the mags are different, the rib on the rear of the no4 mag stops at the mag catch, the no 1 goes further down

longbranch didnt make no1 mk3 rifles in 1942, they were making no4 mk1* rifles, so it is either a 1942 longbranch or its a no1 mk3, not both. clearing up this bit will help identify the correct mag
 
scott585 said:
the mags are different, the rib on the rear of the no4 mag stops at the mag catch, the no 1 goes further down

longbranch didnt make no1 mk3 rifles in 1942, they were making no4 mk1* rifles, so it is either a 1942 longbranch or its a no1 mk3, not both. clearing up this bit will help identify the correct mag
Click to expand...


I was taking his word that it was made at longbranch but it is for sure a No.1 mkIII. I am still wondering if he bought the mag I mentioned thinking it was a Longbranch and that would explain why it did not fit.
 
dauph197 said:
I look forward to see if we can find a No. 1 Mk III made at Long Branch... is it me or they made only No. 4 Mk. I?!

Martin
Click to expand...

It's not just you....:) W1897, if it is indeed a no.1, are you sure it wasn't made at Lithgow perhaps? They were still being made there in '42. Maybe a couple spots in England still producing them at that point too. I think No.4 production started coming into full swing around '41. Long branch and Savage were tooled up specifically to build these models and the major British builders made the switch around that time as well. Perhaps someone with a slightly better memory could elaborate on the dates a little more clearly.

As for the mags, the no.1 and no.4 used a slightly different magazine, mostly the catch at the back was different. One works in both rifles (sort of) and the other doesn't IIRC, but I can't recall which way it goes and I don't currently have a no.4 on hand to test it out. The magazines are getting scarcer, best bet is to watch the EE here or check out the gunshow tables. Usually somebody has one or two up for grabs but they don't seem to be going for as cheap as they used to either.
 
scott585 said:
the mags are different, the rib on the rear of the no4 mag stops at the mag catch, the no 1 goes further down

longbranch didnt make no1 mk3 rifles in 1942, they were making no4 mk1* rifles, so it is either a 1942 longbranch or its a no1 mk3, not both. clearing up this bit will help identify the correct mag
Click to expand...

This. If it's from 1942 it's not a no.1

Only Lithgow in Australia was still making no1s by 1942 I do believe.
 
kennymo said:
It's not just you....:) W1897, if it is indeed a no.1, are you sure it wasn't made at Lithgow perhaps? They were still being made there in '42. Maybe a couple spots in England still producing them at that point too. I think No.4 production started coming into full swing around '41. Long branch and Savage were tooled up specifically to build these models and the major British builders made the switch around that time as well. Perhaps someone with a slightly better memory could elaborate on the dates a little more clearly.

As for the mags, the no.1 and no.4 used a slightly different magazine, mostly the catch at the back was different. One works in both rifles (sort of) and the other doesn't IIRC, but I can't recall which way it goes and I don't currently have a no.4 on hand to test it out. The magazines are getting scarcer, best bet is to watch the EE here or check out the gunshow tables. Usually somebody has one or two up for grabs but they don't seem to be going for as cheap as they used to either.
Click to expand...

No4 production started in 1939, was standard by 1941. So unless it's from a factory that never made no4s (lithgow, maybe ishapore?) Then it's not a no1 if it's from 1942.
 
BSA made/assembled Mk. III* rifles into 1944.
Long Branch apparently made replacement SMLE barrels.
 
I have a no4 mag that fits in my no1 mk3 Lithgow, I've never fired any rounds out of it so no comment on how the no4 mag feeds ammo. It does click into place and release without any issues, that much I know. The back notch where the mag locks in and releases is different on the no4 mag as well as the vertical groves on the mags sidewalls.

Edit: I loaded five dummy rounds with a stripper clip into the no4 mag in my no1 rifle, loads and ejects rounds perfectly fine. The no4 mag enters the mag well a c-hair tighter than the proper no1 mag does, but that's the only differance between the two in my rifle.
 
Last edited:
samsplacci71 said:
If I am not mistaken, the mags on both the no.1 mk 3 and no. 4 mk1's were hand fitted to each rifle.
Click to expand...

yes, but they mostly interchange with few issues between rifles of the same type, a particulary out of spec pair may not fit or function though, and swapping they may lead to some feed or fit issues in some rifles
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom