Dumb SMLE Question

[bogusiii]

I have a question about when the volley sights on Sht. L.E. Mk.III stopping being installed.

From what I understand they, and the magazine cutoff, were there when the rifle was first introduced in 1905. In 1916 the sights and the cutoff were removed on the Mk.III* version, then the cutoff reintroduced post WW1 when Mk.III's were produced again (at least for B.S.A. and Enfield but not L.S.A. that never did convert to the Mk.III*). My question is whether there was ever a pre-1916 Mk.III that was still made with the cutoff but not the volley sights?

 

[Eaglelord17]

No, the original No. 1 Mk. 3 SMLE utilized both the volley sights and the magazine cut-off (as well as other features like a windage adjustable rear sight). The No. 1 Mk. 3* in the need to expedite production removed both however some No. 1 Mk. 3*s did have the magazine cut-off slot in the receiver and post WWI were sometimes upgraded to No. 1 Mk. 3s (by striking out the '*').

Post war they decided to remove the volley sights from the No. 1 Mk. 3s they started remaking (as well as the windage adjustable rear sight) and only put in the magazine cut-off. The reason being was they decided they no longer would use volley sights as it was simply impractical.

 

[bogusiii]

I think that fits with what I thought. There would never have been a 1915 Mk.III that had the cutoff but no volley sights.

 

[Eaglelord17]

No, however in refits it could have had the furniture replaced and the volley sights removed.

 

[englishman_ca]

Hold on a minute, it is not so clear cut. One should refer to the List of Changes. The jump to Mk.III* did not involve the cut off, it was the sighting changes. The cut off was deleted by an additional and subsequent LoC entry. They came in short order, but separate directives.

I am just blowing this out of my ear as I am away from home and don't have my reference materials at hand. Going from memory on details is not always the best for me.

Could there be a legit manufactured Mk.III* with cut off but no volley sights?, I think that the short answer is yes.

 

[Eaglelord17]

There could be legitimate No. 1 Mk. 3*s with the cut-off (many post war had the '*' crossed out), however there wouldn't be a No. 1 Mk. 3 with the cut-off and no volley sight, as the big change was removal of the volley sights.

 

[5THBATT]

The LoC of 1916 is in 2 parts, Part 1 lists modifications to the FUTURE MANUFACTURE of the MkIII ie the parts listed in part 1 were to be omitted from the MkIII in furture production, no mention of the cutoff being omitted or deleted so the cutoff or "MkIII' lives on.

Part 2 introduces a new rifle that has no cutoff or slot but as its the same as the MkIII but without a cutoff slot, the changes to the MkIII listed in part 1 also applies.

Both part1 & part 2 of the LoC use the term "may embody" which means both the MkIII & MkIII* could still be assembled using parts listed in part 1 or a mix of those parts, the whole point of the changes was to speed up production!

Both Lithgow & LSA continued to produce MkIIIs with cutoffs into 1918 before both switched to the MkIII*, LSA ended production in 1918 so only ever made a few MkIII*s so are reasonably scarce.

 

[5THBATT]

but not L.S.A. that never did convert to the Mk.III*

My 1918 LSA MkIII* no cutoff or slot.

 

[RememberTheSomme]

Very nice indeed. I have a 1916. What's in your stock disc??

 

[5THBATT]

Very nice indeed. I have a 1916. What's in your stock disc??

Mine is blank.

 

[BadgerDog]

Just for interest sake, here's an old girl in the Knowledge Library. The MKL example includes an installed "Flanders Flap" ...

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

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

 

[5THBATT]

Just for interest sake, here's an old girl in the Knowledge Library. The MKL example includes an installed "Flanders Flap" ...

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

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

I have stuck my Flanders flap on the 1918 LSA MkIII* i posted before on this thread, rifle has had a few years of BLO added to the wood since the other photo was taken.

 

[mkrnel]

I have a 1940 dated Lithgow SMLE Mk.III no star with mag cutoff fitted but no volley sights. The butt socket markings are the same as these ones -

 

[5THBATT]

Lithgow produced the MkIII into 1941