Enfield info?
- Thread starter 45C
- Start date
- Location
- Western Manitoba
Not a big deal for some - based on other for sale pictures, but that magazine appears to have side grooves right through to bottom edge - so that is a No. 1 magazine, not a No. 4 magazine. So correct for that rifle, I think.
Since it is a No. 1, has a specific sequence to take it down - the forearm wood must be removed before attempting to turn the big screw within the butt socket - else, if all parts in place, turning that big screw within the butt will split / break the rear end of the forearm - something to look at or check if you get it in your hand. Fore-end wood should be removed straight down - kept parallel with the barrel - do not want to pry down on the front end with the rear still in place - that likely breaks the "draws" inside top of fore-end wood. Is all hidden - no way that I know to tell condition and fit of those "draws" without dismantling that fore-arm.
When set up and properly "worn in" - those are amazing smooth and slick actions - I had one so slick, more than once I opened the bolt to ensure that a cartridge had got fed into chamber - it closed that smooth. Some people have aversion to the "#### on close" action and the two stage trigger pull. Both those features contribute a lot to the dependability of that design - alterations to either, tend to make the thing less dependable - or bring along other issues. The design is not about "quick change" magazine like a modern rifle - magazine pretty much meant to stay in rifle and NOT be removed, except for cleaning - very "flimsy" feed lips along the top of that magazine box that might need tuning for the particular bullet tip shape being used - FMJ vs Spitzer SP vs Round Nose - and then those "lips" are easily bent when inserting that magazine - so leave it in as much as possible - not generally a good plan to view it as "quick detach".
I am sure that I read that earlier versions of the rear sights had thumbscrew for windage adjustment - either was too expensive to continue making or was constantly getting loose in service - so later versions did away with that windage function. I have some of the later ones - have never handled an earlier one. Windage was "set" by drifting the front sight, then use "hold off" for wind, etc. No 1 was used by Australia (?) through WWII and into some 1960's and 1970's conficts - so those were made at Lithgow. I think also were made in India / Pakistan (RFI and POF), besides in Britain (multiple makers).
Because of the thin diameter barrel, I think the No. 1 was fairly sensitive to the bedding in the forearm - one of the changes made when it was morphed into the No. 4 - and an acquaintance has a "Heavy Barrel" version - so like a target rifle - made up by Australia Lithgow.
Since it is a No. 1, has a specific sequence to take it down - the forearm wood must be removed before attempting to turn the big screw within the butt socket - else, if all parts in place, turning that big screw within the butt will split / break the rear end of the forearm - something to look at or check if you get it in your hand. Fore-end wood should be removed straight down - kept parallel with the barrel - do not want to pry down on the front end with the rear still in place - that likely breaks the "draws" inside top of fore-end wood. Is all hidden - no way that I know to tell condition and fit of those "draws" without dismantling that fore-arm.
When set up and properly "worn in" - those are amazing smooth and slick actions - I had one so slick, more than once I opened the bolt to ensure that a cartridge had got fed into chamber - it closed that smooth. Some people have aversion to the "#### on close" action and the two stage trigger pull. Both those features contribute a lot to the dependability of that design - alterations to either, tend to make the thing less dependable - or bring along other issues. The design is not about "quick change" magazine like a modern rifle - magazine pretty much meant to stay in rifle and NOT be removed, except for cleaning - very "flimsy" feed lips along the top of that magazine box that might need tuning for the particular bullet tip shape being used - FMJ vs Spitzer SP vs Round Nose - and then those "lips" are easily bent when inserting that magazine - so leave it in as much as possible - not generally a good plan to view it as "quick detach".
I am sure that I read that earlier versions of the rear sights had thumbscrew for windage adjustment - either was too expensive to continue making or was constantly getting loose in service - so later versions did away with that windage function. I have some of the later ones - have never handled an earlier one. Windage was "set" by drifting the front sight, then use "hold off" for wind, etc. No 1 was used by Australia (?) through WWII and into some 1960's and 1970's conficts - so those were made at Lithgow. I think also were made in India / Pakistan (RFI and POF), besides in Britain (multiple makers).
Because of the thin diameter barrel, I think the No. 1 was fairly sensitive to the bedding in the forearm - one of the changes made when it was morphed into the No. 4 - and an acquaintance has a "Heavy Barrel" version - so like a target rifle - made up by Australia Lithgow.
Last edited:
That one sold, but he may have another.
Better overall condition but missing the bolt.
So he sold the first one.
He’s now asking $500 for another one , without a bolt.
He said it’s in better condition than the first one.
Better overall condition but missing the bolt.
So he sold the first one.
He’s now asking $500 for another one , without a bolt.
He said it’s in better condition than the first one.
Last edited:
- Location
- WMU248 near Edmonton
bolts can be found but then you need to fit them, I would think that a complete bolt would run about $100
- Location
- Western Manitoba
Regarding woodchopper's "need to fit them" comment - that does not really mean that they just have to "fit" into the rifle and the bolt closes - as some seem to think - a bit more to that - at least based on what I learned about No. 4's - putting in a replacement bolt also minimally requires verifying some equal bearing contact for both the recoil lugs on that bolt body in that receiver's recesses, headspace and firing pin protrusion. I know the No. 4 should also get a "clocking" check for overturn on the bolt head, but I am not sure how that was dealt with on the No. 1 rifles. The British were pretty fussy to have the receiver bolt number on the bolt - other countries were not - so I assume that the British thought it was important to keep that "fitted" bolt with that receiver. Or maybe just their version of "busy work"...
Last edited:
No 1 bolt heads are not numbered, they must be measured to fit or fitted. Today this is generally done by going through a box of bolt heads until the correct length is found, if you don't have a box full of bolt heads, you'll need to find someone who does. The length of the bolt head determines the head space, so this is pretty important.
- Location
- Western Manitoba
The numbered bolt head thing is from the No. 4's?? Can be misleading because of that "clocking" issue I mentioned - might have three different #3 heads and try on same bolt - one might meet spec for overturn, but other two do not. Possibly due to wear on rear edge of previously used bolt heads? Some evidence on internet that there is a considerable difference in lengths among heads with same number - so likely want to actually measure your No. 4 head and the one that you plan to replace with - might or might not be "solving" an issue. I have never had enough of same number to confirm that length thing one way or the other. What I think I read was results from many dozens or perhaps hundreds of each size that were measured.
Well - Based upon personal experience, bolt heads of the same number do display quite a bit of variance, even overlap. OP - Even if you do find a decent bolt, it will be mismatched to the rifle, which ultimately limits collectibility.
Yes, he’s asking $500 for this one, he claims it’s in way better condition than the one he just sold for $500.
But it’s missing the bolt.
There are a couple of bolts for sale,for $75, but Is it even worth messing around with?
Sounds like a lot of headaches,for little returns.
- Location
- WMU248 near Edmonton
yes some bolt heads were 'stoned' to get the correct head space.
I have somewhere in my little box of parts a bolt head marked 2 but it is shorter then a 0 bolt head
I've read the replies, If your contact has another, in better shape than the one in the pic, only missing the bolt, jump on it and quit procrastinating over the last toonie.
Send me a PM with the fellow's contact info and I will make up your mind for you.
Snooze, you lose, just about every time.
Well said.
