First Enfield, No.5 Pictures.

D

-DeerStalker-

CGN Regular
Rating - 100%
36   0   0
This is my first Enfield. No.5 Jungle carbine.

Extremely faint No.5 MK I on the receiver. M/47C on the band, front sight, barrel, bolt handle, extractor, bolt head and the trigger guard.

Serial number on the band and back of the bolt handle match. I can't find any other serial numbers. Dated 1945 on the band.

Mag is marked M/56. Has a metal capped fore stock that has an F stamped on the metal.

Unfortunately the original rear sight has been replaced with a Parker Hale No. BA21 unit that doubles as a mount for a weaver base. The receiver has been drilled and tapped and has a Parker Hale weaver base.

The stock is as close to mint as you can get. can't tell if it's been re finished, but the wood is in exceptional shape. Bore is bright and shiny and the rifling is beautiful and sharp. Shiny chamber too.

Anybody have any info for this Enfield Noobie? Haven't cleaned the rifle yet, but there's still some hard caked on cosmo? on some of the metal.

I want to locate the correct rear sight. Impossible?

004.jpg


009-1.jpg


024-1.jpg


015-1.jpg


002-1.jpg


005-1.jpg


010.jpg


017.jpg


018.jpg


022-1.jpg


026.jpg
 
Last edited:
The rear sights are not to rare. The correct ones are pretty much the standard NO.4 rear sight, but instead of graduating to 1300 yards, they only go up to 800y. Keep an eye on Ebay and the EE.

Its a nice looking rifle, a good example of a No.5. I would imagine a smith could fill those holes in pretty easy.
 
There is a No.4 sight forsale in the EE now. I think Ill wait for the correct 800 yard sight.

The hard rubber pad looks like it's going to increase the felt recoil. It decreases the surface area of the butt stock, and it's shaped funky.

In the pics are some 1942 and 43 dated .303. I couldn't imagine the recoil from 215gr. bullets.
 
:runaway: Oh no! A "Jungle Carbine"!!!! With a No. 5, the evil wandering zero will make it impossible to fire two shots in a row in the same direction!!!:runaway:

Just kidding. You have a nice old rifle there. I have two No. 5's. I have tried to wade my way through a couple of gun writers' explanations of just what the evil wandering zero actually is, but have concluded that, because I am not a very consistent shooter, it wouldn't apply to me anyways!!:p
 
Like you Kjohn, I 'lucked' into a pair a while ago. One, in very nice shape and like the one DeerStalker got it has a metal tipped forend with a five stamped on it. It has the original sling and just for the hell of it I picked up a bayonet from a guy on site, just to round out the package.

MyJCwithbayonet.jpg


The second one was in a little rough shape but I picked it up for parts anyway. I decided to clean it up first and it didn't look too bad after all so I picked a couple of scope mounts and used one on it. It has an after market butt stock on it but I do have the original as well and this one has the plain wood forend.

SmokeyBobJC303Br.jpg


I put a 3-9 Bushnell Buckhorn on the second, just for a little load testing and the first batch shows the old club has promise;).

303BrJCBG.jpg
 
Those are two nice No.5's John. Nice groups too. Thanks for the tips on the rear sight, but I've found one thanks to the helpful member Vimy Ridge.
 
-DeerStalker- said:
Those are two nice No.5's John. Nice groups too. Thanks for the tips on the rear sight, but I've found one thanks to the helpful member Vimy Ridge.
Click to expand...

Glad to hear it. Good deal. Just a small word of caution, there's a screw and threaded piece it goes into to anchour/secure the front end of the mount. Be careful starting that screw as it's pretty easy for it to start crooked.
 
kjohn said:
:runaway: Oh no! A "Jungle Carbine"!!!! With a No. 5, the evil wandering zero will make it impossible to fire two shots in a row in the same direction!!!:runaway:

Just kidding. You have a nice old rifle there. I have two No. 5's. I have tried to wade my way through a couple of gun writers' explanations of just what the evil wandering zero actually is, but have concluded that, because I am not a very consistent shooter, it wouldn't apply to me anyways!!:p
Click to expand...

I remember reading an article by Al Miller, on the No.5. He never had a problem with the accuracy in his No.5 until he fired Mk.VII ball in it. All over the place. I've never tried any in mine, but the ones I've had have been at least as accurate as a No.4.
 
Years back, I bedded a No 5 rifle with Accraglass and it was a very nice shooter for the first four or five rounds. The first four were within an inch at fifty yards, and the fifth an inch higher, the sixth an inch higher and the seventh an inch higher, as the barrel heated up.
It shot pretty well for what it was. I didn't bother letting the barrel cool between shots. I also had younger eyes back then.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom