Help from the Milsurp gurus needed. Lee Enfield. Pic Heavy.

[Daver_II]

Hey guys and girls of the military surplus!

I am not a milsurp guy at all, but I managed to get myself a Lee Enfield that I would like to know more about.

If anyone can help me research, or point me to a easy to read reference I would appreciate it.

I have pictures of every marking I can find, but if there is anywhere I should look for more, please let me know.

I am most interested in knowing where and when it was made, and any other points of note... As well as value if anyone can help me there...

Serial Number, but not sure what the "M" means

Guessing the III is relating to the MK3?

Marked on bottom of trigger guard a "C"

Barrel Band marked "OA"

No idea what this marking is for. located on left side of receiver at the chamber.

Markings on the back of receiver. an upside down "u" "2" and a little "z" on the left. not sure what the marking on the right is.

Bolt markings. a "3" clearly, and what looks like a "6" or "8"

Back of the bolt, a "u" some serial number markings (original seems to be ground off?) and another small marking by the bolt handle.

The mess under the rear sights....

The end cap (doesnt match the reciever)

And the butt plate.


Under the rear handguard

Thanks anyone that can help me here.

Dave

 

[enefgee]

Carefully, and gently pop the rear hand guard off - that will show you the Knoxform, which will have more stamps and markings on it. Looks like it's been assembled from parts - possibly in a factory thorough repair (arsenal rebuild). The OA is an Australian mark, but the receiver was built at Enfield in 1918, the bolt has been re-numbered to match the receiver. All of the barrel info is on the Knoxform, as noted remove the hand guard carefully and gently because the two little arms on either side of the rear sight are probably about as delicate as it gets. Every part maker had a code, so most parts will have a cryptic little stamp, added to which every inspector had a mark, so all major components have a mark for that too. The best online resource is the Milsurps Forum board, founded by members from this site.

 

[Mk VII]

Made by RSAF Enfield in 1918. Lot of WW2 Australian parts in there. Sight's been recycled off several other rifles (common). Rear sight protector is either the final type without the crank in it, or has been put on the wrong way round, can't tell. Bolt matches, which is a bonus, nosecap doesn't (not a big deal). Probably a rebuild in WW2 or later, can't see the bbl date.

 

[Daver_II]

Thanks so far guys, I added the two last pictures to the thread with the barrel markings.

Thanks.

 

[RossRifleNut]

Looks like it has Australian wood with the copper pins and space for the mag cutoff. Probably Coachwood or Queensland maple the Aussies ran out of walnut early on.

OA is rifle factory 3 or orange factory, they made small parts for Lithgow.

The Aussies had a very good scheme for marking maintenance done to their rifles you can download a pdf from the Lithgow museum that will tell you everything.

 

[RossRifleNut]

Also check the right side of the butt stock for a date, it's easily worn away or might have never been there but if there is one it will tell you when it was refurbished.

 

[Pblatzz]

Rebarreled in 1943 and the rifle has the wrong magazine, it's a no. 4 magazine. Quite probably an Austrian WWII FTR, looks like a coachwood stock covered in a heavy coat of varnish.

 

[enefgee]

British service marks on the '43 barrel, no visible FTR mark, so it's a wartime rebuild using Australian small parts. Kind of neat, its seen a real slice.

 

[collector67]

Yup, Coachwood. I have a 1942 Lithgow wire wrap with the same wood, I kinda think it looks better than Walnut.

 

[enefgee]

Yup, Coachwood. I have a 1942 Lithgow wire wrap with the same wood, I kinda think it looks better than Walnut.

It isn't really durable enough, though. As it ages it softens somewhat, if not properly cared for.

 

[XRCD011]

It isn't really durable enough, though. As it ages it softens somewhat, if not properly cared for.

Truth to that about walnut. I bought some for a project and lost all respect for it as a "hardwood" as it was soft, easy to work with, but I thought it would be a lot harder and robust.