I have too many enfields (pic)

At one time not long ago, I had that many Long Lees hanging on my wall... I think I bought and sold close to 200 Enfields and Metfords over the past 5 or 6 years, and had 50 or so at one time jammed into the gun room. But still, compared to others I know, that's small peanuts. I have one friend that just collects Canadian rifles, and he has one wall in his basement covered with Brown Bess muskets from every Milita county in Nova Scotia.... and a collection of Ross rifles to die for... He even has a "proto-type" Lee Metford!!

And by the way, at last count, I now only own around 3 Enfields, and one .22 trainer, and one of the rifles is a .308 target rifle... Oh well, easy come, easy go... :D
 
Last edited:
ilovepotatos said:
When I do finally get around to buying some .303's, what should I be shooting with? I'm not an incredible shot, so I doubt I'd see any performance increases with the No. 4 over the No. 5. Is the jungle carbine a lot easier to shoot than the No. 4? Recoil a bit much I'm thinking?
Click to expand...

Go with a No.4 potatos. They're more readily available at generally lower prices than No.5s, they're milder to shoot, and parts are widely available.
 
guninhand said:
Please expound.:confused:
Click to expand...

Don't worry
There is nothing wrong with the No5 Jungle Carbine bud.

I am not fond of carrying them in the bush anymore because of the ballance point and sling system.

If you hold a full wood SMLE you will find the ballance point is forward of the magazine. It's a very comfortable hold.

The ballance point over the No5 (and to some degree the No4) is right over the magazine which makes things difficult when walking over tricky ground (like slash or wind throw).

In addition the sling system forced the bolt into your rib cage which after a long day can get pretty tiresome.

I would prefer the SMLE in the bush.
Sure its heavier but much more comfortable and easier in the long run.

Hope this helps.
 
Some missing, but this is the gist of it. .22 Trainer was just purchased too. :)

-1896 Long Lee
-BSA No.1 MkIII
-Indian No.1 MkIII
-Long Branch No.4 Mk1 ('43)
-Savage US PROPERTY marked No.4 Mk1/3
-No.4 Mk2 Brit


P1030909.jpg
 
To try to clear things up a little for some of the new guys, all of the early varieties, up to and including the "Smellie" (Short, Magazine Lee-Enfield Mark III and Mark III*) were designed in a series from the original Lee Rifle of 1879. There was some degree of interchangeability of parts right from the first adoption in 1888, through to the end of production of this series in the 1960s.

In the 1926/27 period, all of these early rifles designed and built in the period 1901 forward, were renamed as Rifle Number 1.

Rifle Number 2 became the .22" versions of the Number 1 rifles.

Rifle Number 3 was the renamed Pattern '14 rifle in all its variants.

In the late 1920s and early 1930s a major effort was made to completely redesign the entire series for mass production on modern machines, this partly with a view toward dispersal of production in case of another war. The result of this was the Rifle Number 4. When the Number 4 was produced, even the screw threads were different than on the early-series rifles. Rifle Number 5 was the so-called "Jungle Carbine" Rifle Number 6 took us back a little ways, as it was the (mostly Australian-produced) "jungle carbine" version of the Number 1 (or SMLE) rifle. Number 7 was in the same series as the Number 4 and was the .22" version of the Number 4 (although very early Canadian rifles were marked ".22" LONG BRANCH 1944" in three lines). Number 8 was the target/sniper version of the Number 4.

And Number 9 was the EM-2, which some of us are still crying over.

But at least we can own (and shoot) the older rifles........ and we do......... and there are more than 400 varieties of lee-Enfields known, so they are also FUN!
 
smellie said:
Number 8 was the target/sniper version of the Number 4.
Click to expand...
Well written smellie but I think you meant that the No.8 was yet another .22cal. training rifle based on the No.5 action and looking very much like an L39. The L8 series were 7.62mm conversions of the No.4 well the No.4Mk1(T) and L42A1 were the sniper version of the No.4. The Envoy and L39A1 as well as the Fulton’s and the DCRA’s were the Target versions of the No.4 among many others.
 
#4mk1(T) said:
.......... but I think you meant that the No.8 was yet another .22cal.
Click to expand...

+1 ........ :)

Regards,
Badger

User Handbook 0.22 in., No.8 Mk.1 Rifle (Land Service 1961)



(Click PIC to read and save Adobe PDF File)
(Right Click on PIC and choose "Save Target As..." to download PDF file)
Click to expand...
 
No9 designation was later given to a .22" No4 conversion to help bury the EM2. Politics. Tories in power and the EM2 a "socialist" Labour govt design.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom