Lee Enfield #1 mk5

[Dosing]

I recently got to see this in the flesh at the Royal Winnipeg Rifles museum (posted a thread in the Pictures forum for those interested), and was really taken by that rear bridge, and the quite beefy rear sight, especially the fine checkering on the sides. One of, if not the nicest machined bits I have ever seen on a LE.
Anyone know of any others on display anywhere?

 

[mr.e moose]

My word I have never seen a Rear sight on a No 1 like that.Would this be a transitional rifle as the Lee Enfield adopted the form of the No 4?

 

[Blastattack]

My word I have never seen a Rear sight on a No 1 like that.Would this be a transitional rifle as the Lee Enfield adopted the form of the No 4?

Basically. The No 1 MKV was the predecessor to the No 4 MKI. Not very many made.

 

[B_noser]

I have owned two of them over the years and I don't think the caption is correct. As I recall, the Mk 5 failed trials due to accuracy issues. It was followed by the No 1 Mk 6 and that is the rifle that eventually became the No 4 Mk 1.

 

[John Sukey]

Have both a Mk5 and a Mk6

 

[Dosing]

Come on guys, pics or it never happened. Are yours still full wood?

 

[enefgee]

They don't make a lens wide enough to take a picture of John's collection. He's the Jay Leno of anything 303.

 

[5THBATT]

Here's mine.

 

[buffdog]

.
A lot of the Mark VI rifles were converted to Sniper Rifles when WWII broke out. After that, the Number 4 Mk.1T was it's successor.

Here's a Trivia question. Do you know what that brown button, (not the steel knob for wind adjustment,) on the rear sight of the top rifle of the four rifles in the picture in the Post above is made of?



And the Winner is ---JP---- with a time of 8 minutes.

.

 

[JP]

Bone, the plastic of the day.

 

[B_noser]

Come on guys, pics or it never happened. Are yours still full wood?

I'm afraid they are long gone. Both were full wood.

 

[Dosing]

Here's mine.

I have to say, I think it is the nicest looking of the #1s, with the uninterrupted upper handguard. With a slightly shorter barrel I really think cosmetically it would be the perfect looking LE. Thanks for the pics, great to see these.

 

[sail32]

I think B_noser's comments on the accuracy of the No.1 Mk V may be correct.

I noticed that when I fired my No1 Mk5 the back sight would move up and down the long range arm of the sight.

The solution was a threaded adjustable sight as found on the No. 4 and No. 5 Lee Enfield's, the exceptions of the sights being the some war time production.

 

[5THBATT]

I think B_noser's comments on the accuracy of the No.1 Mk V may be correct.

I noticed that when I fired my No1 Mk5 the back sight would move up and down the long range arm of the sight.

The solution was a threaded adjustable sight as found on the No. 4 and No. 5 Lee Enfield's, the exceptions of the sights being the some war time production.

From what i can find both the MkV SMLE (not No1 Mk5) & the No1 MkVI suffered from inconsistent shooting during trials.
The MkV was never fully accepted into service as it was originally planned to convert existing stocks of SMLEs to the MkV pattern but due to problems with alignment of the added on rear sight & the cost & time to sort it, the MkV was abandoned & it was decided to build a new rifle & so the No1 MkVI came to be.

BTW no No1 MkVIs were converted to sniper rifles because of the low wall to the left side of the receiver, it was the trials No4 Mk1s that were converted.

 

[flying pig]

5TH, why was the nomenclature different for MkV? Instead of being No1 MkV?

 

[maple_leaf_eh]

Good to see there is at least one in captivity in Canada.

I see a welded eye to the FNC and a woodscrew attaching it to the display case. Philistines! Considering even fewer of those have Canadian Forces lineage, you'd think the curators would be more careful (oh sorry, they are hard working volunteers/underpaid professionals and can't do everything to our satisfaction).

 

[Lee Enfield]

.
A lot of the Mark VI rifles were converted to Sniper Rifles when WWII broke out. ...snip...

This is not true. None of the No1MkVI rifles were converted to snipers.

The No1MkVI does not have enough height on the left receiver side rail for the front pad, and the lightening hole on the rear of the action interferes with the location of the rear pad....ie) there is nothing to screw to.

The initial sniping No4 conversions were based on the remaining No4MkI trials rifles dated from 1931 thru 1933 (some may be dated as late as 1936, but earlier dates are overstamped).


Having said that, part of the confusion may be linked to 2 facts:
1. The initial 1931 No4 trials rifles were originally designated as "No1MkVI" (there were at least 3 main MkVI varients) until someone recognized that there were too many changes from the MkVI and redesignated them as No4MkI rifles.
2. Existing MkVI rifles and actions were rebuilt to as close to No4MkI status as possible so that they could be utilized. MkVI rifles will be found with No4 wood, barrels, bolts, sights and other parts fitted as necessary.

NOTE** I understand that on some of the early receivers, you may be able to see part of the overstamped original MkVI designation markings on 1931 dated No4MkI trials rifles.

 

[Lee Enfield]

5TH, why was the nomenclature different for MkV? Instead of being No1 MkV?

The MkV trials rifles pre-date the 1927ish re-designation to the No1Mk X system.

 

[sail32]

My understanding that the No. 5, the jungle carbine, was passed over for standardization, was because of a floating zero. I also suspect that is only part of the story.

 

[Lee Enfield]

My understanding that the No. 5, the jungle carbine, was passed over for standardization, was because of a floating zero. I also suspect that is only part of the story.

The No5MkI and No1MkV are totally different rifles