Lee Enfield #5 MKI and the Malayan Emergency

fat tony

CGN Ultra frequent flyer
Rating - 100%
111   0   0
Just realized my folly of having bought a pamphelet on this rifle from Amazon.com entitled: "The Number 5 Jungle Carbine" by Alan M. Petrillo. Could have saved $ by passing on it, but curiosity got the better of me. :mad:

The following is from page 21, the chapter on the supposed wandering zero.

On the 'wandering zero':

The number 5 Mark 1 rifle suffered from what has been called the wandering zero. While the rifle was well liked by the British soldiers who used it,(why would they like a flawed rifle?) there were many complaints about the rifle's tendency to lose it's zero(supporting material absent from his book on this claim)

Then he goes on:

But British armourers were stumped to solve the problem of the wandering zero. It was determined that different batches of Number 5 rifles did not shoot to a consistenf norm(I really doubt British armourers would be 'unable to resolve it', but again he does not cite any supporting documentation).

And this guy goes on like this for another half page or so, nowhere does he cite ANY reference work whatsoever.

I have no idea why the Crown would put precious resources on the development of a novel gun like this, have it 'liked' by the troops, yet the thing was found to be a piece of junk(no disrespect to the British who devised it), I also find this veiled hatred of the British coming out in forum after forum when threads on the #5 MK I rifle are started.

According to at least Wikipedia, the rifle was part of the order of battle for British troops serving in the Malayan Emergency, at least during the first part of that war.

From Wiki:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Malayan_Emergency


During the conflict security forces killed 6,710 MRLA guerrillas and captured 1,287. Of the total number of guerrillas, 2,702 surrendered during the conflict and about 500 at the end of the conflict. There were 1,346 Malayan troops and 519 British military personnel killed. 2,478 civilians were killed and 810 recorded missing as a result of the conflict.

I realize that the Commonwealth forces there were not solely armed with #5 MK I rifles, they had numerous other weapons systems to rely on to close with and destroy the enemy, but I fail to see the logic in putting garbage in the hands of your elite front line troops.

I guess I'm just seeing more British bashing in this guy's book, which lacks hard facts. I am very disappointed and don't reccomend this guy's book to anyone. I can understand somewhat where the Americans are coming from, what with things going in the UK(from over here, through our media filters, anyways, it seems things are going south over there). What do you think? :confused:
 
I have the book "My side of history" written by the Chin Peng, the leader of the Communist Party of Malaysia. After reading it, it was clear the Brits were ahead of them all the time. For the first 5 years or so the leader of the CPM was a double agent in the employ of the British! Reading the book, I would rename it to: "A dummies guide on how NOT to fight an insurgency"


The CPM used mainly weapons dropped to them during WWII and captured Japanese and british arms taken during thefts and ambushes.

The british relied heavily on the Sten and Bren. The Police Museum in Kula Lumper has a interesting selection of homemade weapons, common seem to be 1911's fitted into rifle stocks. I think I have some pictures I can scare up.
 
Yes, Brit troops were mostly armed with LE#5 carbine while the local Malay Scouts used LE#4. Interestingly, Browning auto shotguns & M2 carbine were quite popular with both army & police units. Stens were mostly Mk5 plus some Aussie Owens. By 1957, the Commonwealth forces began switching to SLR & phasing out LE#5.
 
Last edited:
My wife's Uncle served 15 years in the Jungle squad and has quite a few medals, a very happy go lucky guy, but we went to a memorial to Police killed and he was able to point out many of the names as people he knew.
 
Hey folkies, found this site:

http://britains-smallwars.com/malaya/index.html

I found the section on aircraft used to be very interesting. Eclectic mix of interesting aircraft used against the Commies.

To get back on topic, has anyone heard anything concrete *ie; seen the actual MOD reports about the supposed problem? I mean, other than the usual mindless regurgitation that the rifle had a wandering zero; and tisk tisk, et al.
 
Last edited:
Cool site thanks for the tip about the small wars site Fat Tony.
I have been interested in the wars in Aden and Malaysia for quite a while and both of those wars could be used as how to fight an insurgency properly.
 
Aden was an interesting but not very successful COIN op. The hostile & rugged landscape seems to resemble A Stan a lot.
 
I wouldn't class Aden as an example of "how to fight an insurgency properly". ;)
It was, however, a perfect example of how NOT to fight an insurgency.
The communists won.
 
I have always suspected the wandering zero thing to be more about the solder flinching after 4 agonizing shoulder pounding shots with that hockey puck buttstock...just a theory of mine. :D
 
Depending on how much I shoot mine, I might swap out the butt with a #4 butt, just because of the butt being probably a bit better, and the sling thing (lefty). Also would make it look more like the S.I.R. bubba #4's :eek: being sold now. Don't worry, I would keep the original butt. :D

Hey! I said the b word 4 times! :D
 
Last edited:
I must have a either a dense shoulder or a dense head, I like shooting mine:)

Never had much issue with the zero wandering about either, but then I'm not draggin' it though jungles....so who knows..
 
Mine shot great and I regret ever selling it, only time I had a problem with it was when I put on an SK scope mount. It just wouldn't stay put.
 
I fired approximately what....60 rounds was it..?..through my No5Mk1 at the WW2 match at Thompson Mountain last autumn and I can assure you that if you think you're tough, you should try it. :eek:
I had a bruise the size of a hockey puck on my upper arm/outside shoulder from the butt "recoil pad" and a very bruised right knuckle from the knob on the bolt handle hitting it with each shot.
The actual recoil of a Jungle Carbine isn't that bad, quite honestly...it's the design of the "recoil pad" that causes the punishment. It's the short stock that caused my knuckle to be up against the bolt handle. Very poorly thought-out and executed design.
But overall, the Jungle Carbine HAS to be the ###iest-looking WW2 bolt-action battle rifle. :cool: :D
 
Six Star said:
I fired approximately what....60 rounds was it..?..through my No5Mk1 at the WW2 match at Thompson Mountain last autumn and I can assure you that if you think you're tough, you should try it. :eek:
I had a bruise the size of a hockey puck on my upper arm/outside shoulder from the butt "recoil pad" and a very bruised right knuckle from the knob on the bolt handle hitting it with each shot.
The actual recoil of a Jungle Carbine isn't that bad, quite honestly...it's the design of the "recoil pad" that causes the punishment. It's the short stock that caused my knuckle to be up against the bolt handle. Very poorly thought-out and executed design.
But overall, the Jungle Carbine HAS to be the ###iest-looking WW2 bolt-action battle rifle. :cool: :D

If on the other hand nature gifted you with really short arms, they fit better then anything else......I grab every milsurp carbine I can find because they just fit me better.....:rockOn:
 
Back
Top Bottom