Martini-enfield??

Honk...Honk...Boom

Honk...Honk...Boom

Regular
EE Expired
Rating - 0%
0   0   0
Saw an awfully nice gun today. You know the kind that goes up to your shoulder perfect! Im not overly knowledgable about these rifles but I think I might get her.
Heres what I know its a Martini Enfield carbine, Stamped on the side is 1903.
Im told it could be 303 British or 577 something? What is this worth? How much should I pay? Its in good shape I just dont know about it to much. Is it safe to shoot?

Help!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Thanks boys, ;) ;) ;) :p
 
There are many different versions of Martinis, but if it is a legitimate Martini-Enfield (i.e. properly converted to .303 in A British arsenal), then the 1903 date, and other relevant markings, should be on the left side of the receiver. When originally made as a Martini-Henry, in .577/.450 (essentially a lengthened .577 Snider-Enfield case, necked down to .450 cal.) the receiver markings would have been applied on the right side of the receiver. Then, if later converted to .303, the markings signifying that conversion were stamped on the left side. If it is a British conversion , the original Maretini-Henry markings should still be present on the right side.

Another possibility - there are also quite a few "Citadel" Martini-Enfields on the market. These were surplus/obsolete rifles supplied by Britain to Egypt in the early years of the 20th century, and should be marked on the left side of the receiver with a "star & crescent" mark, over "Citadel", over the date. In this case, the original British markings on the right side of the receiver would be "scrubbed" - i.e. removed. (The explanation is that, although Egypt was very much within the British "sphere of influence" - so Britain could control the Suez Canal - it was still officially part of the Turkish Ottoman Empire, so it "wouldn't do" for British-marked firearms to be supplied to them. The "Citadel" mark denotes the arsenal at "The Citadel", the main Egyptian military installation at that time, located in Cairo.)

A third possibility, especially if the 1903 date appears on the right side of the receiver, is that it could be a "Khyber Pass Special" - meaning a hand-built copy produced under primitive conditions in that area of the world. The "craftsmen" who made them often did an incredibly good job making them look right, but they weren't up on what dates should appear on that side of the receiver (e.g. 1903 would be wrong there) - also, it is questionable whether such a copy would be safe to fire.

Can you post any clear pictures of the markings?
 
Last edited:
Grant, just exactly how many "Khyber Pass Specials" are there out there?:confused:
The more I speak of Martinis the more I hear about them.
In fact I'm beginning to have nightmares about buying a large frame action to build a custom rifle and finding out it has less structural integrity than a soggy matchbox courtesy of it's illegitimate parentage at the hands of Afghani "artisans".:(
I gather these are not to be confused with Gahendras which are an entirely different beastie.
BTW, H.H.B., what was the price tag on this carbine?
You should also keep in mind that the carbines, both .303 and particularly the 577/450 kick like a rogue elephant!:eek:
Someone recently suggested that the Martini cocktail gained the name from the Martini Henry rifle as it was a "strong hit" however I have my doubts.
I've read the Vodka Martini was refered to as the "Silver Bullet" but I suspect this has more to do with James Bond 007 than the Zulu Wars!:p
 
Would the .303 version be safe to use with modern or fairly modern ammo, I take it the .303 was smokeless by then?
 
Funny this should come up just now... I just obtained an SMLE Nº3 barrel to replace the shot-out one on a Martini-Enfield I picked up a year or so ago (as I understand the threads are the same) and have always wondered about its provenance. Could you help on this one, GrantR?

MH%20.303.JPG


It has no date markings anywhere, but on the R. side of the Knox form there are several cyphers (one illegible) - a crown over BP, a crown over BV and a crown over NP, and "Nitro Proved", as well as ".303". On the right side of the breech is the crown over BV again (also on the right rear of the loading gate) , and on top of the breech a "2". Under the Knox form there is the number 462 and possibly an 88- the screw hole for the forearm screw has oblilterated one numeral.

Aside from the badly pitted bore, it's in pretty good shape. The firing pin strikes a tad low, due to some wear on the horns of the lever, but it doesn't affect firing and wouldn't be that hard to fix by welding and grinding.

I'm looking forward to getting the "new" barrel on it and maybe putting on a new forearm and getting it out to the range.
 
Colin said:
Would the .303 version be safe to use with modern or fairly modern ammo, I take it the .303 was smokeless by then?
Click to expand...
Well, it depends on the barrel actually.
The 174gn FMJ ball ammo used through 2 world wars is actually the MkVII round but the MkI ammo originally used in Martini .303s and Lee-Metfords was a compressed charge of 70gn of ffg pushing a 215gn cupro-steel FMJ to about 1820fps.
What does this all mean?
Well, early conversions to 303 aren't necessarily fitted with a "Nitro Proofed" barrel so if you pick up a Martini Enfield check out the barrel carefully.
Should this stop you buying it? Nope.
You can always look around for a N.P. bbl or another alternative bbl from another 303 and stow the original away for re-fitting should you want to return it to it's original condition for sale or restoration.
A mate who's a dealer is constantly sourcing N.P. barrels and .303 extractors for customers wishing to rebarrel BP .303 bbls or M.H. 577/450s while keeping the original in a safe place.
Makes shooting cheaper.
But if it is N.P. then, yeah, it's very safe as long as the normal things are checked, i.e. firing pin, headspace, etc..
 
Cordite was introduced in the British service in 1891 and the Enfield rifeling for .303" arms was not introduced until 1895 so the ME would made for smokeless. The BP .303" produced 19 tons psi vs 16 tons for the .303" cordite Mk II-VI.
 
green said:
Cordite was introduced in the British service in 1891 and the Enfield rifeling for .303" arms was not introduced until 1895 so the ME would made for smokeless.
Click to expand...
Why then are there M.E.s with non-Nitro Proof bbls?
I've seen them with my own eyes and they're a concern for my dealer who's been shooting Martinis all his life.
The other thing to take into account is that while cordite may have a lower psi rating, smokeless burns faster than BP.
As such the immediate pressure upon ignition is larger.
That's why smokeless powder kicks and BP gives you a milder push.
It's also the same reason why long barrels are important for BP.......so all the BP burns.
But then I'm probably teaching my grandmother to suck eggs.;)
 
Black powder cartridges only lasted for at most three years. Conversions of the Martini were done later. any .303 Martini would have burned A LOT of smokeless powder during its service. "Nitro proved" is a commercial marking.

As for Khyber pass rifles. The easiest way to identify them is by upside down letterrs and numbers or atrocious spelling.:D
 
All I know is what I've seen with my own eyes.
The Martini range is so varied and full of oddities that it should hardly be surprising that BP-only 303s were built.
If I owned one I'd also be reluctant to play with standard smokeless loads......precisely because they'd probably have fired lots of them over the years.
But I'll keep my eye out for npside pown letters and badd spelign. :D
 
While you can find Martini-Metfords ( metford rifling) I an assure you that any Martini service rifle will handle the standard .303 smokeless loading without any problem. That does NOT include copies of somewhat doubtful parentage. The Martini action is quite strong enough to do the job and was made for even larger British hunting rounds.

If we were to judge a rifle by its original cartridge, the Lee Metford would be relegated to only Black powder, which of course, it is not. Saying that, the hotter burning cordite eroded the shallow metford rifling which was designed for the Black Powder Mk 1 round. this resulted in the barrel being replaced on most of the rifles with the deeper Enfield rifling. No change was made regarding the strength of the Lee reciever.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom