My new basket case SMLE

Cdn303

CGN frequent flyer
Rating - 100%
47   0   1
Location
Bruce County, On
So on March 16 two friends and I went to a local shop, and perused the rack. On it were 2 sported SMLE’s and a sported m/96 Swede. I looked at all three and put them back down, but latter the next week it started to nag at me. So today I went back and swung a deal for one of them. I was going to try for both SMLE’s but upon further examination the one need quite a bit of work, and a lot of spare parts.

What I got was a sportered No1MkIII (no star), that still has the cut off, and the windage adjustable rear sight. Now the forestock has a piece missing, but I got it to have as a restoration project, so it will be getting a full length one anyhow. All of the following pictures were taken prior to cleaning

Here she is.

basket_002.jpg

basket_003.jpg

basket_005.jpg

(I know, someone has put the sight protector on backwards)

Upon further examination, which started at the gun shop and ended at home with the rifle disassembled pieces, I’ve taken to calling her my basket case. At the shop I noticed the big things, like the crack, and that none of the numbers match. The bolt, receiver, barrel, and rear sight all have different numbers. Good news is, the bore is in fairly good shape, there are a few little pits, about a dozen. Also before disassembly I checked the headspace and it checks out and the crown is good too.

Now we get deeper into things. The RH wrist has the GR below the crown and BSA Co below that. There is no date stamp, or SMLE MkIII stamp. On the top of the receiver “A.G. Parker & Co. Ltd Birmingham”, and on the knox form, “AGA Ball Burnished”. Out comes “The Lee Enfield” by Skennerton (©2008). The only reference that I could find for either of those was this: “AG Parker & Co Ltd, Birmingham -.22 Sht. Rifle Patt ‘14# - 1915 to 1918”. However, it is not a .22 as the knox form is also stamped Nitro Proved 303 and my 303 snap caps and headspace gauges fit.
basket_035.jpg

basket_006.jpg

basket_007.jpg


I see that this is starting to get long, so I’ll continue with a bunch of pictures and captions, and finish with a paragraph or two.

basket_008.jpg

The safety catch spring is missing, but the safety is safe at the gun shop (I forgot to pick it up)
basket_010.jpg

I am not sure why the rear trigger guard screw is so long, a proper one is on the list.
basket_013.jpg

This is the inner band screw and what I thought was the spring, but it turns out that it is a piece of wire wrapped around the screw. (Again on the list)
basket_014.jpg

basket_015.jpg

These are of two pieces of the stock broken off of the stock and stuck in the receiver.
basket_016.jpg

And back on the stock.
basket_017.jpg

basket_019.jpg

basket_033.jpg

The reinforce at the back of the stock in gone, but the more interesting thing is that the stock bolt does not have a squared end. I thought they are supposed to. I guess whomever bubba’d this thought that they knew more than Mr Lee and Mr Speed and ground that off

basket_021.jpg

This is her disassembled as far as I want to go. Note the S.A.I.S manual to aid in some of the process, and the mallet the persuade some stubborn items. (I worked on the floor to avoid the inevitable dropped and rolled somewhere under the bench senario)

There is a whole manner of proof marks and such, rather than post them here is a link to my photobucket page. http://s1204.photobucket.com/albums/bb415/Cdn303/Basket%20Case/#!cpZZ2QQtppZZ20

My intensions are to gather the necessary pieces and give her some dignity back. Since there is no date I guess I could put her together to either the MkIII or the MkIII* specs. However, seeing as her maker operated during war one and since she has the cutoff and the windage adjustable rear sight, I think I am going to go the MkIII route. So I need to find a stock that has the volley sight cutouts and the volley sights themselves.

I'll be re-reading the chapter on SMLE's in the 'bible' and hopefully it will help explain the manufacture situation

I’ve been looking at online parts dealers and Numrich has reproduction volley sights at $21.15(rear) and $53(front) but they are sold out of volley inlayed forestocks. They do have most of the other bits though, as does LTC and Springfield Sporters (I have a way of getting stuff from them). Darn that was almost that easy. I would however, like to try and find original parts if I could and to use Canadian dealers first.

Between Tradex and Marstar I can get all of the small pieces that I need, but I am still coming up short with the volley inlayed stock and original volley sights. Help locating these would be appreciated.
 
You have a Trade rifle, built by Birmingham Small Arms and supplied to Alfred G. Parker for sale through his shop.

Parker then BALL BURNISHED the barrel and offered the rifle for sale.

Ball Burnishing was a process involving pushing an extremely hard "ball" through a barrel, smoothing any roughness, tool marks and so forth and ensuring that the bore was PERFECT. They shot very, very accurately indeed. Also, break-in time was MUCH shorter with a Ball-Burnished barrel, down from the normal 300 to 40 or 50, perhaps 150 at VERY most, depending upon the barrel. This was very important for guys shooting the old-time Long Range matches such as the DCRA still shoots annually in Ottawa and such as the annual Bisley Commonwealth match in England.

Modern button rifling has pretty much done away with Ball Burnishing as it gives you effectively a Ball Burnished barrel with a single pass. Barrels with proper CUT rifling still well could benefit from the process, but I don't think anyone is doing it any more. It has become a relic of old-time SERIOUS long-range target shooting.

I have made a couple of posts regarding this type of shooting, over on milsurps dot com, but they are much too much typing to repeat here. Anyone interested can go over there and get into the LE forum and look for the thread on relative accuracy between Number I and Number 4 Rifles.

You have a very real PRIZE, sir!

THIS ONE might even be possible to TRACE!!!!!!!!!!!
.
 
I figured you'd go back for at least one of those. I saw how that cut-off was tearing at you when you looked at it the first time.
 
You have a Trade rifle, built by Birmingham Small Arms and supplied to Alfred G. Parker for sale through his shop.

Parker then BALL BURNISHED the barrel and offered the rifle for sale.

Ball Burnishing was a process involving pushing an extremely hard "ball" through a barrel, smoothing any roughness, tool marks and so forth and ensuring that the bore was PERFECT. They shot very, very accurately indeed. Also, break-in time was MUCH shorter with a Ball-Burnished barrel, down from the normal 300 to 40 or 50, perhaps 150 at VERY most, depending upon the barrel. This was very important for guys shooting the old-time Long Range matches such as the DCRA still shoots annually in Ottawa and such as the annual Bisley Commonwealth match in England.

Modern button rifling has pretty much done away with Ball Burnishing as it gives you effectively a Ball Burnished barrel with a single pass. Barrels with proper CUT rifling still well could benefit from the process, but I don't think anyone is doing it any more. It has become a relic of old-time SERIOUS long-range target shooting.

I have made a couple of posts regarding this type of shooting, over on milsurps dot com, but they are much too much typing to repeat here. Anyone interested can go over there and get into the LE forum and look for the thread on relative accuracy between Number I and Number 4 Rifles.

You have a very real PRIZE, sir!

THIS ONE might even be possible to TRACE!!!!!!!!!!!
.

The post you are referring to was a very interesting read when you posted it on Milsurps.

Since I'm not sure I can link to a competing forum, I'll just say the thread title is 'Which is a more accuraate rifle? The No1 MK 3 or the No 4 MK1', and smellie's post is #14 in that thread.
 
all those extra long screws and missing safety tell me that there is a Parker Hale target sight somewhere missing its rifle :(

those screws are hard to find, and you should be looking for the proper target sight to finish off your rifle
 
Hey, thanks guys. I would have taken pictures post cleaning, but the power was out for 3 hours tonight. I did get the bore slugged via candle light. It didn't turn out real great. The first one worked for the first 8 inches of barrel, but then just pushed straight through. The second one I only pushed in 6 inches and pushed back out the muzzle. It looks like it is .312, but I want to try again tomorrow with some proper light.
 
Here it is cleaned up. I left the forestock off, as it was damaged (see above) and the bearing surfaces were no longer the same.

basket-clean_001.jpg

basket-clean_004.jpg

basket-clean_002.jpg

basket-clean_003.jpg


Given smellie's explanation of what I have, is a full forestock and volley sights still the proper course of action?

I am heading over to milsurps now to read that 'Which is more accurate' thread now.

Edit. That was a good read. But sometime after smellie's last post it got way off topic.
 
Last edited:
The volley sights may be correct for that rifle (if the OP is looking to restore her to her original configuration) as I think, and smellie will be able to confirm or refute, that the volley sights were dropped from the No1 MkIII* in order to speed up production during the Great War.

The OP did say his rifle is a No1 MkIII without star.
 
Smellie beat me to the description of ball burnishing. The UK's factories were focussed on pouring production out the plant doors to fulfil their Great War contracts. Afterwards, a lot of parts were left over. What to do? Find a way to make consistent parts from ones that were good enough for the trenches, but too wide in tolerances for discriminating gentlemen who fired single aimed shots. Enter the ball burnishing technique. They even carried it over to the No.4s after the subsequent European unpleasantness.
 
all those extra long screws and missing safety tell me that there is a Parker Hale target sight somewhere missing its rifle :(

those screws are hard to find, and you should be looking for the proper target sight to finish off your rifle

I think you are correct. There was a small spring stuck on that screw when I bought it and I wasn't sure what it was for. Then reading about the target sights here I see that there is a small spring placed on the axis of the safety catch.

I am going to ask the shop owner about the previous owner when I go and pick up the safety. (I had forgotten it there b/c it wasn't attached, b/c someone removed the target sight)

I think until I fully decide what to do to her, I'll get the hourglass shape spring plate, then maybe try and find a target sight.

The volley sights may be correct for that rifle (if the OP is looking to restore her to her original configuration) as I think, and smellie will be able to confirm or refute, that the volley sights were dropped from the No1 MkIII* in order to speed up production during the Great War.

The OP did say his rifle is a No1 MkIII without star.

I am not to sure of that anymore. As smellie pointed out it is a trade rifle, so I'm not 100% on its proper configuration. I think the MkIII specs are correct.
 
If the rifle was bought before WWI it would have volley sights,after WWI just the cut off.This is a general rule.
I have examples of both.
A commerical MK III with volley sights are very rare.Only seen a hand full in 25 years collecting.
 
its a BSA comercial so all bets are off as to MkIII of MkIII* it can have a mixmatch of parts and that would be original.

If it was manufactured for the express purpose of being a target rifle I suspect that the volley sight would have been ommitted but not the cut off plate or windage adjustable rear sight.

One thing I find interesting is that it has the crown above the BSA, the BSA comercials I have don't have th crown or royal cypher (GR)
 
Right now my main attention has switched to finding out a more approximate date. This will let me know how far to go on restoring it. Some of you (one for my buddies included) may just say make it a shooter, but I want to properly restore it. This includes getting a target sight for it, some day.

As it stands, I have a range of dates from 1907 to 1918 obtained via serial number production runs. Here is the breakdown

Receiver W91017 - 1907-1915 BSA MKIII OR 1915-1918 Enfield, BSA, SSA, NRF#1 MkIII*

Barrel R928 - 1907-1915 Enfield or BSA MkIII OR '15-'18 Enfield, SSA NRF#1 MKIII*

Rear Sight - '07-'15 BSA MKIII OR '15-'18 Enfield or NRF#1 MKIII*

This is the closest that I can pinpoint it with the information that I have. My shooting buddy (different one then metioned above) was over tonight and we (OK I) kicked around several theories.

One theroy is that after war one it was assembled out of spares, or pieced together from rifles undergoing repairs; possibly ones retrieved off the battlefield. That being said, there is no discernible flat spots on the wrist where it would have been scrubble of military markings. This lends credibility to a purpose made, pre war, receiver theroy.

It doesn't help that the switch over from MKIII standards to MKIII* were not finite, plus after war one, most production switched back over to the reintroduction of the cut off.

The only one who would know for sure is a long past employee of AG Parker & Sons Ltd.

I am starting to consider contacting one of THE enfield experts about this. I has me that curious.

On a side note. This is why I love collecting milsurps. There is always a story behind them. You spend 10x more time finding/learning the story then you do at the range, but that is the fun part.

On another side note, this was the cheapest guns that I have bought (to date) and it has given me the most intrigue and enjoyment.
 
You have a Trade rifle, built by Birmingham Small Arms and supplied to Alfred G. Parker for sale through his shop.

Parker then BALL BURNISHED the barrel and offered the rifle for sale.

Ball Burnishing was a process involving pushing an extremely hard "ball" through a barrel, smoothing any roughness, tool marks and so forth and ensuring that the bore was PERFECT. They shot very, very accurately indeed. Also, break-in time was MUCH shorter with a Ball-Burnished barrel, down from the normal 300 to 40 or 50, perhaps 150 at VERY most, depending upon the barrel. This was very important for guys shooting the old-time Long Range matches such as the DCRA still shoots annually in Ottawa and such as the annual Bisley Commonwealth match in England.

Modern button rifling has pretty much done away with Ball Burnishing as it gives you effectively a Ball Burnished barrel with a single pass. Barrels with proper CUT rifling still well could benefit from the process, but I don't think anyone is doing it any more. It has become a relic of old-time SERIOUS long-range target shooting.

I have made a couple of posts regarding this type of shooting, over on milsurps dot com, but they are much too much typing to repeat here. Anyone interested can go over there and get into the LE forum and look for the thread on relative accuracy between Number I and Number 4 Rifles.

You have a very real PRIZE, sir!

THIS ONE might even be possible to TRACE!!!!!!!!!!!
.

just to note the "milsurp" Dot com post #14 is just down right epic. just had to say it
note for smellie what kind of sights did the smle use a 900+????
 
Back
Top Bottom