Smellie, were not some of the 1915's (post October production I read somewhere) designated Mk III*? And if so, did they still have the volley sights, and drift adjustable rear sight? (learn something new every day
)
Need quick advice
- Thread starter popcanhunter
- Start date
Smellie, were not some of the 1915's (post October production I read somewhere) designated Mk III*? And if so, did they still have the volley sights, and drift adjustable rear sight? (learn something new every day
)Non-matching numbers means the rifle was assembled out of parts. As in the bolt is not the original bolt and you don't know if the headspace is good making the rifle safe to shoot. If the seller can prove good headspace, buy it. Assuming it's in decent condition, of course.
If the headspace is bad, it'll cost a bunch of money to fixed. No. 1 bolt heads run $22 each from Marstar and you'll need a handful plus the headspace guages to fix it. It's an easy thing to do, but you need the stuff to do it with.
$5 says 1916 to 18 were a lot harder on men than rifles. snicker.
If the headspace is bad, it'll cost a bunch of money to fixed. No. 1 bolt heads run $22 each from Marstar and you'll need a handful plus the headspace guages to fix it. It's an easy thing to do, but you need the stuff to do it with.
$5 says 1916 to 18 were a lot harder on men than rifles. snicker.
Or you can forget about the handful of $22 boltheads and the $65 gauges and just get a couple of 7/16 O-rings or a dollar's worth of pony-tail ties..... and KNOW that you have ZERO headspace with every shot and that your brass is PERFECT for reloading.
Reloading, costs the same to shoot a Lee-Enfield as most other older military rifles: 60 cents a pop for full-house ammo or as little as 8 to 11 cents for practice ammo.
Rocket science it ain't, but it can be a lot of fun.... and you learn something, too. Bonus all around!
Reloading, costs the same to shoot a Lee-Enfield as most other older military rifles: 60 cents a pop for full-house ammo or as little as 8 to 11 cents for practice ammo.
Rocket science it ain't, but it can be a lot of fun.... and you learn something, too. Bonus all around!
I have sent "THE 11" a PM regarding the GRADUAL, EXTEMPORE change-over from Mark III to Mark III*. It has been discussed here previously, so I won't bore you.
But DRIFT and WINDAGE are two very different things and are so very easy to confuse.
DRIFT is the sideways motion of the projectile, off the line of sight, which has 2 basic causes: Coriolis force and WIND. At firing, there is considerable PRESSURE on the MEPLAT of the bullet: that tiny little flat at the "point". Its precise size is calculated to produce a KNOWN amount of DRIFT. Left-hand rifling will DRIFT the bullet to the Left of the line of sight, right-hand rifling will DRIFT it to the RIGHT. So they made the rear-sight caps ADJUSTABLE to make up for this.
There is additional DRIFT imparted to the Bullet by a CROSSWIND at velocities all through the range, but MOST noticeably when the Bullet falls below MACH 1. THEN it gets REALLY noticeable. That is why the flags every 100 yards along a long-range rifle-range: so you know how much WIND you are bucking..... and can ADJUST your Rear Sight accordingly.
With the SMLE, the Rear Sight was very slightly crooked on the rifle, accommodating for DRIFT due to Coriolis force. The Lee-Metford Mark II had the Front Sight installed 'WAY to hell and gone off on one side, but that was before the DRIFT-adjustable sight cap had been developed.
As far as DRIFT from WIND was concerned, there was a FORMULA that every Rifleman learned. Look at the Range Flags. If they are out at a 45-degree angle, that is a STANDARD WIND. If they are almost STRAIGHT OUT, that is a DOUBLE WIND. And if the flag is straight out and the free end RAISED, that is a TRIPLE wind. For shooting in a STANDARD WIND, you SQUARE the HUNDREDS (at 300 this is 3x3=9, at 500 it is 5x5=25, at 800 it is 8x8=64) and that is the NUMBER OF INCHES YOU AIM INTO THE WIND. For a double or triple wind, you double or triple THIS figure. Same thing for a HALF wind: cut the calculated figure in HALF. It works. That holds with Service Mark VII Ball ammunition, which is what was issued to Infantrymen. IF your rifle has the DRIFT-ADJUSTABLE rear-sight cap, you can make the adjustments on your Rear Sight.
So that is DRIFT.
WINDAGE, properly speaking, is something ELSE and, in a Rifle, it is something you do NOT want at all.
WINDAGE is the ESCAPE OF PROPELLING GAS AROUND THE PROJECTILE AS IT PASSES DOWN THE BORE AND EXITS THE MUZZLE. ANY WINDAGE will DESTABILISE your Bullet, giving you ERRATIC and INACCURATE shooting. The only cure for WINDAGE is a TIGHT-FITTING BULLET..... or a new Barrel....... and they are awfully scarce these days.
The term WINDAGE dates from the time of the Brown Bess. It was common in all front-stuffers when used in military muskets with undersized Balls.
The term DRIFT only came into use after RIFLED firearms began to be fitted with PRECISION barrels and sights and ammunition loaded with Smokeless powder.
Sorry to sound like a pedantic old sod, but that's the way it is.
Hope this helps.
But DRIFT and WINDAGE are two very different things and are so very easy to confuse.
DRIFT is the sideways motion of the projectile, off the line of sight, which has 2 basic causes: Coriolis force and WIND. At firing, there is considerable PRESSURE on the MEPLAT of the bullet: that tiny little flat at the "point". Its precise size is calculated to produce a KNOWN amount of DRIFT. Left-hand rifling will DRIFT the bullet to the Left of the line of sight, right-hand rifling will DRIFT it to the RIGHT. So they made the rear-sight caps ADJUSTABLE to make up for this.
There is additional DRIFT imparted to the Bullet by a CROSSWIND at velocities all through the range, but MOST noticeably when the Bullet falls below MACH 1. THEN it gets REALLY noticeable. That is why the flags every 100 yards along a long-range rifle-range: so you know how much WIND you are bucking..... and can ADJUST your Rear Sight accordingly.
With the SMLE, the Rear Sight was very slightly crooked on the rifle, accommodating for DRIFT due to Coriolis force. The Lee-Metford Mark II had the Front Sight installed 'WAY to hell and gone off on one side, but that was before the DRIFT-adjustable sight cap had been developed.
As far as DRIFT from WIND was concerned, there was a FORMULA that every Rifleman learned. Look at the Range Flags. If they are out at a 45-degree angle, that is a STANDARD WIND. If they are almost STRAIGHT OUT, that is a DOUBLE WIND. And if the flag is straight out and the free end RAISED, that is a TRIPLE wind. For shooting in a STANDARD WIND, you SQUARE the HUNDREDS (at 300 this is 3x3=9, at 500 it is 5x5=25, at 800 it is 8x8=64) and that is the NUMBER OF INCHES YOU AIM INTO THE WIND. For a double or triple wind, you double or triple THIS figure. Same thing for a HALF wind: cut the calculated figure in HALF. It works. That holds with Service Mark VII Ball ammunition, which is what was issued to Infantrymen. IF your rifle has the DRIFT-ADJUSTABLE rear-sight cap, you can make the adjustments on your Rear Sight.
So that is DRIFT.
WINDAGE, properly speaking, is something ELSE and, in a Rifle, it is something you do NOT want at all.
WINDAGE is the ESCAPE OF PROPELLING GAS AROUND THE PROJECTILE AS IT PASSES DOWN THE BORE AND EXITS THE MUZZLE. ANY WINDAGE will DESTABILISE your Bullet, giving you ERRATIC and INACCURATE shooting. The only cure for WINDAGE is a TIGHT-FITTING BULLET..... or a new Barrel....... and they are awfully scarce these days.
The term WINDAGE dates from the time of the Brown Bess. It was common in all front-stuffers when used in military muskets with undersized Balls.
The term DRIFT only came into use after RIFLED firearms began to be fitted with PRECISION barrels and sights and ammunition loaded with Smokeless powder.
Sorry to sound like a pedantic old sod, but that's the way it is.
Hope this helps.
Smellie, were not some of the 1915's (post October production I read somewhere) designated Mk III*? And if so, did they still have the volley sights, and drift adjustable rear sight? (learn something new every day
There is no reason to not suspect that some early MkIII* came from the factory complete with volley sights etc, the LoC of 1916 clearly states the changes were to the MkIII but would also apply to the MkIII* the last sentence is the key statement
Sorry Smellie but cant let this slide.
In 1915 BSA, EFD, LSA, Lithgow & Ishapore were all up & running & producing the MkIII
Ok if its "want" and not "need" then its a "must"Need? Who said anything about need. The issue is "Want"!
@ 5THBATT:
I was speaking (writing?) of ENGLISH factories. We didn't have one, Lithgow is in that place where they all ride around on Kangaroos and the national sport is Poddy-dodging and Ishapore is not far from Dum Dum on my map: India.
London Small Arms did not have a FACTORY, per se; they had a small ASSEMBLY building where they assembled parts made by the major London gunmakers. Their total production was 5% of ENGLISH production during the Great War.
In the end, Enfield produced roughly 60% of English production, 30% for BSA and everybody else shared the last 10%: LSA 5%, NRF and SSA together 5%.
Should have made my statement more obvious.
At least THAT much is obvious.
I was speaking (writing?) of ENGLISH factories. We didn't have one, Lithgow is in that place where they all ride around on Kangaroos and the national sport is Poddy-dodging and Ishapore is not far from Dum Dum on my map: India.
London Small Arms did not have a FACTORY, per se; they had a small ASSEMBLY building where they assembled parts made by the major London gunmakers. Their total production was 5% of ENGLISH production during the Great War.
In the end, Enfield produced roughly 60% of English production, 30% for BSA and everybody else shared the last 10%: LSA 5%, NRF and SSA together 5%.
Should have made my statement more obvious.
At least THAT much is obvious.
There has been no mention of where the rifle was made, country or factory, only its a 1915 Lee Enfield, to say there was only 2 factories is wrong.
My point is the rifle was only descibe as a 1915 Lee Enfield so could of been made by anyone, you coming in & saying its rare as there were only 2 factories making them in 1915 is miss-leading at best, if you want to pack a sad, go for it, no skin off my nose.
Did the OP ever answer any of the questions? Is it sporterized for example?
It amazes me how:
a. simple answers need to be dragged out of people;
b. how willing to help people are regardless of "a."; and
c. how any thread longer than 10 posts has a 75% chance of pissing someone off.
It amazes me how:
a. simple answers need to be dragged out of people;
b. how willing to help people are regardless of "a."; and
c. how any thread longer than 10 posts has a 75% chance of pissing someone off.
I believe it is sporterized. There is no wood on top, and the bottom wood ends halfway down the barrel. The rear sight is ahead of the breech and is similar to an sks sight, not a peep.
I've already bought it, but don't let that stop the discussion as I'd like to learn all I can about it.
I've already bought it, but don't let that stop the discussion as I'd like to learn all I can about it.
Yep sporterized. Sounds like a good price was paid. Can you post pics of the markings as this will help a ton in identification.
I actually did not hear Smellie say that a 1915 rifle is rare BECAUSE there were only two factories. (And yes, there were only 2 proper English factories at the time). I heard him say that 1915's are rare because they were really only beginning to ramp up production. If you look at the numbers below you can see how big the jump was in 1916. A big jump from 1914-1915 as well. But the numbers clearly show how long it took to really ramp up wartime production. But there is alos another reason why pre 1915 rifles are more rare than other wartime production SMLEs. Namely that the 1915 production would have worked it's way through pretty much every major action of the war, and would be more likely to have been lost, damaged, or scrapped.
Royal Small Arms Factory, Enfield
1903 to 1907 Mk 1 and Mk 1* 193,644
1907 to 1912 Mk 111 100,000
1913 Mk 111 30,000
1914 Mk 111 51,576
1915 Mk 111 271,856
1916 Mk 111* 418,283
1917 MK 111* 640,113
1918 Mk 111* 623,330
Total: 1,681,726
Royal Small Arms Factory, Sparkbrook
1903 to 1906 Mk 1 14,640
Birmingham Small Arms Company (BSA)
1903 to 1906 MK 1 and Mk 1* 150,000
1907 to 1909 MK 111 50,000
1910 to 1913 Mk 111 30,000
1914 Mk 111 51,419
1915 Mk 111 and Mk 111* 275,927
1916 Mk 111* 435,212
1917 Mk 111* 468,447
1918 Mk 111* 345,732
Total: 1,811,734
London Small Arms Company (LSA)
1903 to 1906 Mk 1 and Mk 1* 65,000
1907 to 1918 Mk111 and Mk 111* 430,000
Total: 495,000
Standard Small Arms and National Rifle Factory
1916 to 1918 Mk 111* 275,000
Ishapore Rifle Company (India)
1906 to 1909 Mk 1* 3,000
1910 to 1914 Mk 111 30,878
1914 to 1918 Mk 111 and Mk 111* 136,800
Total: 170,678
Lithgow Small Arms Factory (Australia)
1913 to 1918 Mk 111 and Mk 111* 112,454
Grand total: 4,561,232
Royal Small Arms Factory, Enfield
1903 to 1907 Mk 1 and Mk 1* 193,644
1907 to 1912 Mk 111 100,000
1913 Mk 111 30,000
1914 Mk 111 51,576
1915 Mk 111 271,856
1916 Mk 111* 418,283
1917 MK 111* 640,113
1918 Mk 111* 623,330
Total: 1,681,726
Royal Small Arms Factory, Sparkbrook
1903 to 1906 Mk 1 14,640
Birmingham Small Arms Company (BSA)
1903 to 1906 MK 1 and Mk 1* 150,000
1907 to 1909 MK 111 50,000
1910 to 1913 Mk 111 30,000
1914 Mk 111 51,419
1915 Mk 111 and Mk 111* 275,927
1916 Mk 111* 435,212
1917 Mk 111* 468,447
1918 Mk 111* 345,732
Total: 1,811,734
London Small Arms Company (LSA)
1903 to 1906 Mk 1 and Mk 1* 65,000
1907 to 1918 Mk111 and Mk 111* 430,000
Total: 495,000
Standard Small Arms and National Rifle Factory
1916 to 1918 Mk 111* 275,000
Ishapore Rifle Company (India)
1906 to 1909 Mk 1* 3,000
1910 to 1914 Mk 111 30,878
1914 to 1918 Mk 111 and Mk 111* 136,800
Total: 170,678
Lithgow Small Arms Factory (Australia)
1913 to 1918 Mk 111 and Mk 111* 112,454
Grand total: 4,561,232
Yes, but it's probably a pre-'68 quarter!
Look, it could be an absolute steal or could be a waste of money; it all depends on what it is and what condition it is in.
1915 rifles are less common because as mentioned, most of them served in the trenches for three years after that, and a lot, perhaps most, didn't survive just like the men they were issued to.
