No 1 Mk 3 SMLE

E

Eaglelord17

CGN Ultra frequent flyer
Rating - 100%
63   0   0
Location
Sault Ste. Marie
Hi all,

Thought I would share my latest addition to my WWI collection. It is a No. 1 Mk. 3 Lee Enfield made in 1912 at BSA. Overall it is mostly matching (except the nose cap), and otherwise it is pretty close to completely correct for a WWI Lee Enfield (missing volley sights, and the stock was heavily sanded). A cool feature is that it was sold out of service then later on brought back into service (likely during WWII). Here are some pictures.

















 
Eaglelord: I had been looking at this rifle as well but the seller told me the barrel was "not matching". Clearly there's more to it than that! Many different markings on barrel and receiver including BSA and Lithgow (and others?). I'll be very curious to hear how the experts interpret all this. If I had seen these photos I probably would have bought it.

milsurpo
 
I think it is using assembly markings for the barrel and receiver (the 413), and that same 413 is found on the rear sight. I also have a thread on it on Milsurps.com where we are slowly trying to learn about it.

I saw it, and I saw it sit for a bit, which generally means it likely isn't a good buy (as most things on there get snapped up fast if it is a good deal), however I had wanted one for a while and I am not 100% concerned if it is a 'pure all matching' example as I wouldn't really be able to shoot that.

Overall I am trying to just find out what I can about it, this is only my second Lee Enfield (first was a beautiful Ishapore 2A1 that I sold years ago), and it isn't really my area of expertise.
 
Personally speaking, I think it's a restored sporter. A big hint is the condition of the stock and the fact that the nose cap doesn't match. As I understand it, the nose caps were fitted to the barrel, hence the serial number. For a 1912 SMLE that's been through 2 wars, it's far too nice looking. I don't think the stock was heavily sanded if the crispness of the stampings are any indication. As long as you didn't pay too much and are just looking for a good shooter, you should be good to go.
 
It might be a restored sporter, but if it is at least they used the correct stock. Feeling the stock you can tell it was sanded, it has that type of feel to it.

Apparently this rifle spent time in Australia as those stampings on the barrel with the stars are Lithgow inspection markings, side by side with the BSA inspection markings. Definitely interesting.
 
The stock bears the ED entwined post 1929 trademark of RSAF Enfield and the 00 arrow inspection mark 1939-45. The fore end lacks the fish belly profile appropriate to an original stock made for the lr sight. IMHO the fore end has had the long range sight fitted to it post service.
 
green said:
The stock bears the ED entwined post 1929 trademark of RSAF Enfield and the 00 arrow inspection mark 1939-45. The fore end lacks the fish belly profile appropriate to an original stock made for the lr sight. IMHO the fore end has had the long range sight fitted to it post service.
Click to expand...

Excellent information, so does that make the stock a No. 1 Mk. 3 stock with the magazine cut-off cut out but lacking the proper fish belly profile for the long range sight, or a No. 1 Mk. 3* stock that was converted to have both post service?

Here is some more photos of the stock







 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom