no5 Jungle Carbine any experts to tell me about this

#4mk1(T) said:
I hate to say it but this rifle is far from original. The black paint looks nothing like any suncorite I’ve ever seen but my bigger concern is the back sight attachment to the receiver. From the pictures it looks to me as if the original Back sight pivot points have been cut off and then pieces fabricated and attached at the back of the receiver. If this is what I’m seeing I’d suggest you get your money back.
Click to expand...

Yeah, I saw that. sorry to say but I think the rear sight ears are buggered up. the bracket looks to be a replacement so the rear sight can fit. There should be a groove for the rear sight axes pin to be attached... see pict.

If it was suncort, it would be on the barrel too.

No5.852.11.jpg
 
The rear sight ears (both sides) have been added to restore to original function. You can see the braze on the left and the right is a flat plate. It appears to fit OK and if functions just enjoy the rifle. Ron
 
reddog9x19 said:
Sorry reading this thread with interest. long time Lee Enfield owner but have never heard of the term "Shirley". What am I missing?
Click to expand...

Three British makers:

Maltby (serial numbers all start with 1)
Fazackerly (serial numbers all start with 2)
Shirley (serial numbers all start with 3)

No.5's were either Fazakerly or Shirley
 
Where did you buy this rifle if you don’t mind me asking? You should be okay since you bought it as a shooter and don’t seem to be so worried about originality, but it would be good for others to be weary. Something the seller claimed were clearly to defraud a buyer of a milsurp. The claim it was all matching when the bolt and receiver clearly don’t match is egregious, the seller must have known the rear sight was buggered as well. The more I look at the paint and compare it to my No.4 it’s clear the finish isn’t original. I also am suspicious of the claim about the unit marking on the stock.

You didn’t pay top dollar for a collector piece at least so you probably made out okay for a shooter. But it would be good to know where the misleading at best and lying at worst seller is.

Finally check the receiver to see if there is filled holes from a scope mount, my bet is this rifle wore a scope at some point since the rear sight was obviously not with the rifle at one point. Is the bayonet lug missing too?
 
Ya the bayonet lug is missing. It was posted on town post actually the post is still up

https://guns.townpost.ca/marketplace/westlock/guns/jungle-carbine-for-sale

Overall the condition of the wood and metal looked good and the rifling and bore looked very good. I am not an expert in milsurp by any stretch of the imagination. It sucks its not what was advertised I might have overpaid a few hundred but I am not going to worry about it too much if it shoots good.

The barrel and receiver are definitely a no5 they show all the right cuts and stuff
 
Definitely some tomfoolery going on back there. Since the fabricated pieces look to have been attached by either brazing, soldering or some type of welding it might not be a bad idea to have a competent gunsmith take a look at the rifle since the locking lug recesses are very close to where the heat would’ve been applied. This area would have been heat treated originally when the rifle was made.
Also keep an eye on your back site axis shaft. They haven’t made a provision, or installed the small retaining pin which stops the shaft from walking out on the site when it is raised or lowered and under recoil.
 
That add is full of red flags, obo without a price listed is interesting to say the least. He got the year wrong, which is strange since it is super easy to read. I think he is trying to pass it as 1944 since they are quite rare. Claiming all original when there is no bayonet lug and the rear sight has been haphazardly attached is just plain wrong.

This ad IMO was designed to hose someone out of their money. Thankfully you didn’t pay top dollar, an all original typically sells for $800 or so. I would personally try and recoup my money, if you’re into short rifles and carbines there are better alternatives. I would be worried about accuracy, locking lug integrity and the ability of that rear sight to hold zero due to it not having the retaining pin and being brazed on
 
I texted him but no response. He did text me back after the next day he texted me a ton of pics of other rifles he said he has like 200 in his collection. Who knows somebody else text him he might be still selling them lol

Well that sucks I knew there was some flags for sure but didn't know about the sight stuff that does anger me some. I think I need to send it to somebody to check through now I'm worried about shooting it

Anyone know anything about that place in Saskatchewan that says does Lee Enfield work ? http://leeenfieldrestorations.com
 
Looking from the rear the rear sight appears slightly canted to repaired sight ears. You may want to check the level. I agree with everyone else in the paint job, it does feel original.
 
I suppose its possible that the seller did not know the rifle has been modified, but if he is a straight up guy, he should refund your money.
 
Your last two pictures - look inside the bolt way - more or less polished shiny as it should be - now note the colours - that is indication that the shiny steel has seen heat there, while the steel was polished and shiny - old school blacksmiths / gun makers would use colours to judge tempering heat, etc. So, faint-yellow=349F; light straw = 401F; dark straw = 439F; brown = 500F; purple = 540 F and so on. As posted above, the Lee Enfield receiver's had bolt lug seats on each side - should be very hard heat treated on those surfaces. Careless welding or torch work can heat them enough to draw temper, even possibly anneal the area. So, take a good look at the bolt way - the colours are telling you things. Also, small number of swipes with fine emery cloth and those colours are gone - so you are only seeing them because "buddy" didn't bother to clean them off.

Would be very much to your advantage to find a picture of a correct No. 5 - even on Internet - to see how much that rear of yours had been altered - very clearly a "made to work" job, in no way a restoration or "repair". That "paint" is apparently cracking in places - something that I have never seen on suncorite, but what do I know??
 
The mag is for a No1MkIII* not the no 5. From the link to the other site. Note the grooves on the side, No. 4 or No. 5 Lee Enfield mags don't have grooves all the way down. and I won't even mention the spine of the mag.

No. 4 or No. 5 Lee Enfield mags look like this..

Gm1CZB-LQGWZucjojaLJgdYnZZ8uJUba7M7C1hHicRCoihnj2tHq5eTpkpcjonr9fBkxE2EwFO3iqVlAy8hl6ybzww6t_OuXSehQ06kEmnI


A No1MkIII or no1MkIII* mag looks like this.

BEjHauzP9MITfzAnJO6nsuo8loPGZsbJP_wQQZpQp1JcpZ0520nJnMcj5iwe0Hf8jCj227XD-crqCCSqqIYoO6lyoCyIMk4OKDSOS7aXMt7hShTm
 
Well too many questions I had to do it, I got some stripper and tried to remove the paint and ya it came off like butter it was not suncorite just normal paint and it was hiding the left side eye hole but it was the whole strip that looks like was repaired and attached. The magazine says 4 on it tho here is some pics of what i'm seeing now. It is missing the pin for the rear sight and the channel not sure what to do now lol

https://ibb.co/sRFmDK1
https://ibb.co/dJqyCY4
https://ibb.co/0ZYTWYZ
https://ibb.co/G0LGSyK
 
That thing with the "4" on it is not the magazine body - it is a replacement part that gets installed onto the magazine front edge - a spring type thing, not actually the magazine - I have about a dozen of them somewhere. No idea at all what the "4" might signify on that spring. I do not know if there is a difference between those used on No. 1, No. 4 or No. 5, but they will all pretty well fit into any other... You can probably see how to "pop" it off, going up, away from the magazine body. You can clearly see the No. 1 magazine lugs on the rear that have been "sort of" filed away to work in that rifle - if it works?

Again, get a look at a picture of a "real" No. 5 receiver - that whole shiny assembly on the left side, right up to the charger bridge, is a "home made" thing - that is in no way how a LE No. 4 or No. 5 receiver looked. It might work just fine, but is no way "original" - if that matters...

Look at picture in Post #21, and then look at yours. Post #21 picture is what it is supposed to look like, except the axle for the rear sight should have a tiny little cross pin fitting through its hole, living in that long groove. If that little cross pin is there, I missed seeing it... That little cross pin clearly visible in Post #20
 
Last edited:
Ravage said:
Well too many questions I had to do it, I got some stripper and tried to remove the paint and ya it came off like butter it was not suncorite just normal paint and it was hiding the left side eye hole but it was the whole strip that looks like was repaired and attached. The magazine says 4 on it tho here is some pics of what i'm seeing now. It is missing the pin for the rear sight and the channel not sure what to do now lol

https://ibb.co/sRFmDK1
https://ibb.co/dJqyCY4
https://ibb.co/0ZYTWYZ
https://ibb.co/G0LGSyK
Click to expand...

I think your best bet is to use any salvageable parts to restore another sporter. Find an example with sporterized wood and swap them over.
 
"Not sure what to do now" - decide if you are in this for profit or for experience. I saw nothing that seriously impaired its ability to safety fire cartridges - so long as no other evidence of excess heat around the lugs. You have a "decent" shootable rifle, I think. Maybe you paid more than you should have?? How much of this would you have picked out having it in hand - say at a gun show, or in a gun store? If you decide to sell it now, then on you about what you claim it to be. People pay hundreds of dollars for fake Leupold and Zeiss scopes - my neighbour even claims they work very well and deliberately went back and bought a second one, knowing full well it was fake and how to tell. Maybe someone out there really wants a correct No. 5 barrel and stocks,and does not care about "matching"? You have not even got into details - bands,cartouches,butt details and so on. A correct, original flash hider with bayonet lug likely goes for several hundred dollars - not sure what your "sportered" one would go for, but that was a choice someone made when they took a hacksaw to it...
 
"The rifling looks outstanding" - that's the first tip off that it's not original. I own a No 5 Fazakerley and have seen many for sale at gun shows and none exhibit an outstanding barrel. The combination of jungle humidity and corrosive ammo take their toll on these.

They also tend to group minute of barn door. 5 or 6 inches is standard.

That being said - It is a nice handy rifle - and I love mine.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom