Old, old sporterized Lee Enfield UPDATE! with 1-piece stock...

louthepou

louthepou

Snow-White Le Mod<br>Moderator
Moderator
Rating - 100%
792   0   0
Location
Aylmer, QC
Hi guys, update: another old, old sporter joined this one-piece stock Lee Enfield. See page three for the pictures.

------------------------------------



Hi folks,

Well I finally took this one out of its box. Got this as a bunch of parts, with rusty metal and broken stock. But, a nice bore... didn't need more than that to convince me to keep it and make it look nice again.

I won't show you the stock (just yet) but here are a few pics to show the amount of modification that went into it - from what I can see, this happened a long time ago.

Receiver with bolt and scope mount, and the Weaver J2.5 which came with it:



Receiver with trigger guard:



Now, here's what really got me thinking. Note the inscription on the extension which was brazed on the back of the receiver:

 
Last edited:
wonder if they sold the bits with a template ? If they did produce these there would possibly be more out there ,or might be south of the border .You never know as people leave us so does the information that they carried
 
It is a carbine bolt and a carbine receiver. If it were a Long Lee receiver, there would still be some remnant of the screw hole for the long range sight. That knox looks more like a No 1 than a carbine or Long Lee bbl.

I have seen similar one-off conversions of Lee Enfields, but I can't say I have ever seen or heard of a commercial conversion by Bannerman or any of their contemporaries. I don't see adequate provision for a recoil lug on this one.

Sure would like to see more pics
 
M
louthepou said:
Hi folks,

Well I finally took this one out of its box. Got this as a bunch of parts, with rusty metal and broken stock. But, a nice bore... didn't need more than that to convince me to keep it and make it look nice again.

I won't show you the stock (just yet) but here are a few pics to show the amount of modification that went into it - from what I can see, this happened a long time ago.

Receiver with bolt and scope mount, and the Weaver J2.5 which came with it:



Receiver with trigger guard:



Now, here's what really got me thinking. Note the inscription on the extension which was brazed on the back of the receiver:

Click to expand...

Very cool Lou , you have a knack for finding them. . Looking forward to the finished results .
 
That is very cool. Elwood Epps used to make up modified Lee Enfields with one-piece stocks back when he was in Clinton, ON. That is not one of his. I suspect that the work was not done by Bannerman, but used a kit they provided.

We want to see before and after pics of the stock!
 
Thanks guys. B_noser, the recoil lugs is likely an issue which explained why the stock broke the way it did.

Home job, sure looks like it. Especially when I look at the work on the stock inletting. Many details were left, let's say, half-done.

Sorry Andy, I didn't take the "before" pic, but here's the main repair done:



On the outside, it does look ok:



Still have to work on bedding a bit, and a buttplate.

Hoping to find a replacement 3/4 inch tube scope for it too... Not an easy task.

More pictures coming soon!

Lou
 
Lou
You should be able to build an adequate recoil lug by welding a metal plate to the rear of the receiver between the new tang and the remnant of the butt socket, or extending the socket remnant. That is a very nice looking stock and it should assemble into an attractive little sporter. It would be a shame for it to be unreliable due to the lack of a recoil lug.

Is the barrel off a No1?
 
Thanks b noser that sounds easier than other ideas i was contemplating.

The barrel seems to be original number matching. Rear sight is gone and barrel was shortened.
 
B_noser said:
Lou
You should be able to build an adequate recoil lug by welding a metal plate to the rear of the receiver between the new tang and the remnant of the butt socket, or extending the socket remnant. That is a very nice looking stock and it should assemble into an attractive little sporter. It would be a shame for it to be unreliable due to the lack of a recoil lug.

Is the barrel off a No1?
Click to expand...


LOU

You should NOT alter the receiver. Francis Bannerman was one of the greatest arms dealer of surplus military equipment in the early 1900s. This is one of those rifles that was modified by the Bannerman Company. Bannerman had a large island in the Hudson River near New York City, and it was absolutely FULL or old military equipment from clothing to cannons. It is now a park and recreational area. About 1960, it was cleaned up and there were artillery shells all over the place. Bannerman also had a warehouse in the New York area.

This is the first Bannerman rifle I have seen in over 60 years, and is a true classic. Many old Springfields were altered to .303 calibre along with others, as a possible sale to the British, but this is the first Lee Enfield I have seen.

The Bannerman Catalog was reprinted, (in a format similar to the Gun Digests and early Sears catalogs,) and is available. I have one, and the stuff in it is almost overwhelming. "Bannerman Catalog of Military Equipment - 1927", I think it might be available from AMAZON for about $25 in anyone is interested.

It does look like someone made another stock for it, but it is an interesting piece.

.
 
Last edited:
Thanks Buffdog. Initially i was looking at how the stock could be reinforced, and also looking at the copy of the bannerman's catalog which was lent to me by Sly Old Fox to see if i could find something to verify any detail from this old rifle's family history.
 
Buffdog is certainly more knowledgable and experienced than me and I have to defer to his advice regarding modification of the receiver. However, if I were doing the restoration and wanted to end up with what I would consider a reliable shooter, I definitely would not leave the recoil absorborption situation as it stands. If you don't want to modify the receiver, you might consider inletting and fastening a metal plate into the stock in such a way that it's upper edge would butt up against the rear of the receiver in the area of the notch between the added tang and the socket remnant. If it has been restocked at some point, it may have been originally built with some such arrangement. I find it difficult to accept the idea that any reputable company would put that much work into a conversion without adequately addressing recoil. That is just my opinion. That and $2.50 should get you a small coffee at Tims :rolleyes:
 
B_noser said:
If you don't want to modify the receiver, you might consider inletting and fastening a metal plate into the stock in such a way that it's upper edge would butt up against the rear of the receiver in the area of the notch between the added tang and the socket remnant.
Click to expand...

That is what I was thinking about this morning as my hamster was running in circles in my brain waiting for its next dose of caffeine. :D THanks for the tip. Expect updates very soon.
 
b: Wow! That is a delightful find! I have an old "Spencer" pump shotgun manufactured by Bannerman on the old Spencer machinery.

Whatever you end up doing, please, please keep us posted! :)
 
.
I do agree with strengthing the rear to take up a bit more of the recoil. I might suggest a steel spacer, cut to length, inletted into the stock in the wrist area through which the rear receiver action screw goes. Similar to the spacers in Mausers, etc. I suspect that this stock is not the original one, but one that was made up for the action, at a much later date. When Bannerman made up his rifles, the telescopic sight was not all that popular with hunters, so open sights were the norm for most of the shooters of that era. Telescopic sights were very expensive for the ordinary hunter before WWII.

Another indicator is the shape of the stock. Way back then, most rifles did not have cheekpieces, and those that did have them, it was a much smaller area and design. This stock has a large Monte Carlo cheekpiece, which came into popularity around the 1960s and later, when the reasonably priced telescopic sight was getting more available and accepted by hunters.

The Weaver J series scopes were 3/4 inch diameter, (made 1947 to 1967 ), and the mount looks like a "N" series mount.
 
Last edited:
I would think that is not the original stock that came with the rifle when Bannerman's rebuilt it. That comb and cheekpiece combination did not become popular until after Bannerman's was history. There were old European rifles, even shotguns, built with cheekpiece stocks, but all I have handled, owned or used have been comparatively low and understated. The high cheekpiece is a response to the day when people forgot what iron sights are for!

One thing Bannerman's did have at one time was a quantity of original Remington-Lee rifles. These were the original 1879 type and did NOT have the big Butt Socket which the British eventually designed for their rifles. That Butt Socket came from the Martinis. With an original Remington-Lee to hand, they would have known exactly how to build a proper stock for a Lee action.

The Bannerman Springfields were/are just about the ultimate rarity as far as 303s are concerned. A hundred were built, using 1901 Springfield Test actions from rifles which had been surplused. They were shipped to Britain and disappeared. I have no idea if any are in collections today, although the Pattern Room might have one. They certainly do not crop up on Kijiji, that's for sure!
 
Well computers allow mw to bave access to really knowledgeable folks via a certain forum so i can't say i hate computers that much! :)

Looking at the stock i too think it's an after thought. More on this later (have to get breakfast ready for the kids and the dogs!)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom