Please help me identify this No. 4 Enfield

[cantom]

I bought a No 4 Mk 1 Enfield today at the gun show. It is somewhat unusual. It is marked as follows on the left: No 4 Mk 1 ROF (F) 11/43
I know this to be from Royal Ordnance Factory Fazakarly.(sic)

This rifle has a Jungle Carbine type flash hider. No bayonet lug. Cut away front top handguard. It has the regular (not 800 yard) Mark 1 type rear sight. The flash hider has a retaining screw on the right side. Removing the screw does not allow the hider's removal.(it's on tight)

It is definitely not the Numrich Arms no 4 to no 5 conversion flash hider- I recently had one so I know. I haven't seen this hider before and I've had about 5 Jungle Carbines including one now. The hider is not held on with two pins on the top as per usual for a jungle carbine.

The non-matching(darn) bolt has the lightening cuts as per Jungle Carbine, the hole in the handle as per Jungle Carbine, plus the rifle supposedly has other lightening mods, although they don't jump out at me and it isn't particularly light. The serial number on the bolt is not a letter followed by 4 digits like some JC numbers I've seen.

Finish is all matching grey park, not black paint. Serial number is not engraved like a Jungle Carbine. There is no FTR on the rifle.

Top cover is grooved, and ends just forward of the band with the sling swivel on it.

I am well aware that various companies in the US have been making faux Jungle Carbines from no 4's for years. I considered this fully before deciding to buy this, and the possiblility factored into the price paid.

The seller told me it was made in a run of about 5000 for the Royal Marine Commandos. He has seen exactly the same rifle at various shows. He said they always have 11/43 as the date. He said he had at one time been given a sheet with all the info on the rifle but had lost it over the years.

One guy I talked to after buying it said he had seen the same rifle at the National War Museum in Ottawa 15 years ago.

Needless to say I'm intrigued. Anyone got any info on it? A link or scan with info on it would be much appreciated.

On the tag he had on the rifle, it says MK IV T 1/2
The trigger is pivoted on the trigger guard as per no 4 mk 1, not on the receiver.

 

[Claven2]

The seller told me it was made in a run of about 5000 for the Royal Marine Commandos. He has seen exactly the same rifle at various shows. He said they always have 11/43 as the date. He said he had at one time been given a sheet with all the info on the rifle but had lost it over the years.

Buy the rifle - not the story. You've been had - it's 100% for certain a bubba job. I promise you.

EDIT TO ADD: Your seller is a moron. MkIV T 1/2 is not a legit Enfield at all. A No.4T is a real model, but it's not what you have. A 1/2 would be a brit No.4Mk1 converted to Mk2 spec in the 1950's, which again, you don't have. Anyone who would label a rifle as "MkIV T 1/2" and feed you that Royal Marines BS story would immediately make my "never buy from that guy again" list, and I would warn all my friends away from him - seriously.

 

[Stevo]

The seller told me it was made in a run of about 5000 for the Royal Marine Commandos. He has seen exactly the same rifle at various shows. He said they always have 11/43 as the date. He said he had at one time been given a sheet with all the info on the rifle but had lost it over the years.

I hope you bought it for a shooter and not as a collector's piece. The dealer was "creatively marketing" this rifle.

What you have is a modified No4. Mk1. Nothing special about it.

Wouldn't a non-FTR '43 Faz be Suncorited as well, not parked?

On the tag he had on the rifle, it says MK IV T 1/2

If he had "Mk IV" on a No. 4, it shows just how much he knows about Lee Enfields. Which, apparently, is very little. Even less than me.

Please tell us you didn't pay more than $150-200 for it.

 

[BadgerDog]

I bought a No 4 Mk 1 Enfield today at the gun show.

What gun show was this?

I think I've seen this piece before .......

Regards,
Badger

 

[cantom]

I hope you bought it for a shooter and not as a collector's piece. The dealer was "creatively marketing" this rifle.

What you have is a modified No4. Mk1. Nothing special about it.

Wouldn't a non-FTR '43 Faz be Suncorited as well, not parked?



If he had "Mk IV" on a No. 4, it shows just how much he knows about Lee Enfields. Which, apparently, is very little. Even less than me.

Please tell us you didn't pay more than $150-200 for it.

$200. The rifle is in nice shape, shiny bore and is worth that to me regardless or I wouldn't have bought it. It was a guy selling his own rifle, not a dealer. It is not Suncorited, it is grey park. No black paint anywhere.

Any speculation about who would have done it up like that?

 

[cantom]

What gun show was this?

I think I've seen this piece before .......

Regards,
Badger

Woodstock ON.

 

[Stevo]

$200. The rifle is in nice shape, shiny bore and is worth that to me regardless or I wouldn't have bought it. It was a guy selling his own rifle, not a dealer. It is not Suncorited, it is grey park. No black paint anywhere.

Any speculation about who would have done it up like that?

As long as you like it, that's what's important.

Besides the commercial mods, IIRC there were kits available at one time for the home conversion of No.4's to No.5 look-a-likes.

 

[BadgerDog]

Woodstock ON.

Yup, I handled the same rifle at the front table (as you come in the door) at the Orangeville Gun Show.

I spent a fair amount of time with the seller listening to the provenance......

Regards,
Badger

 

[Slash5]

Looked at that gun today as well. Told the guy it was probably a #4 conversion but he spun the same story.
I thought the bore looked a bit dark, maybe better when it's cleaned up.
For the price, it was looking like a candidate for my #5 to .22 conversion project but funds were tight.

 

[Gibbs505]

Any chance of pic's??

 

[cantom]

Any chance of pic's??

I have a really crappy digicam, but I'll see what I can do.

I considered 4 rifles today at the show:

1) A pretty nice but non matching Lithgow 1mk3. $250
2) A gorgeous Savage No 4 mk 1* $350
3) A really nice Jungle Carbine $350
4) This rifle- tag said $225, I got it for $200.

I have had dozens and dozens of Enfields. A normal, run of the mill example doesn't really float my boat, I have a nice Long Branch and thus my normal No 4 is covered...I would like something a bit different and this is that...
Incidentally I just put a patch w/CLP down the bore and it looks like it was just machined last week...as bright and shiny as you could want.

 

[cantom]

Yup, I handled the same rifle at the front table (as you come in the door) at the Orangeville Gun Show.

I spent a fair amount of time with the seller listening to the provenance......

Regards,
Badger

What did you think of the story re this rifle? You know your Milsurp obviously...
He said he had his eye on an as new version of this rifle, and he went to the show to get it only to find...the guy thought he wasn't coming and put it out only to be grabbed by Bob(who was at the show today- he's an Enfield expert apparently). This rifle is in nice shape but certainly shows signs of use.

He said lots of people question the reality of these rifles, but lately some people started collecting them...who knows?

My question is, have you seen more than one of these?

 

[Gibbs505]

I have a really crappy digicam, but I'll see what I can do.

I considered 4 rifles today at the show:

1) A pretty nice but non matching Lithgow 1mk3. $250
2) A gorgeous Savage No 4 mk 1* $350
3) A really nice Jungle Carbine $350
4) This rifle- tag said $225, I got it for $200.

I have had dozens and dozens of Enfields. A normal, run of the mill example doesn't really float my boat, I have a nice Long Branch and thus my normal No 4 is covered...I would like something a bit different and this is that...
Incidentally I just put a patch w/CLP down the bore and it looks like it was just machined last week...as bright and shiny as you could want.

Looking forward to them!!

 

[BadgerDog]

What did you think of the story re this rifle? You know your Milsurp obviously...

Well, thanks for the compliment, but there's at least a dozen folks on here who have forgotten more about Enfields then I'm going to learn with what's left of my collecting career.

I have a pretty open mind about most things and there's no such thing as a perfect body of research in any of the books on Enfields or Mausers that I've read. They all have errors and omissions, but I've never seen one reference in any research material that referred to a rifle that looked like what I handled. That's not to say it couldn't be what he claimed, but the preponderance of empirical data and experience factors of the collector community indicate to me that it's a simple "bubba" job.

I do have to say though, I thought it was pretty well done, which is why I spent so much time going over the oddities of it. It sure wasn't a basement hacksaw job and whomever did it, took great care to make it look right. I think it's a unique party conversation piece and I'd sure love to see some good pics of it posted, so everyone here could share in the experience of seeing it clearly.

As you know, I do large detailed photo montages of my collection with a good digital camera, so if you'd like to display the piece in the Miscellaneous CGN Members Collections section of the MKB for future reference, I'd be happy to do a photo pictorial for you and set it up for display. We just have to arrange for me to borrow the piece for a few days, so I can do that.

Regards,
Badger

 

[cantom]

Well, thanks for the compliment, but there's at least a dozen folks on here who have forgotten more about Enfields then I'm going to learn with what's left of my collecting career.

I have a pretty open mind about most things and there's no such thing as a perfect body of research in any of the books on Enfields or Mausers that I've read. They all have errors and omissions, but I've never seen one reference in any research material that referred to a rifle that looked like what I handled. That's not to say it couldn't be what he claimed, but the preponderance of empirical data and experience factors of the collector community indicate to me that it's a simple "bubba" job.

I do have to say though, I thought it was pretty well done, which is why I spent so much time going over the oddities of it. It sure wasn't a basement hacksaw job and whomever did it, took great care to make it look right. I think it's a unique party conversation piece and I'd sure love to see some good pics of it posted, so everyone here could share in the experience of seeing it clearly.

As you know, I do large detailed photo montages of my collection with a good digital camera, so if you'd like to display the piece in the Miscellaneous CGN Members Collections section of the MKB for future reference, I'd be happy to do a photo pictorial for you and set it up for display. We just have to arrange for me to borrow the piece for a few days, so I can do that.

Regards,
Badger

Should I be kicking myself for getting hosed on this thing or feel I got $200 worth? One way or the other, it's not a bad looking rifle.
Hey, if I'd bought the best bone stock No 4 there is, there'd be nothing to talk about, would there? It is a bit different...

Where are you located, pmail me if you wish. Maybe I'll drive there for you to photograph this, it's a nice day. I don't as yet have a good camera.

 

[Stevo]

Should I be kicking myself for getting hosed on this thing or feel I got $200 worth? One way or the other, it's not a bad looking rifle.
Hey, if I'd bought the best bone stock No 4 there is, there'd be nothing to talk about, would there? It is a bit different...

Tom, if you bought the rifle because you liked it, then enjoy it.

I still want to see pics of it, too.

 

[Hitzy]

$200 is nothing to spend on a rifle. Don't beat yourself up.

 

[green]

It is a conversion done by Golden State Arms/Santa Fe fto increase the sale price of a No4 on the commercial market c1960.

 

[cantom]

It is a conversion done by Golden State Arms/Santa Fe fto increase the sale price of a No4 on the commercial market c1960.

After googling that name, I came up with this.
http://enfieldrifles.profusehost.net/sp3.htm

There is no company's name roll stamped on the barrel. Actually, there are no extra stampings on it at all. In fact, fewer than usual.

It has a normal 10 round mag.

 

[BadgerDog]

Should I be kicking myself for getting hosed on this thing or feel I got $200 worth? One way or the other, it's not a bad looking rifle.
Hey, if I'd bought the best bone stock No 4 there is, there'd be nothing to talk about, would there? It is a bit different...

Where are you located, pmail me if you wish. Maybe I'll drive there for you to photograph this, it's a nice day. I don't as yet have a good camera.

No, you weren't hosed, but it isn't a special Commando thingy ......

IMHO, I'd think she's worth $200 you paid as a solid bolt-action .303......

green could be right. I've heard of those, but never seen one, except perhaps if that's what I was looking at in Orangeville. The one I saw didn't have ANY Santa Fe markings on it at all, at least that I remember.

I'm in the n/e part of the GTA. If you want to send me a PM, we could arrange to get together and do some pics if you'd like.

Regards,
Badger