ShtLE markings.

[mctrigger]

Well after a night of scouring i still have come up empty. I'm struggling with the markings of my newly acquired no1 mk3. I'm interested in what these marks mean and what's it story. I would greatly appreciate any help or a direction to go.

[/URL][/IMG]

[/URL][/

[/URL][/IMG]

[/URL][/IMG]

[/URL][/IMG]

[/URL][/IMG]

[/URL][/IMG]
Magazine cutoff

 

[mctrigger]

Let me know if there is a better picture I can take. Or angle change. Here's the bolt too

[/URL][/IMG]

 

[mctrigger]

Here is the tang and rear site too

[/URL][/IMG]

[/URL][/IMG]

 

[mr.e moose]

Looks like a matching receiver, barrel, bolt and rear sight. Rifle was proofed in 42 but I think it is still the original barrel. I take it is a barreled action since there are no pictures of the fore stock or nose cap.

 

[Eaglelord17]

Pretty sure that is a replacement 1942 barrel. Font is different font and it doesn't have a earlier proofing. There rear sight is also a replacement rear sight. Still makes it all matching, just not factory original to the rifle.

Here is my 1912 No. 1 Mk. 3 with matching barrel for comparison. Note the 1912 proofed barrel, and the assembly numbers which are the same font and size.

 

[mctrigger]

This is great. Thanks for the help. Barrel is still in great shape a 1942 replacment. The nose cap matches the rest but only has the serial number. No numbers on stock there is a small mark that looks like ftr on butt stock behind trigger. Are any of these markings indicating a Canadian linage? Also what does the V represent on the barrel or is it a double vv? Also on the 6th image There is a broad arrow with two circles
Which is different than the rest?? Finally what else would tell me a year of the rifle seeing that most of the marks on the reciver part are worn off? It was advertise 1916 for curiosity sakes I'd like to know what marks would mean this.

Thanks again guys.

 

[Eaglelord17]

I don't see any Canadian markings, the 'C' broad arrow is pretty distinctive (if you google it you will see plenty markings). In regards to your receiver markings, unless someone is able to figure out the date by the serial number there is two possibilities. Possibility number one this rifle was made in roughly 1916 and earlier, it would have originally had volley sights, magazine cut-off, piling swivel, and a windage adjustable rear sight. Later on it would have been though repairs and factory to bring it up to later standards and lost some of the early features as well as having parts replaced as needed (such as the rear sight in your case, and the barrel).

Possibility number two is the rifle was made sometime in the post-war years (20s-30s) and would have just had the magazine cut-off (and maybe the piling swivel, I haven't read up enough on that area to know for sure). Again throughout its service life it would have been refitted as needed, again in your case rear sight and barrel were replaced. Odds are I would say it was most likely possibility number one as most No. 1 Mk. 3 Lee Enfields (not No. 1 Mk. 3*) were made in that time frame.

I am not going to pretend to be a expert on Lee Enfields (that 1912 BSA I just posted photos on, I got slightly burned on because it was a restored sporter and I was unaware of that fact when I bought it). Just trying to help with what knowledge I have. Hopefully someone more knowledgeable pops along with more information.

 

[englishman_ca]

It is a 1910-16 Enfield made Sht.LE Mk.III. 1910 is earliest because it has a George Rex proof mark (King George V 1910-1937) on the left receiver ring. It is a Mk.III which went to III* in 1915/16. There is a marking under the III that has some relevance but I cant read it. '18 ?? '12 ??
Looking at the left butt socket '37 denotes that is went back to the factory for significant work in 1937. There should be a tiny inspector stamp close by to the '37 which will tell as to which factory.

It has had a barrel changed and fitted in 1942. Enfield made barrel. It was renumbered to match the receiver. There are a number of RSAF inspector markings on the right hand barrel reinforce which often indicates that there was some work done on the barrel, chamber or sights.

The rear sight bed is a post 1925 Enfield unit that was pulled out of a parts bin and fitted. While the base had been sitting in stores, it was picked at random as part of a 10% of inventory inspection and thus marked o/l\o. The sight leaf is a replacement too, a good used part out of the parts bin, old number cancelled then and renumbered to match the rifle.

BSA on the underside of the barrel is likely an ownership marking for the British South Africa Co.. An outfit organised much in the same way as that of the East India Company. Is there a three digit number adjacent to it?
Single hand stamps, so we cant rule out that it could be simply a previous owner's initials (Bertram Samuel Atkins?).

This rifle was probably purchased and reassigned duties post WWII. There are no commercial proofs apparent, so this has been sold out of service through channels outside of the British gun trade.

 

[mctrigger]

Great info englishman_ca! I appreciate this a lot!
Here are a few more pics. I can't make out what is under the III. Looks like 42

[/URL][/IMG]

Here's the left butt socket

[/URL][/IMG]


Here is the bsa stamp. There is a 6 after it that's all and a better picture of what's beside it.

[/URL][/IMG]

[/URL][/IMG]

Finally these are the only stock marks I found. The first behind the trigger guard and the second is the bottom forend behind the nose cap. Looks like a match to the serial number

[/URL][/IMG]

[/URL][/IMG]

 

[englishman_ca]

So it appears that it has been back into Depot once in 1935?? and in 1937. I see two dates and two inspector stamps. Very faded, maybe just my imagination but I think that I can see a face down E in the lower inspector stamp. Wishful thinking staring at a ghost of a stamping, but it would fit, refurb at RSAF Enfield.

The '42 on the right side is again a marking to show that it went back to the factory for repair or upgrade. Makes sense as the replacement barrel was fitted up in 1942 (could be the same '42 hand stamp used on both barrel and receiver ring). It usually appears on the left but sometimes on the right side contrary to the 'Instructions for Armourers'. Often this date can be seen with the marking FR or FTR for Factory Thorough Rebuild. But not in this case.

I don't know what the two Vs are marked on the nock's form flat signify. I have never seen a marking quite like it.
Late India refurbs had an open sided triangle tick mark thingy stamped on reworked components, but it is not the same.
Nothing here screams Indian rework and I think that would be going off track. I would pursue the South African connection..

The marking on the fore arm is a super imposed E, F and a D. This is a RSAF Enfield marking which first appeared in 1925. The numbers would be the serial number. Nice, it matches so there is a good chance that the factory bedding is still good.

The markings on the underside of the butt wrist look to be a common inspector mark and two initials, probably to denote the subcontractor who made the butt stock. Too faded to read.

 

[mctrigger]

Well damn I'm impressed. Sounds like you are a walking encyclopedia on these. Thanks a lot for the info. From everyone. I will dig into the South African side. This is my first Enfield and I like it. I wish this thing could talk. Hahaha. I'll post some pics when I take her out for a shoot. Looks great all cleaned up! Thanks again.

 

[5THBATT]

It is a 1910-16 Enfield made Sht.LE Mk.III. 1910 is earliest because it has a George Rex proof mark (King George V 1910-1937) on the left receiver ring. It is a Mk.III which went to III* in 1915/16. There is a marking under the III that has some relevance but I cant read it. '18 ?? '12 ??
Looking at the left butt socket '37 denotes that is went back to the factory for significant work in 1937. There should be a tiny inspector stamp close by to the '37 which will tell as to which factory.

It has had a barrel changed and fitted in 1942. Enfield made barrel. It was renumbered to match the receiver. There are a number of RSAF inspector markings on the right hand barrel reinforce which often indicates that there was some work done on the barrel, chamber or sights.

The rear sight bed is a post 1925 Enfield unit that was pulled out of a parts bin and fitted. While the base had been sitting in stores, it was picked at random as part of a 10% of inventory inspection and thus marked o/l\o. The sight leaf is a replacement too, a good used part out of the parts bin, old number cancelled then and renumbered to match the rifle.

BSA on the underside of the barrel is likely an ownership marking for the British South Africa Co.. An outfit organised much in the same way as that of the East India Company. Is there a three digit number adjacent to it?
Single hand stamps, so we cant rule out that it could be simply a previous owner's initials (Bertram Samuel Atkins?).

This rifle was probably purchased and reassigned duties post WWII. There are no commercial proofs apparent, so this has been sold out of service through channels outside of the British gun trade.

It is not necessarily a 1910 to 1916 rifle, it could have been made in the 1920s, the MkIII was not replaced by the MkIII* in 1916, the LoC of 1916 lists changes to the future manufacture of the MkIII & lists the changes, these are listed in part 1 of the LoC, part 2 of the LoC introduces the MkIII*

Loc of 1916

A 1927 Ishapore MkIII

A 1929 ENFIELD MkIII

A 1935 Lithgow MkIII

A 1939 BSA MkIII

 

[englishman_ca]

That is true, it could indeed be inter war made. I had a 1924 Enfield Sht.LE Mk.III.

This is also an Enfield made specimen with an E prefix serial number. I gotta dig for my notes on blocks of serial numbers..

 

[mctrigger]

Would there be a magazine cutoff on 20s enfields?

 

[englishman_ca]

I should put on my helmet and be ready to duck.



Yes, 1920's Enfields would have a magazine cut off.

 

[mctrigger]

I should put on my helmet and be ready to duck.



Yes, 1920's Enfields would have a magazine cut off.

Haha. Sorry. I've made a real solid attempt at figuring most of this out by myself but there are so many damn variations.

 

[englishman_ca]

There are indeed a great many variations. That is part of the fascination of them. Most of the components went through changes of some sort. It is a progression of how they were manufactured. So there are mini histories of each part and how its evolution fits in with the morphing of the rifle.

In service, replacement parts were fitted as a matter of course in making repairs. Many parts were interchangeable and the Brits were frugal with the Crown's money, they were into recycling 150 years ago. So it is common to see rifles with parts from earlier or later models fitted.

The magazine cut off was deleted as a WWI wartime manufacturing concession to help speed up production. It was re-introduced after the war. Some of the Mk.III* that were assembled without the cut off were retrofitted in the inter war years with the plate and the * in the designation struck out.

Quite frankly, these days, it is very few Sht.LE Mk.III or III* rifles that I see fitted with the cut off, I believe are original to the rifle. Many of the owners tell me that they fitted the cut off themselves. I can tell if a cut off plate has been with that rifle for some time by looking at the wear marks scratched into the blue of the metal of the plate. It becomes pretty obvious after looking at a few as to which are recent replacements. There are subtle differences in the cut off too, they also changed at certain years. There were about ten different variations.
If that magazine has been fitted and working with that cut off plate for any length of time, the wear marks on the platform will bear witness.

Same goes for a bolt head. If it has been on that bolt body any length of time, the scratch marks will line up when the bolt head is rotated just so. Makes it easy to tell if somebody had recently been messing with headspace and switched out bolt heads.

There are a bunch more little tell tale signs. There are so many 'restored from a sporter' rifles out there being passed off as original factory built. There is a lot more to installing new wood than just bolting it on.

It is a lot like detective work sometimes trying to figure out a rifle.

 

[5THBATT]

The cutoff was not deleted in 1916, Lithgow & LSA continued making MkIIIs into 1918 before switching to making MkIII*s.
Between 1919 & around 1922 there seems to have been no MkIIIs made (yet to see a SMLE with a cutoff made from those years that appear to have been made as a MkIII & not retrofitted) but then not many MkIII*s about from those years either. Both models were made between the wars but Lithgows production seems to have been basically all MkIIIs with cutoffs between around 1924 though to 1941 but there are always exceptions, BSA also seems to have made mostly MkIIIs as well but a few MkIII*s show up but in higher numbers than Lithgow but that is just a observation based on observed examples & the opposite might be the reality, the cutoff was finally omitted from production in 1941, pretty much in line with the start of true production of the No4 which originally included a cutoff during trials.
When the surplus SMLEs were sold, one of the first things many people did was remove the cutoff & piling swivel if these were fitted as there was no need for these things in civvy street & the cutoff was a inconveniance to many shooters & of course many went further & cutdown the wood as well, collectors today love having these things fitted so many get refitted & if these things were deleted many years ago while in-service & removed they would be very rare items to find today especially if they were done away with in 1916, i have been collecting for many years & the biggest source for cutoff plates & piling swivels was the draws of old school gunsmiths who removed them in the hundreds for customers.

 

[ricohman]

I have a 1917 SHTLE MKIII* that has a mag city off that appears to have been there for 100 years. So they are out there. I need to figure out where mine was built.