U.S. Enfield

oldiron

oldiron

CGN Regular
EE Expired
Rating - 100%
77   0   0
Location
central Alberta
I have this old Enfield, not really my thing. Is it worth my re-building, or is it worth selling?? Matching #s on the bolt, none on the mag. Bore shines, but rifling looks shallow to me.
I know nothing about them.. SN 58C4201.





 
.
Made by Savage. Could be a candidate for restoring as barrel is intact with bayonet lugs and bolt serial number matches. Was factory / gunsmith sporterized in England and has been proof fired at Birmingham.

Could be two groove or five groove rifling; if two groove it looks shallow but it originally shot within accuracy specifications.
 
Last edited:
I have a similar one but missing the front sight guard It was given to me years ago. I am spending about $200 to bring it back. I think it is well worth it given the price of enfields
 
Shiny bore, uncut barrel, matching numbers. Those are the biggies.

Peeling Suncorite paint, used looking finish, British FTR Savage. (appears FTR but can't see the electropencil in your pics)

Restorable and worth spending on to restore but not highly valuable.

Long Branches are the premium rifles in Canada, Savage takes a back seat to them desirability wise.
 
Yes it is. For some reason the Brits would take a perfectly good rifle and then draw all over the side of it with an electropencil.
They'll even scritchy scratch the s/n of a Long Branch in on the side, right over the Long Branch No4MkI* 1943 etc. for no apparent reason.

The rifle is still good but less aesthetically pleasing.

They also will often bin the original parts and throw on whatever British part is at the top of the bin. Thus they become a hodgepodge of whatever manufacturer's parts are to hand. They didn't care.

Then they'll paint it with Suncorite, which tends to scratch, chip, peel and depaint itself over time. Peeling Suncorite is not very nice looking IMHO.

For the purists, of course a factory original rifle is nicer.

Same goes for Long Branch. In the 1950's they'd FTR wartime rifles, and then end up parkerizing them in that greenish tinted parkerizing (which I've heard is due to the Cosmoline reacting over time). At least, they didn't electropencil them.

I call them Greenies...still a good rifle but not as nice for the purists who know what an original wartime rifle should look like.
 
One nice thing on this one is the British proof marks are straight, square and all right side up. I've seen so many where it looks like they just grabbed the punch, didn't look which way it went and whacked it on the most uneven spot on the barrel.
 
Thanks for the info!! Sort of makes me want to rebuild. Is the gun worth much as is ? That would be the easy way, don't really need one. Does some Canadian dealer have orig. parts for these if I decide to do something to it?
 
There is really nothing wrong with an for rifle, they just sell for a little less, but every collection should have an example.

Too bad it's not a mk1/3.
 
Probably worth around $200 due to the mk1 sight and mag being present. It could be restored pretty easily with any old no.4 mk1 brit or savage wood.
 
I don't see any of the fine British engraving, with the FTR electric pencil. The rifling is a 2 groove, but they must have been believers, to put on the long range ladder sight. I'm thinking I will list it tho, still just not my thing. Others appreciate them for what they are. Bill..
 
Here is pic of mine..
wvjhsFE.jpg
[/url][/IMG]
 
Last edited:
Winchester-1897 said:
Is FTR less desirable?
Click to expand...

It depends what you desire. A typical collector likes things as close to original as possible, (sometimes fails to appreciate that a rifle might have replacement parts because it was actually used in the war and it may have repairs or non-matching parts because it was repaired at a field workshop and put back in the hands of a front line combatant, or that a rifle with all matching parts may have been restored to that condition by someone who bought it surplus and wanted it to be all matching, "all original." If you want a rifle that is an artifact of history, which is more authentic?

FTR was a process that took damaged or worn rifles back to factory to be repaired, refurbished, restored to original production specifications. Replacement parts might be cannibalized from other rifles or might be new production spares. They didn't care whether the replacement part(s) came from different manufacturers as long as it fit the rifle and worked as it ought, it could be used. If you want a rifle to shoot as a representative experience of what the soldiers carried and shot in the war(s), an FTR example may shoot better than a rifle that never got the treatment. And it may cost you a bit less because some purist collectors aren't interested in it.
 
quinnbrian said:
Why ...? I have an mk1/3
Click to expand...

The No.4 rifle was produced in two variants during WWII. No.4Mk.1 was made by all manufacturers. Early in the war the Canadian manufacturer, Long Branch, came up with a modification that simplified production (cheaper, faster) by eliminating the bolt release catch between the charger bridge and the rear sight. This variant is the No.4Mk.1* and the Savage factory in the U.S. also switched to making them that way from that point. Both of these variants have the trigger hung from the trigger guard.

Post WWII a new mark was introduced, No.4Mk.2 with the trigger hung from the receiver. This is better. Any No.4Mk.1 or Mk.1* that went through FTR after the Mk.2 trigger was introduced got its trigger hung from the receiver, and was re-stamped to show it had this modification. But they weren't exactly like a Mk.2 and the system liked to keep track of these things so they introduced new designations. If a No.4Mk.1 got the modification it was re-stamped No.4Mk1/2 and if a No.4Mk.1* got the modification it was re-stamped No.4Mk.1/3. There are still unmodified No.4Mk.1 and No.4Mk.1* rifles.

So, "too bad it's not a mk1/3" because it would then have the improved trigger attachment, like yours.
 
Last edited:
quinnbrian said:
I have to Savages, one MK1 and one MK1/3 FTR. Nice rifle, but I wish the MK1/3 was not an FTR rifle.
Click to expand...

If it hadn't been through FTR it wouldn't be a No.4Mk.1/3, it would still be a No.4Mk.1* with the unimproved (but still good enough to not lose the war) trigger.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom