The Guns We Own

Sure did! Can't see properly, but it appears to possibly have the magazine cut-off, a fairly rare thing to find these days, although that didn't really start to appear until about the second year of WW1 on the SMLE.

I can take additional pics of any part you would like to see in more detail...lemme know what you want to take a gander at, and I'll get the pics for ya! The guy assured me it was put together with all original parts, too, not rebuilt with modern stuff. It was sitting right next to another Enfield (for about $20 more) that was stamped "1945"....thought about that one, for a minute, since it was in immaculate condition and included the original sling, but being in perfect condition, I figured it would have been issued to a Home Guard, not put into front-line circulation. Nothing against the Home Guard, I just prefer pieces that have seen active duty.

And the Springfield fires like a champ! My wife's groupings are frikkin still tighter than mine!

Wouldn't mind seeing a pic of the top of the bolt housing/chamber - the complete area of the bolt would be fine. If the other Enfield was stamped 1945, it sounds more like an Enfield No4, and would have the exposed muzzle with the 'U' shaped foresight protector blade, with the rear sight being either a simple 'flip over' peep site, or a graduated, screw-adjusted, folding sight, graduated out to 1,300 yards. When folded flat, there would be a ring 'peep' site, for ranges out to 300 yards, known as the 'Battle site'. These weapons were front-line issue, not given to Home Guard, who would normally have been issued Springfield P14s, as would other second-line units. The No.4 replaced the SMLE from late 1941, in general service, and was still the basic infantry weapon of British Forces until 1958, when the L1A1 SLR (FN FAL design) was introduced.

Sweet. Pictures coming shortly! Gotta get the ever-inquisitive-and-oh-so-helpful toddler distracted. Elsewhere.

Okay, got some more pics for ya. Sorry 'bout the wait, got hit with some honey-doos. And, of course, my little helper had to help. I tried to get shots of all of the markings, and from different angles, but the lighting wasn't the best, so I apologize for the bad contrast on some of these. One question, though...the little round port on the buttplate...was that where they stuck cleaning rags/wires, or was that where one stashed cigarettes or the "Alamo" ("you aint' takin me alive!") bullet?

First things first - what a gorgeous little girl!
OK, to business. first off, that is one beaut weapon! The finish is superb. On the right (looking from the butt) of the receiver, that ring bracket is the mount for the magazine cut-off, either missing from, or not fitted to this example, This bit of kit allowed a fully loaded magazine (10 rounds) to be retained, and a further round to be chambered, by the bolt, for immediate use on 'Advance to contact' - in other words, retaining full load, but with one extra, when going 'over the top', or into immediate contact.
At the extreme rear of the bolt, the vertical, flat ribbed part is the striker 'grip' of the firing pin which, as you know, runs through the bolt itself, and shows the weapon's 'Registered Number' - serial number - which should be the same as all the other stamped numbers on the receiver, bolt, butt etc. These weapons were literally hand-built, and could be made with 3 different butt-stock lengths, to accommodate the individual.
On top of the receiver, within the bolt housing, you'll notice a vertical slot. This is the 'Bridge Charger Guide', which was designed to accept a 'charger' ( a clip) of five rounds. The chargers were pressed down the guide, immediately loading five rounds into the magazine (which was only removed for cleaning, remaining on the weapon in normal use), allowing very rapid loading of 5 or 10 rounds, with the facility, if needed, of loading individual rounds by feeding independently into the mag. The charger, or clip, was then free and ejected. (normal issue was in chargers of 5 rounds, designed for rapid loading.)
This system, together with the precisely machined bolt and breech assembly, made the Enfield, and it's successors, the fastest. smoothest, bolt-action rifle in the World, a 'title' which has yet to be surpassed.
The 'tunnel' in the brass butt plate is known as the 'Butt trap', and held a cylindrical, brass oil bottle, plus a 'pull through' cord and weight, intended for basic cleaning in the field. The full cleaning kit was carried by the soldier in the front, left pouch of his webbing belt order.
You have a fine example of the gunsmith's craft there RA, a real beaut, and it should be able to put each round within half an inch at 1,000 yards, every time.
Nice one mate!

Thanks for the info, AF! So, the clip normally stayed on the gun, and the rounds were loaded from the top, down into the clip? I picture this happening like with Vassily Zeitzev at the beginning of "Enemy at the Gates", where he had the strip of rounds, pushed them down into the gun, then pulled out the little strip that was holding them all together....something similar to that?

The other Enfield that they had was, if you can believe it, in much better shape, looking like it was just unpacked from the manufacturer's shipping straw (or whatever was used for packing). This one, while looking a lot more beat-up and run through the mill, just screamed "character" to me. Its got stories to tell, if you know what I mean (most of the time, even I don't!). I'm very proud to own it, and now I know a lot more about it! Thanks for the help, bro!

No probs mate, and yes, the charger (the clip of 5 rounds) literally fell off the weapon when the rounds were pressed down into the magazine (what you have called the clip!). The basic design (of the weapon) was a development from the older, 'long' rifles of the 1800s, which culminated in a design from Lee-Metford. Your weapon was the final, refined version, shorter than previous rifles, but optimised for best trajectory and muzzle velocity, and built at the Royal British Small Arms (BSA) works at Enfield, in Middlesex, England, from the Lee design, which gave it the title SMLE = Short, Magazine, Lee-Enfield.
By WW2, the need for a simplified, less expensive, quicker to mass produce weapon, was met by the Lee Enfield Number 4, mentioned earlier, which was basically the same weapon, but with a simplified, but no less efficient bolt-action, a weapon which is still used as a sniper rifle, and, in civilian guise, as a match rifle, known (depending on use) as the Savage, or Enforcer, normally chambered for 7.62mm NATO these days.
If you want more info, just PM me and let me know what you'd like to find out.
Cheers,
Terry.

Composing PM now!

Airframes surely you meant 1/2 inch of point of aim at 100 yards, not 1000 yards ?
In other words a 1 inch group.

When I get a 1 inch group at 100 yards with my Enfield i'll be a happy man.

One final question about the rifle, there are two brass (?) holes on the top, right behind the rear sights. Are these for mounting a scope? They seem rather small to be holding a scope in place, to me. Sorry about the quality, my camera was already put up, so I used the cellphone.

They appear to be a later addition, and are possibly for mounting a rail to accept a 'scope mount, although I agree they seem rather shallow. The rail would be relatively short, and with a 'V' notch on either side, onto which the main mount, incorporating the ring brackets for the 'scope would slide.
Edit: Sorry Tierod, just noticed your post. No reason why a one inch grouping at 100 yards shouldn't be achievable, that used to be the norm for qualifying at 300 yards. OK, I agree that at 1,000 yards it's pushing things a bit, but still possible.

I doubt that anybody would mount a scope on wood, or even if those brass screws went through to the barrel underneath, it still wouldn't a good idea to mount the scope with wood under it. The wood slightly contracting and expanding from changing moisture content would move the scope around.

I do wonder what they are for .

tyrodtom said:

I doubt that anybody would mount a scope on wood, or even if those brass screws went through to the barrel underneath, it still wouldn't a good idea to mount the scope with wood under it. The wood slightly contracting and expanding from changing moisture content would move the scope around.

I do wonder what they are for .

Click to expand...

Have to agree all scopes I have seen are mounted to the receiver whether civilian or military application.

I agree too. On the Lee Enfield No.4T, the scope mount was on the receiver and/or Bridge Charger Guide. Maybe it was a failed attempt? At first, I thought they might have been gas relief ports, but they wouldn't be brass, and there'd only be one, normally on the side, front of the receiver.

i agree not the place to mount a scope,an attempt at a scout scope mount maybe?

WW1 Lee Enfield sniper rifles had the mount on the left of the gun not along the centre line so I don't think it was for a telescopic sight. That said some officers had the rifles adjusted at their own cost by individual gunsmiths but that would be a very rare example.

Plus a scope mounted there ( top center ) would interfere with using the charger clips to reload.

My new (to me) 1943 M-1 Garand.

Nice looking Garand. I've got a 1943 made M1 Garand Receiver at home that I want to get matching parts for, but that could be expensive. Have you looked into dating any other parts on the rifle? Most have a mix-match of parts from numerous arsenal, and public rebuilds.
Wood looks to be in pretty good shape from the picture. Any markings/cartouches on the other side?

Congrats.