help to find the make of this Enfield

W

WeedWacker

New member
I picked this up a couple weeks ago and after fruitless attempts with the internet not being friendly towards my queries I simply cannot find the make of this rifle. At first glance it looked like it had a jungle carbine stock on it but there are no markings for barrel bands, almost as if it's a sporter version with wood. It also has barrel lugs on the end by the crown almost as if to attach a flash hider... :confused:

Pics:

cimg0290x.jpg


cimg0289.jpg
 
M

madcratebuilder

New member
It's a sporter .303, or as some call them a Bubba. Look on the left side of the receiver for identifying marks. Looks like a 4/1 or 4/2. Great hunting rifle. Looks a lot like what I did to my first Enfield back in 62. For a total cost of $20 I had a great brush gun.

Here's a No5 Mk1 for comparison.
pix1111178859.jpg
 
W

WeedWacker

New member
Madcratebuilder, I notice that your No5 Mk1 has a bayonet lug on the underside of the front sight. Mine does not nor does it bear any toolmarks that would indicate there had been one there in the first place.

There aren't many markings on it to begin with. It has a more recent etched in importation number (SER. MK4413***) and a number on the left side of the receiver below the safety reading DA24754. Is ther anywhere else I can look, there are several numbers stamped on the barrel, most of which are barely legible, with what looks like a cartouche of a crow which I assume is the marking of England.


I took it out to shoot yesterday but it was at the end of the day and clouds were rolling in. Only got two shots off and only one of them nicked the paper plate. :eek: These sights take some getting used to... Anyway i really like the trigger on this thing compared to my Mosin and M1903. With a little tweaking this might wind up being my primary woods gun. That is if I feel like risking getting it banged up in the woods.
 
T

Tidewater_Kid

New member
Weedwacker,

The lugs in front of the sight band for for the No.4 spike bayonet. The bottom lug on the No.5 is for the bayonet that fits that model. Your barrel is correct for the No.4. Here's a picture of my Savage No.4 sporter. Note the two different bayonets they fit the No.4.
 

Attachments

  • savageno4.jpg
    savageno4.jpg
    24.3 KB · Views: 32
R

RJay

New member
Week Wacker, What TideWater is telling you , You don't have a Number 5 Jungle Carbine. You have what looks a Mark 4 No1. The stock has been cut off and modified to make a hunting rifle out of it.
 
W

WeedWacker

New member
Tidewater
That looks very similar to my rifle with the exception of the front sight. Any particular reason for that?

RJay

I know it's not a Jungle rifle, "jungle carbine" is what first popped into my head when I saw it and was trying to figure out what it was.
 
M

madcratebuilder

New member
That looks very similar to my rifle with the exception of the front sight. Any particular reason for that?
Click to expand...

Because they are both No4's. Your rifle has had the hand guard removed and the lower cut down to "sporterize" it. You can easily put it back to original because the barrel has not been cut. New front wood and barrel band would do it. OR you can just use it as is. You have the flip sight on your rifle. There are better sights that well fit, from hundreds of dollars for a Parker-Hale or a ladder style found on most No4Mk2's.

The different NO & Mk numbers can be very confusing to the new Enfield owner. There are dozens and dozens of variations of this basic rifle and all have their own No&Mk. At least a half dozen different manufacturers with different stamp #'s It takes awhile to take it all in.

If you have a good barrel I think you well find it to be a fairly accurate rifle. Mine all shoot 2-3moa, maybe better with a better rifleman.

Here's a 1955 manufactured No4Mk2. The cheek piece is added, it's from a Enfield"T" or "TR" model (sniper rifle) Your rifle basically looked like this when new.

ForSale008Medium.jpg
 
A

Aussie Pete

New member
The rifle in question is/was a No.4 Mk1 or Mk2. Without being able to look closer I can't tell the difference. However the No.4 Mk2 had the variation where the trigger assembly was fixed to the receiver frame and not, as in the Mk1, fixed to the wood.
What's missing:
The bottom wood has been shortened and reshaped.
The top 2 woods.
Middle and front bands (to hold the wood pieces)

It seems that someone has had an attempt to sporterise it. The sights are the "Battle sights" and flip-up/down for 100 yards or 300 yards. The finer "Singer" sights will fit.

From what I can see it would be relatively easy to bring back to Military spec.
Noticed that the rifle is cocked, I presume it has been cocked for the picture.
 
G

gyvel

New member
If you look at the top picture on page 219 of Ian Skennerton's book, The Lee Enfield Story, you will see a photograph of a virtually identical rifle, captioned: "This early production No. 4 rifle is tagged 'EXPERIMENTAL (woodwork cut-away)' and appears to have been a prototype lightened rifle."

It appears to have been a well documented modification and also appears to be legitimate as it is "tagged" by (I assume) the Enfield Pattern Room.
 
W

WeedWacker

New member
Noticed that the rifle is cocked, I presume it has been cocked for the picture.
Click to expand...

Checked action before the pic, just didn't take the time to "de-cock" it.

How easy would it be to get a scope mount for this that doesn't require smithing? I'm a little leery of the 6 o'clock sights and want something a little more precise. The sights are fantastic and I did pull a decent group once I got the hang of it but I can't spend as much on ammo for this as I can my other rifles since the local supply of surplus is no where to be found... :(
 
J

James K

Member In Memoriam
It was a Rifle No. 4, Mk 1, made at Long Branch in Canada during WWII. It is not any kind of rare experimental.

It is now a hunting rifle. If you want a No. 4, that one could be restored, but No. 4's are still inexpensive, so balance the cost of the necessary parts against the cost of an unmodified rifle. Don't forget 1) the hassle of finding all the right parts and the time involved in doing the work and 2) the restored rifle won't be at all "correct" as the parts will be a mishmash.

Jim
 
D

dreamweaver

New member
Here's a 1955 manufactured No4Mk2. The cheek piece is added, it's from a Enfield"T" or "TR" model (sniper rifle) Your rifle basically looked like this when new.
Click to expand...


that's a beauty!! i don't think i've ever seen furniture that shade before. is it one of the aussie imports?
 
M

mp25ds4

New member
id restore it. you probly could for about 150$.
im not fortunate enough to have a no. 4 that could be restored, the front 1"-1-1/2" of the barrel has been cut off
 
A

Aussie Pete

New member
Here's a 1955 manufactured No4Mk2. The cheek piece is added, it's from a Enfield"T" o

The rifle, by the date and the No.4 Mk2 designation would be what is termed from the "Irish Contract". I have one of these, any with the same wood/colouring. These, well mine is, were made in England at the Fazakerley plant.

These / mine is a very accurate shooter, I use it in a monthly military shoot.
 
A

Aussie Pete

New member
Here's a 1955 manufactured No4Mk2. The cheek piece is added, it's from a Enfield"T"

The rifle, by the date and the No.4 Mk2 designation would be what is termed from the "Irish Contract". I have one of these, and:) with the same wood/colouring. These, well mine is, were made in England at the Fazakerley plant.

These / mine is a very accurate shooter, I use it in a monthly military shoot.:)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top