PDA

View Full Version : what to look for in a Enfield


jwaller5
February 16, 2009, 14:28
I don't know to much about the Enfields, if I was going to look at getting one, what would I look for? I have never shot one. what would you compare it too? I own a Garand and a FAL. I have shot a Mauser.

StoneyCreekMrMauser
February 16, 2009, 16:03
They are fine rifles and very fast to operate. The action cocks on closing, which makes bolt lift light and smooth. Parts are very available, and ammunition is plentiful.

The only problem you might find is that most of the ammo is corrosive. That's easy to fix. However, I've noticed lots of split cases with POF and FNM, usually at the neck and shoulder.

Be sure to check the headspace of the weapon. I have a few and all of them accept NOGO gauges and a few will accept FIELD REJECT gauges.

Enfields come in two calibers in military configuration, .303 British and 7.62x51 NATO (Ishapore No2A, Indian). Either is a good caliber. 303s are commonly used in Maine as moose guns, so power is not a problem. Commercial 303 is very good and can be reloaded. 7.62 NATO you already know about, and unless the loads are overloaded you should be able to interchange ammo between an FAL and No2A.

You can pick one up just about anywhere and I don't think they're on anyone's current ban list. Haggle a bit and you can get one for a C-note (usually beat to hell but it'll go) or look for a cherry for higher. Either way, you won't be disappointed.

They also shoot with less recoil than a Mauser, if that means anything to you.

mitchellh
February 16, 2009, 16:14
Jwaller5,

That's a fairly broad question, but I'll give it a try. I'm sure other enthusiast will chime in.

What you have here from top to bottom are;
The SMLE No1 MkIII 1944
The No4 Mk2 1955 Fazakerley
The No4 Mk1 1943 Long Branch
And lastly, a Navy Arms 2A1 Carbine cut down from a Ishapore .308 rifle.

http://img201.imageshack.us/img201/3875/picture021fj8.jpg (http://imageshack.us)
http://img201.imageshack.us/img201/4210/picture019np4.jpg (http://imageshack.us)


The Lee Enfield (I.M.H.O) has one of the smoothest bolt action for a surplus rifle. Spare parts are readly available from Springfield Sporters, and Gun Parts Corp. Except the No1 MkIII replacement stocks have become scarce, as well as replacement barrels.

The No1 MkIII has notched rear leaf sight that sits forward of the receiver and make aiming a bit more challenging. The No4 MK1/2 has rear sight that sits at the rear of the receiver, and the sight picture is circle. It also has a ladder type site for farther distances.
http://img15.imageshack.us/img15/3222/l1030553edited1td3.jpg (http://imageshack.us)


Both have 10 round detachable magazines that are not compatable between No1's and No4's.

The Ishapore is basically the same as a No1 MkIII, but in a .308 caliber.

Prices vary widely, but decent Enfields are around the 250.00+/- range, and 500.00+ for the NOS Fazakerley N04 MK2.

What questions do you have now? Which are you more interested in the NO4, or NO1?

Here's a thread with a lot of different varities of Enfield family.

http://www.falfiles.com/forums/showthread.php?s=&threadid=227189

jwaller5
February 16, 2009, 19:04
what is the difference between the No.s and MK?s? I know they were upgrades. But which is better? I would really just be looking for a good shooter that is not alot of trouble. I would probably stick to .303. it looks to be cheaper write now. I barely shoot my FAL due to ammo price.

-Which would everyone recommend between a enfield and a mauser?

bykerhd
February 16, 2009, 19:58
I would look for a No. 4 Mk II. That's is a post World War II .303. British made.
And there I would look for the newest possible. Mid-50s if possible.
There are some around from stocks that came in about 15 years ago that were in un-issued condition. Virtually "new" old rifles. They are getting a bit pricey in mint condition but are generally a very good choice as a shooter.

Some of the wartime produced rifles have been rebuilt several times in various places and have served in several countries. No 4 Mk I & MkI* are mostly WW II vintage. They were produced in England, Canada(Long Branch) and the US(Savage). They are somewhat less expensive, but a good one, will cost you these days.

The carbines are post WW II mostly, but some have seen VERY hard service.

The earlier No 1 Mk I,II & III go back to the late 19th century and through WW I.
The Australians used them through WW II. Many of the rifles have been rebuilt several times and reflect the hard use they've seen.
India made versions, generally less desirable, in both .303 & .308 in to the 1960s. They also used British & Australian rifles and usually fitted them with a big, ugly screw or bolt in the wood in front of the action. Referred to as an "ISHY screw"(Ishapore Arsenal) around here. It does devalue the rifle quite a bit.

There were some transitional No 1 rifles made between WW I & WW II. If you find one in halfway decent shape that is COMPLETE with a date between the wars, LEAP on it. If not complete or sporterized, RUN away. Parts are nearly impossible to find for a proper restoration.

A square 10
February 16, 2009, 20:57
"what is the difference between the No.s and MK?s? "

the number system was set up in the 20s , the number essentialy denotes the model of the rifle and in a few cases the caliber

no1 = an SMLE [short magazine lee enfeild ] the short refers to the length of the rifle , the magazine indicates the method of feed , the lee enfeld refers to the designer and the design ,

in general the no1 is a 303 cal rifle

a no2 is a 22cal trainer version of this rifle

a no3 is the P14 [M1917 type] rifle

a no4 is the late 30s upgrade from the SMLE to the new battle rifle [not SMLE]


the marks are evolutionary changes in the model , they incorporated 'lists of changes' to the standard rifle , ment as improvements , but sometimes war expediants that may later have been totaly or partialy reversed in the following peace

an early SMLE [no1 rifle] might was a mkI , it was upgraded by changes to a mkI* and later thru a mkI*** to a mkIII , then a mkIII* ,

the stars represent small changes useualy , but in the case of the common mkIII/III* rifles it eliminated the magazine cutoff , the volley sights , and the windage adjustment of the rear sight --in my mind fairly drastic , but since it was war time [WWI] it was an expediant that allowed faster production ,


because you asked .......
heres a long lee enfeild , an early SMLE upgraded to mkI*** condition , and a converted-shortened long lee converted to a 22cal trainer ,

http://i144.photobucket.com/albums/r188/Asquare10/MIKESBAYONETS043.jpg


heres a mkIII , a no2 mkIV* trainer , and a mkIII* ,


http://i144.photobucket.com/albums/r188/Asquare10/MIKESBAYONETS046.jpg


heres a no4 mkI , no4 mkI* , Cno7 mkI 22cal trainer , and a no4 mk2 ,

http://i144.photobucket.com/albums/r188/Asquare10/MIKESBAYONETS040.jpg

and here is a cooey canadian 22cal trainer [w/scope] and a no5 mkI rifle ,

http://i144.photobucket.com/albums/r188/Asquare10/MIKESBAYONETS041.jpg

ive really not covered this in depth , but only deeper than the others , it can get a bity overwhelming ,

SO - lets put it in perspective for the new person ,

you will readily find the no1 mkIII* rifle - they were made in england and austrailia , and india , look for a nice one , in shootable condition ,

you will readily find a no4 rifle , a mkI will be produced in england , a mkI* will be produced in north america , a mk2 will be produced in england [and packistan]
if you find a mkI/2 its a conversion of the mkI to mk2 standards , a mkI/3 is conversion of the mkI* to a mk2
the mk2 is the best accuracy , and you can get a new-in-the-wrap one that is factory fresh - plan to pay big bucks for it tho


if you find an indian made 2A or 2A1 it is in 762x51 nato

you can also find indian converted rifles to 410 shotgun in both english 410 and US 410 ,

one caution - NO - two -

1] if it has DP marked on it get help , these can be dangerous , they are drillpurpose only

2] if the markings look suspicious in any way , get help , the kyber pass rifles are slipping in and can look fine but are very dangerous

A square 10
February 16, 2009, 21:06
oh , and id be most pleased to help if you email me , if i cant help i will find you someone smarter than i that can , i know a number of very knowledgeable enfeild people ,

dont be scared off , these are some very fine rifles to shoot and most interesting to collect , they are very addictive

the no3 - P14 is the dark one here , and the others are M1917s

http://i144.photobucket.com/albums/r188/Asquare10/MIKESBAYONETS034.jpg

mitchellh
February 16, 2009, 21:19
Originally posted by jwaller5
what is the difference between the No.s and MK?s? I know they were upgrades. But which is better? I would really just be looking for a good shooter that is not alot of trouble. I would probably stick to .303. it looks to be cheaper write now. I barely shoot my FAL due to ammo price.

-Which would everyone recommend between a enfield and a mauser?

Easy solved, go with a No4 MK1, or the MK2. You will be happy. The main difference between the Mk1* and Mk2 is how the bolt is released.

If you want a shooter that's not a lot of trouble, check out;

BDLLTD. Brain Dick is an Enfield gunsmith and any rifle you purchase from him should function with no problems.


http://www.bdlltd.com/mil_sale.htm


Good Luck.

StoneyCreekMrMauser
February 16, 2009, 21:52
Originally posted by jwaller5

-Which would everyone recommend between a enfield and a mauser?

I'm not everyone, but FWIW, I'd recommend the Mauser (what'd you expect?).

That being said, either is a great rifle. Both have solid reputations for accuracy, power, and reliability. The difference is really in what you prefer. If you prefer a cock-on-closing action, the Enfield is the best but Mauser factories produced rifles with this feature from 1889 until the 1940s. They are pretty slick. You'll get more rounds in an Enfield (usually 10) as opposed to the Mauser's five, but your mag won't fall off and get damaged (not without destroying the rifle anyway). Stripper clips for the Mauser are a little easier to come by and I think faster to use. The Mauser bolt is much stronger than the Enfield's and can handle quite a powerful load. Mausers also have the benefit of a bolt face that accepts many cartridges as opposed to the Enfield, so a new caliber is always an option if you have the barrel (plenty of those hanging around!). Additionally, you don't need a tool to disassemble the Mauser bolt for routine maintenance. For complete breakdown, there's often a hole in the stock just for that or you can make one with a 1/4" hole in a piece of wood block.

Each rifle has its advantages and disadvantages. It's hard to go wrong either way. My reasonings are just that, mine. YMMV.

BTW, what do want to do with this rifle?

brownknees
February 17, 2009, 10:45
The main difference between the 1 and 2 is how the bolt is released.
Sorry I have to contradict you there.
Both the #4 Mk1 & #4 Mk2 have the same bolt release mechanism.
The #4Mk1* has the differing one.

Like others have posted the (*) means there was some fairly minor change to whatever the Mk## was in the designation.

The #4Mk1 was the latest improvment to the earlier models. Things like sights & stock were changed, big things, so the new number.

The production needed to be simplified & speeded up during wartime, so there were little changes made to the #4Mk1.

The rifling was simplified, the spring-loaded bolt catch was replaced with a simpler cut-out in the rail, and in some cases the rear sight either stamped from sheet metal, or replaced with a "L" shaped flip sight. This became the #4Mk1*. Most were made in the US by Savage arms.

After WW2 the need for quick, materials conserving simplificatiions was no longer needed, so the #4Mk2 was introduced.
Basically it went back to the #4Mk1 reversing most of the economy measures in the #4Mk1*. But some other changes were made as well, such as changing the method of securing the front sight blade & re-working the trigger for a (Thoeretically) better one.

Having had all 3 versions of the #4, I found all of them to be good shooters, I didn't find any real, practical disadvantage with the Savage simplified one either. If it had been fitted with the "L" sight I'd just have swapped it out for the micrometer type, a fairly easy thing to, and not expensive either.

I found a #4Mk2 so I swapped them out. Not because of anything "wrong" with the Savage, but because I got lucky & found a brand new, unused Mk2.

If you can then get a #4Mk2. Not because they are remarkably "better", even though there are some little improvments, or more accurate, but because they'll have been used a lot less.:whiskey:

DYNOMIKE
February 17, 2009, 14:44
Do yourself a HUGE favor and get this book......

http://www.surplusrifle.com/reviews/ncpno4.asp

Enfields are awesome rifles, but the changes and Mods are tough to get a handle on...

I might suggest a NO4 MKI, or a NO4 MKII, or a NO1 MKIII, or a P14, or a US MODEL 1917, or......
Oh never Mind just get the BOOK.. :p

LITHGOW NO1 MKIII... :whiskey:

http://i275.photobucket.com/albums/jj295/DYNOMIKE_photos/P8240404.jpg

http://i275.photobucket.com/albums/jj295/DYNOMIKE_photos/P8090359.jpg

http://i275.photobucket.com/albums/jj295/DYNOMIKE_photos/P8090362.jpg

kalliste
February 17, 2009, 15:17
As I understand it, the difference that people care about between the No 4 Mk 1 and the No 4 Mk 2 is that on the Mk 1 the trigger is pinned to the trigger guard, which may be affected by the stock, and on the Mk 2 the trigger is pinned to the receiver. It's not hard to see why the Mk 2 would be considered superior but AFAIK the Mk 1 is perfectly serviceable and in actual use you probably wouldn't be able to tell the difference.

http://www.telusplanet.net/public/philqgbr/enfields.html

mitchellh
February 17, 2009, 16:41
Originally posted by brownknees

Sorry I have to contradict you there.
Both the #4 Mk1 & #4 Mk2 have the same bolt release mechanism.
The #4Mk1* has the differing one.



BK,

Thanks for the contradiction, I am remiss, and needed to be corrected.

:beer:

brownknees
February 17, 2009, 17:49
No biggie. If we, the "experts" get confused just imagine how messed up this has to be for a new guy just starting out on the slippery slope to "chronic Enfielditis":p

Wait till he finds a #4 mk1/2, right next to a #4 Mk1/3:tongue:

brownknees
February 17, 2009, 17:51
Originally posted by kalliste
As I understand it, the difference that people care about between the No 4 Mk 1 and the No 4 Mk 2 is that on the Mk 1 the trigger is pinned to the trigger guard, which may be affected by the stock, and on the Mk 2 the trigger is pinned to the receiver. It's not hard to see why the Mk 2 would be considered superior but AFAIK the Mk 1 is perfectly serviceable and in actual use you probably wouldn't be able to tell the difference.

http://www.telusplanet.net/public/philqgbr/enfields.html

Pretty much the whole story. If the wood stock warped, swelled, or shrank it was in thoery changing the trigger feel.

The only thing I think that would make me favour the Mk2 would be about 1,000 rounds thru the barrel, & only cleaned with a pull-thru & screen wire.:cry:

Para Driver
February 17, 2009, 17:55
now I want one, might have to trip over to MGS and take a gander...

brownknees
February 17, 2009, 18:24
It only takes about 5 rounds to get hooked.:devil: specially if you're used to the Mauser, or Moisin bolt & trigger.
They have less felt (or percieved) recoil than the Mauser, or Moisin as well.

I got another member "hooked" at gunner pool, he just kept on about how "smooth & slick" the bolt was. Then we found out the tips of the bullets were slamming into the feed ramp base because the mag lips needed a bit of fine tuning! He was just muscling them past the ramp & it still felt nicer than his Mausers.
You should have seen the look on his face after we bent the lips up a tad so it fed correctly.:shades:

jwaller5
February 17, 2009, 19:42
thanks for all the good info, another question, I am left handed, any problems from an enfield? also, someone asked my main intent for the rifle, just to have a nice piece of history and shoot it. thats why I enjoy the Garand also. I think I am starting to get the No.'s and Mk's, leave it to the British to make something so confusing, almost as bad as our military. I should know, I work for the DoD (Navy/USMC supply),,don't worry, where here to help!

bykerhd
February 17, 2009, 23:13
If you're a lefty, I think the cock on closing may be a problem for you.
You probably want to handle one and try the action before you commit yourself.

brownknees
February 17, 2009, 23:44
leave it to the British to make something so confusing,
C'mon now! at least we don't call a rifle, a carbine & a tank all an "M-1":biggrin:

I know left-handed Enfield shooters. To me, being right handed any left hander using a right handed bolt looks "akkerd" but that's just because I'm righty.

The least difficult looking technique is to roll the rifle 90 degrees left, then work the bolt left-handed over the stock. It does slow you down as you can't keep the rifle shouldered while doing this but it does allow for a good push when closing, important on a cock-on-closing action. The whole secret (if there is such a thing) is to not "baby" the bolt, whip it up & back fully & try to slam the bolthead out of the muzzle. You won't actually suceed, but the bolt will cock, load & close & believe me you won't harm an Enfield bolt by being too forcefull in closing it.

Opie
February 18, 2009, 18:39
Originally posted by brownknees
.....The least difficult looking technique is to roll the rifle 90 degrees left, then work the bolt left-handed over the stock. It does slow you down as you can't keep the rifle shouldered while doing this but it does allow for a good push when closing, important on a cock-on-closing action. The whole secret (if there is such a thing) is to not "baby" the bolt, whip it up & back fully & try to slam the bolthead out of the muzzle. You won't actually suceed, but the bolt will cock, load & close & believe me you won't harm an Enfield bolt by being too forcefull in closing it.

A friend of mine is a lefty and he shoots his Enfield this way....and pretty darn fast too. A big +1 on the bolt operation....try yer dangdest ta rip the bolt out the back when you open it, and try to ram the bolt out the muzzle when you shove it forward....it will eject better, and the only thing that you could possibly hurt is yourself. The chargers (stripper clips) work well enough if you find some that fit your particular rifle well and when you get used to them.

Dirt1042
February 19, 2009, 02:16
Originally posted by jwaller5


-Which would everyone recommend between a enfield and a mauser?

I've got three Enfields and 4 Mausers. I really like both styles. The mauser has a controlled feed that never fails. The Enfield is all about speed baby. The No4 has some of the best sights on a a Milsurp. The mauser sights are just OK. Unless one considers a Springfield 03A3 a Mauser, then that has the best sights.

If you have to have 1, get an Enfield. But if your smart, you'll try different types of guns, and go with what you like and prefer.

brownknees
February 19, 2009, 11:15
But if your smart, you'll try different types of guns, and go with what you like and prefer.
That's very good advice.
Being left handed, the action of the bolt is going to be the big thing here.
Enfield bolts are noticably "slicker" than the Mauser, but they do resist on closing more. I'm not sure which is going to "feel" better to someone shooting left handed.

If you can get some buddies together & check out a Mauser, and Enfield, and a an '03, you'll know how the "feel" works for you.

If you find the Mauser action is better suited to your use then take a look at a P-14 (.303 Brit), a P-17 (30-06 US), or the '03A3. They have the Mauser action, but sights more like an Enfield.

jwaller5
February 19, 2009, 16:18
as said, I already have a garand. I want something thats cheaper to shoot than my FAL, I am also considering a SKS. I started this process out looking at the springfield. but they same to be on the expensive side right now for a nice shooter ($700 range). I am really looking for something in the $300-400. My wife is expecting our first child in the next week or two and if I spend much more on guns/ammo I am likely to die in a pregnant rage,,,given the current administration, she would probably get away with it.

-also, what is a enfield Fazakerley No.4Mk.2, Irish or South African?

or what is a Greek Long Branch No.4Mk.1*?

I saw each on a site that said they were very good condition for about $400 for the Faz, $300 for the long branch.

-mostly asking about the nomenclatures and origins, the No.s and Mks has already been discussed.

kalliste
February 19, 2009, 16:58
Originally posted by jwaller5
-also, what is a enfield Fazakerley No.4Mk.2, Irish or South African? Liverpool, L9, United Kingdom.

Fazakerley was a Royal Ordnance Factory. Closed three decades ago, or more, AFAIK.

brownknees
February 19, 2009, 17:37
You'll find a lot of those "dual-named" rifles BTW.
That's because there were (IIRC) 6 factories actually making Enfields.
BSA, Fazackerly, & Enfield Lock, all in the UK. Then there was Savage in the US & Long Branch. Australia had Lithgow, & India had Isaphore.
Now these were sold, swapped, traded & given to lots of countries friendly to, or a part of the ol' British Commonwealth.
Most of these countries restamped that countries ID to mark it either for "acceptance" or for proof of issue.

As an example I had a South African marked Savage. A Greek Long Branch No.4Mk.1* is a Longbranch made rifle that the Greeks had taken possession of.

dogngun
February 20, 2009, 14:29
If you are not a feverish collecter, I can give you a little of my experience with these rifles- I have owned maybe 6 different .303 Enfields in various conditions, from early WWI to post WWII. ALL of them were very good shooters. i'd recommend a WWII style rifle because of the longer sight radius and peep sight, but any one you find will be a great rugged shooter and will have some history behind it.
I used the Lee Hand Loader - the one that requires a mallet - and neck sized the brass, and was able to get ridiculous accuracy our of several of these old rifles, and load up some pretty hot stuff as well.

Many consider them to be the best bolt action battle rifles ever.

mark

A square 10
February 23, 2009, 18:30
not to be confused by the various double named rifles , that generaly refers to the last users or in the case of the mk2 rifles you will find "contract names" attached to them , like "IRISH" mine is a "BURMA CONTRACT" rifle ,


************************************************** *******

"Originally posted by jwaller5

-Which would everyone recommend between a enfield and a mauser? "

************************************************** ********


the simple answer is to buy an M1917 rifle , its both , the P14/M17 rifles are essentialy a mauser type rifle developed from the M1903 by enfeild engineers on the enfeild type stock , built in commercial US factories 1916-1918 under contract to first the british then the US

SEE MY SECOND PHOTO POST ,