I want a SMLE...but what kind?

[ARCHIVED THREAD] - I want a SMLE...but what kind? (Page 1 of 2)

Posted: 10/29/2014 9:22:49 PM EDT

I've wanted a SMLE for a while, and I think I'm gonna pull the trigger. I really know essentially nothing about the various models. I know I want the type that has the metal surrounding the barrel (bayo attachment)?

Should I avoid Ishapores? Indian made, right? I sort of like the idea of a .308 chambering, but I do reload, so it's not a must. Don't want to break the bank, in case for some reason I don't wind up liking it.

Posted: 10/29/2014 9:24:01 PM EDT

[#1]

Do you have pictures of your Grandfather with one?

ETA

El Linkko Grande

Posted: 10/29/2014 9:29:00 PM EDT

[#2]

I want a Lee Enfield as well and have been looking for a MK 4 Long Branch. Both of my grandfathers were in the Canadian Army so it seems fitting that my nephew shoots one when he is old enough.

Posted: 10/29/2014 9:30:02 PM EDT

[#3]

Saw that; pretty cool. But that is a good example of the type that I don't want. For lack of proper terminology, I don't want the exposed barrel end?

Posted: 10/29/2014 9:31:22 PM EDT

[#4]

I think the MK1 has the metal bayonet mount under the barrel, it was the one used in WW1. Then you can get the long ass bayonet for it too. You might as well get it in .303.

Posted: 10/29/2014 9:34:35 PM EDT

[#5]

I'd post a pic of what I'm talking about, but the iPotato makes it a little tough.

Posted: 10/29/2014 9:35:25 PM EDT

[#6]

If you want the service rifle, you want one in .303 This will be a reloading affair, most likely. .303 reloads wonderfully.

Get one with all matching serial numbers, with plenty of rifling(especially near the chamber), and no colored bands of paint discernible on the wooden fore stock. Do not magnumize .303 in the Smelly, and not even in a No.4. P14? Sure, but don't, anyhow

The Indian smellies may be OK if you want one in .308 "Yes," they will take the pressure. The metallurgy of the action was improved specially to handle .308 Not quite right for your nostalgia trip, tho.

Posted: 10/29/2014 9:35:29 PM EDT

[#7]

No.1Mk3 is what you are seeking.

Look for a WW2 vintage Australian Lithgow.

They are generally found in better condition than a WW1 vintage specimen.

https://www.google.com/search?q=lithgow+no1+mk3&biw=1280&bih=684&tbm=isch&tbo=u&source=univ&sa=X&ei=E5ZRVOr0K4KGyAS0uoKQBA&ved=0CCoQsAQ

Posted: 10/29/2014 9:36:06 PM EDT

[#8]

Unless you want an Ishapore or a crazy expensive surplus sniper, isn't 303 a given?

Disclaimer: I have no qualms with 303, it is very popular in Canada and will be so for a long time.

Posted: 10/29/2014 9:36:26 PM EDT

[#9]

Top of the page.

BDL LTD

Posted: 10/29/2014 9:37:31 PM EDT

[#10]

OK, the classic SMLE (the Short, Magazine Lee-Enfield) is the Mk.III and Mk.III*, which was renamed to the Rifle, No.1 Mk.3 just before WW2:

Just at the eve of WW2, the British adopted the No.4 Mk.1 (and Mk.1* which were made in the US and Canada), which simplified the design for easier production, made it a little easier to shoot well, and changed the bayonet but at the overall cost of making the thing a bit heavier. Post-war, the design was upgraded in the No.4 Mk.2 version, as well as arsenal conversions of No.4 Mk.1 and Mk.1* to the Mk.2 standard, which were respectively called the No.4 Mk.1/2 and No.4 Mk.1/3.
All of those Marks look basically similar (this is purportedly a Canadian-made No.4 Mk.1*):

Late in WW2, the "Jungle Carbine" was developed as a lighter, handier version for use in close terrain where long reach was less important than a rifle that was easier to manipulate. There were/are some complaints about the design (recoil, the "wandering zero" issue) but it's basically a lightened No.4, conceptually speaking.
This example is a bit...scarred:

And finally, post-war, the Indian Army was converting to 7.62mm NATO, and needed a rifle for reserve formations that used the standard ammo, so the 2A and 2A1 were produced. They're NOT conversions, and several of the parts do not interchange with SMLE rifles, despite the nearly identical appearance. The bayonets are compatible, though.

Posted: 10/29/2014 9:37:54 PM EDT

[#11]

Long Branch No4 Mk1.

Posted: 10/29/2014 9:39:58 PM EDT

[#12]

Quote History

Quoted:

No.1Mk3 is what you are seeking.

Look for a WW2 vintage Australian Lithgow.

They are generally found in better condition than a WW1 vintage specimen.

https://www.google.com/search?q=lithgow+no1+mk3&biw=1280&bih=684&tbm=isch&tbo=u&source=univ&sa=X&ei=E5ZRVOr0K4KGyAS0uoKQBA&ved=0CCoQsAQ

View Quote

Yep, that Lithgow is what I'm looking at.

Posted: 10/29/2014 9:42:31 PM EDT

[#13]

The No4 Mk1 has the best sights, and you can still find examples in excellent condition for not too much money.

I'm quite fond of my No1 MkIII* with Parker-Hale target sights:

Posted: 10/29/2014 9:45:27 PM EDT

[#14]

I think for my first, I'd not worry worried about all matching numbers. Honestly, since it'd be my first, I'm thinking of spending no more than $400. Am I off base with this price, to get a shooter, not a collector? I'll go a little more if that's what it takes for a good shooter.

Posted: 10/29/2014 9:46:31 PM EDT

[#15]

I'm a No4 fan myself, own a 1950 Canadian Long Branch CNo4 MkI* and a 1953 Fazakerley No4 Mk2, but you can't go wrong with a No1 MkIII or MkIII*

If I ever go the SMLE route I want a Lithgow

Posted: 10/29/2014 9:47:18 PM EDT

[#16]

Quote History

Quoted:
Long Branch No4 Mk1.

http://www.empirearms.com/45L3412.jpg

View Quote

I think that (F) means that it was Factory Thorough Repaired at Fazakerly arsenal. Same place as mine was.

Pop off the forestock, and you'll likely see postwar dates on the barrel.

Posted: 10/29/2014 9:49:00 PM EDT

[#17]

Get the Lithgow.

Posted: 10/29/2014 9:51:12 PM EDT

[#18]

I want a shortened Ishapore, I think I saw one called a Bulldog. It looked like a foot was removed between the front of the gun and the action and it was super cool.

Posted: 10/29/2014 9:56:52 PM EDT

[#19]

Quote History

Quoted:

Get the Lithgow. http://

View Quote

http://imageshack.us/a/img541/4403/y0op.jpg

Very nice...just hope that I can find one within my budget.

Posted: 10/29/2014 10:11:23 PM EDT

[#20]

Bump for more answers.

Posted: 10/29/2014 10:27:21 PM EDT

[#21]

I have both versions. No 1 MKIII and No 4 Mk 1, love them both

I don't know about where you live, but the pickins are slim these days. I rarely see them for sale locally, in shops or gun shows.

Another consideration, ammo. It's scarce and expensive.

CTD has some for same though

Posted: 10/29/2014 10:30:03 PM EDT

[#22]

Flat out expensive, or expensive for surplus?

Again, I reload, so initial investment might be a little high, bit it'll work itself out.

Posted: 10/29/2014 10:39:58 PM EDT

[#23]

I'm pretty happy with my Savage.

Posted: 10/29/2014 10:45:18 PM EDT

[#24]

Quote History

Quoted:

I'm pretty happy with my Savage.

View Quote

A bit pricey, though, no?

Posted: 10/29/2014 10:47:12 PM EDT

[#25]

Quote History

Quoted:
I'm pretty happy with my Savage.

View Quote

I'd love to have a Savage No4

Posted: 10/29/2014 10:51:58 PM EDT

[#26]

I really like the No.5 Mk.1 Jungle Carbine, I had one and I wish I hadn't sold it. The SMLEs have a slick action and they hold a lot of rounds.

Posted: 10/29/2014 10:55:39 PM EDT

[#27]

The SMLE is the "Rifle No. 1". More accurately, it is .303 Short Rifles Marks I, II Cond, III, IV ConD, and V, as well as several marks of .22 Short Rifle. The Rifle No. 1 Mk. VI is not an SMLE, nor is any variant of Rifles No. 3 (commonly called P'14), No. 4, or No. 5. The No. 4 and No. 5 are accurately called "Lee Enfields" but they are not Short, Magazine Lee-Enfields. Rifle No. 6 uses an SMLE as the base but is not technically an SMLE either.

The most commonly encountered marks of SMLE are Mk. III and III*. The only determiner of what is and isn't a Mk. III is the magazine cutoff. If it has one, it is a Mk. III. If it does not, it is a Mk. III*. Other features such as windage adjustable rear sights, volley sights, etc. may be encountered on either.

It is not particularly difficult to find nice examples of the SMLE Mk.III and Mk. III*. Expect to pay no more than $350 or so for a nice WWI vintage rifle with matching numbers. On the Mk. III and III* rifles, look for serial numbers in the following locations:
Receiver
Barrel (rear handguard will need to be removed)
Back of bolt handle
Underside of rear sight leaf
Underside of forestock just behind nosecap
Front of nosecap (bayonet lug)

Whether the magazine matches or is even marked is of little consequence with SMLE Mk. III rifles. They were not numbered from the factory. If the magazine is mismatched simply replace it with one that isn't marked.

There isn't anything wrong with the build quality of Ishapore rifles; the issue is that the Indians treat rifles poorly and many are in dire shape.

Posted: 10/29/2014 11:01:56 PM EDT

[#28]

Good info, thanks.

Now if I could only afford the NIB Lithgow on GB!

Posted: 10/29/2014 11:07:16 PM EDT

[#29]

Be very careful with "new" Lithgow rifles. An unscrupulous importer in NY by the name of Jovino bought up much of Lithgow's SMLE parts stock which included a number of loose receivers. From those they built a bunch of phony rifles; the forestocks are not properly fitted and lack the brass reinforcing shims needed to prevent them from cracking. These rifles exhibit improper serial suffixes and as such are fairly easily identified. They are best avoided unless you know someone capable of properly fitting the forestock.

Posted: 10/29/2014 11:14:08 PM EDT

[#30]

My favourite Lee-Enfields are the No.1 Mk V with volley sights, No.5 Mk I, and the Lithgow No.6 Mk I/I. I also like the 7.62mm conversion of the No.5 as well as the Canadian lightened No.4.

Posted: 10/29/2014 11:23:05 PM EDT

[#31]

Click

So is this real?

Pretty cool if it is.

Posted: 10/29/2014 11:34:03 PM EDT

[#32]

I doubt it's authenticity.

Posted: 10/29/2014 11:34:59 PM EDT

[#33]

Quote History

Quoted:

Click

So is this real?

Pretty cool if it is.

View Quote

Yea, that was the one I was referring to. But no, my budget is no where near that.

Posted: 10/30/2014 12:31:48 AM EDT

[#34]

A Lithgow Mk. III* was one of the first rifles I bought, as a teenager. I think I paid $12 for it, at Academy Surplus in Austin, Texas. I never liked it much, mostly because of the barrel-mounted rear sight. When the forend wood cracked, I had it completely sporterized, with a Fajen stock, a Lyman receiver sight, and a polished blue job. It ended up looking like a really nice sporting rifle. Later I sold it for about $70, which was way less than what I had in it.

More recently, I started a collection of Savage and Long Branch No. 4's. These I like, and of course I'm keeping them in their original military configuration. There's no question that No. 4's are more practical and shootable than Mk. III's. (And that North American-made ones are better than their British equivalents.)

Posted: 10/30/2014 12:38:45 AM EDT

[#35]

I currently have two Enfields, had a third but traded it off. None are British

One is an Ishapore 2A(as was the traded one), the other is a WW2 era Longbranch. They are all awesome guns. Nothing wrong with the Ishapore 308s at all as long as they are in good condition. One of these days when I have spare money again I'll pick up a British-made rifle to go with my foreigners.

Posted: 10/30/2014 12:49:56 AM EDT

[#36]

Quote History

Quoted:
Click

So is this real?

Pretty cool if it is.

View Quote

I doubt that's legit as they say. More like Jovino

I saw one at a gun show one time, beautiful, but not authentic

Posted: 10/30/2014 12:58:03 AM EDT

[#37]

Indian rifles are fine. In some cases they are actually higher quality then the British made ones, as they were made later with better steel, and shot after corrosive ammo was the norm. They also tend to be cheaper. So if you just want an SMLE and have no care for markings they are good to go.

I'd go for the standard .303 ones.
The .308 ones are quality rifles but the magazine is shaped differently and IMO detracts from its classic profile.

Posted: 10/30/2014 12:59:14 AM EDT

[#38]

Quote History

Quoted:
I want a Lee Enfield as well and have been looking for a MK 4 Long Branch. Both of my grandfathers were in the Canadian Army so it seems fitting that my nephew shoots one when he is old enough.

View Quote

Best No4 made

Posted: 10/30/2014 1:00:49 AM EDT

[#39]

Quote History

Quoted:
I'm a No4 fan myself, own a 1950 Canadian Long Branch CNo4 MkI* and a 1953 Fazakerley No4 Mk2, but you can't go wrong with a No1 MkIII or MkIII*

If I ever go the SMLE route I want a Lithgow

View Quote

If you ever get rid of that Long Branch, let me know. I'll buy it from you.

Posted: 10/30/2014 7:03:55 AM EDT

[#40]

Quote History

Quoted:
Click

So is this real?

Pretty cool if it is.

View Quote

Jovino fake. Note the serial suffix- which Lithgow never used- and the very poor fit and finish of the coachwood stock.

Posted Via AR15.Com Mobile

Posted: 10/30/2014 8:40:58 AM EDT

[#41]

Did the US and Canada only make * No4s, or did they make the standard rifles as well?

Posted: 10/30/2014 8:44:14 AM EDT

[#42]

Quote History

Quoted:
Did the US and Canada only make * No4s, or did they make the standard rifles as well?

View Quote

just the No4 mkI and mkI*

during WWI the US built the P14 .303 for the Brits

Posted Via AR15.Com Mobile

Posted: 10/30/2014 8:45:29 AM EDT

[#43]

I'm going to be a whore and post photos of mine again

Posted: 10/30/2014 8:52:43 AM EDT

[#44]

That's a gorgeous Maltby.

If we're whoring out Enfields, here's two from one of the rarer makers, RSAF Sparkbrook. RSAF Sparkbrook was sold off to BSA in 1906, and thus only produced MLM, MLE, SMLE Mk. I, and a handful of Mk. III (marked BSA Sparkbrook) rifles.

These are, respectively, an MLE Mk. I, and an SMLE Mk. IV ConD (a conversion of MLM and MLE rifles to the Mk. III specification).

Posted: 10/30/2014 8:53:46 AM EDT

[#45]

No4 mk1 with tangent rear sight

Posted: 10/30/2014 8:54:17 AM EDT

[#46]

You should probably buy about a dozen different variants, and send them to me for testing. I will weed out the bad ones, and send you a hand picked one. Sure, it may be a little pricy, but it will totally be worth it.

Posted: 10/30/2014 8:55:47 AM EDT

[#47]

Quote History

Quoted:
That's a gorgeous Maltby.

If we're whoring out Enfields, here's two from one of the rarer makers, RSAF Sparkbrook. RSAF Sparkbrook was sold off to BSA in 1906, and thus only produced MLM, MLE, SMLE Mk. I, and a handful of Mk. III (marked BSA Sparkbrook) rifles.

These are, respectively, an MLE Mk. I, and an SMLE Mk. IV ConD (a conversion of MLM and MLE rifles to the Mk. III specification).

<a href="http://s747.photobucket.com/user/MVolkJ1975/media/Milsurps/22LR%20SMLE/2sparkies_zpsb72d52bf.jpg.html" target="_blank">http://i747.photobucket.com/albums/xx116/MVolkJ1975/Milsurps/22LR%20SMLE/2sparkies_zpsb72d52bf.jpg</a>
<a href="http://s747.photobucket.com/user/MVolkJ1975/media/Milsurps/22LR%20SMLE/2sparkies2_zps18f9c338.jpg.html" target="_blank">http://i747.photobucket.com/albums/xx116/MVolkJ1975/Milsurps/22LR%20SMLE/2sparkies2_zps18f9c338.jpg</a>

View Quote

its never wrong to whore enfields

Posted: 10/30/2014 9:01:05 AM EDT

[#48]

I found a Fulton Regulated Faz #4 a little better than a month ago.

Decent Enfields of most any flavor you want from trainers to competition rifles are available for those willing to put forth the effort to look for them.

If you want the Cadillac of #4s look for a 50s dated Longbranch.