User Panel
Posted: 11/29/2015 2:43:09 AM EDT
So I had a set of Hedman Hedders sitting around. I priced them at 400$.
I posted them on CL and Facebook. Guy messages me and offers this gun plus 200 rounds of 303 and 100$ Pictures of what I traded for.. It needs some work I think. How did I do? Anyone care to tell me about it or give me direction on how to find out more info. |
|
|
That poor rifle. That said, if it shoots well it's still a good rifle just not what it should be. If the ammo is reloadable and the rifle shoots well I'd say you did fair at worst.
ETA-I've actually been looking for an Enfield like that for a custom project. Originality already ruined so I don't have to feel bad about it. Further customizing might be something to consider. You already have the rifle, turn it into something you want. Bare minimum for me would be a refinish. Take your pick of methods, a .303 is too good a rifle to be in that kind of cosmetic condition. |
|
|
Counting the cash, that's about $200 dollars worth of trade in my part of the country.
|
|
I've been looking for a similarly fucked Lee to do a decent sporterization on.
I would replace the stock and scope, consider trimming the barrel since the metal is already altered, and make a decent hunting rifle with it. Or you could get a De Lisle repro made on it. |
|
Quoted:
Why do people do that? See how it shoots. Fast action. View Quote It is not uncommon to see that. Years ago they were inexpensive surplus and no one gave a second thought to sporterizing surplus rifles. My first hunting rifle was a sporterized Enfield that I paid 69 dollars for. It was accurate but heavy as hell. |
|
My family has a few of those in nearly the exact shape. We use them for loaners for deer season. Good shooters, heavy and ugly but good shooters nonetheless.
|
|
Go up to the border and ask the border guard for your honorary toque. You can also start saying "eh" now that you have provisional Canadian status. All you have to do is a shoot a moose with it and you get a passport.
Forty years ago, that was one of the most popular hunting rifles in Canada. |
|
If it shoot decent it will make a good hunting rifle. I know a guy who has been hunting for 25 years with a sporterized enfield. He's culled over 60 deer and hundreds of hogs with it.
|
|
I shot my first dozen or so deer with a 303 that was sporterized in the 60s or 70s.
Killed my first dozen or so deer with it growing up. My only gripe about it is that the trigger is heavy, which I suppose could be tuned up. |
|
That No. 4 Mk. II might be a good candidate for restoration. I couldn't tell from the pictures if the muzzle has been chopped. Do the numbers on the bolt and the receiver match? Also, I couldn't tell if the scope mount uses the existing holes in the receiver, or if new holes were drilled. These would all be critical factors in the decision to restore.
Anyway, NOS military wood is available on ebay. You'll need a complete set of wood, plus the related fittings (buttplate, bands, etc.). All available for a price. Installing new wood on an Enfield is a little tricky. You have to know what you are doing -- it's not a simple drop-in. A restoration would not make economic sense. It would be more like a labor of love. I would do it, but then that's just me. |
|
|
Depending on what the ammo is, and depending on what the bore looks like, you essentially paid about $200 for a badly-sporterized Enfield. Not a bargain, but on the other hand, what can you buy for $200 these days? A pair of sneakers?
If the ammo is corrosive, be sure to clean the bore with lots of boiling water immediately after every shooting session. Solvents and oils alone will neither remove primer salts nor prevent corrosion in their presence. It's not economically feasible to restore this rifle, especially since the receiver has been drilled and tapped. Wood, fittings, buttplate, rear sight, etc. will add up very quickly. The postage alone for everything you'd need would be a deal-breaker, since you probably would have to get them from a variety of sources. At least one post above refers to this as an SMLE. It is not. It's a completely different rifle, the follow-on No. 4. If it was indeed made in 1953, it's a Mk 2, but it looks earlier to me. It's best use is probably as a "loaner" or a "rain gun" for deer season. Enjoy the history of it. It was the last of the wood-and-steel battle rifles. Machined forgings instead of stampings. A rimmed case that was originally loaded with black powder. Even the sporterizing job is part of its history. And if you want a project, you could clean it up considerably. |
|
Quoted:
I had a similar reaction when I found this at a local pawn shop... http://i251.photobucket.com/albums/gg316/buckmaw_1/smleV_zpsfa7dbee3.jpg?1448804330177&1448804339482&1448804356375&1448804369359 Bubba cut the rear sight tabs off... http://i251.photobucket.com/albums/gg316/buckmaw_1/smleV3_zpsbd71c6ac.jpg?1448804330178&1448804339482&1448804356375&1448804369359 Drilled the receiver... http://i251.photobucket.com/albums/gg316/buckmaw_1/smleV2_zps8d9c89df.jpg?1448804330177&1448804339482&1448804356375&1448804369359 And chopped the barrel... http://i251.photobucket.com/albums/gg316/buckmaw_1/smleV1_zps2aa3c348.jpg?1448804330177&1448804339482&1448804356375&1448804369359 It almost brought me to tears. I did buy it for $100 since it's the "unicorn" of Enfields, so incredibly rare. I had never held one before and wanted it to live its future days with its kin. View Quote Don't the Mk V's have a unique rear aperture site? Has it been removed on yours? Can't really tell from the pics. |
|
You got a mangled No. 4 Mk. 1/2. It probably shoots pretty well. Keep it as a beater gun.
|
|
|
Quoted: I had a similar reaction when I found this at a local pawn shop... http://i251.photobucket.com/albums/gg316/buckmaw_1/smleV_zpsfa7dbee3.jpg?1448804330177&1448804339482&1448804356375&1448804369359 Bubba cut the rear sight tabs off... http://i251.photobucket.com/albums/gg316/buckmaw_1/smleV3_zpsbd71c6ac.jpg?1448804330178&1448804339482&1448804356375&1448804369359 Drilled the receiver... http://i251.photobucket.com/albums/gg316/buckmaw_1/smleV2_zps8d9c89df.jpg?1448804330177&1448804339482&1448804356375&1448804369359 And chopped the barrel... http://i251.photobucket.com/albums/gg316/buckmaw_1/smleV1_zps2aa3c348.jpg?1448804330177&1448804339482&1448804356375&1448804369359 It almost brought me to tears. I did buy it for $100 since it's the "unicorn" of Enfields, so incredibly rare. I had never held one before and wanted it to live its future days with its kin. View Quote Mk Vs are hotness. It's painful to see a Bubba Mk V. |
|
OP, NOS stock sets for the No 4 Mk II can be found in England on Ebay at decent prices, say $125.00 or so.
The hardware you can buy from Springfield Sporters. If that rifle were mine, I'd bead blast, park, and "stove" it (black lacquer, or some other type of durable black paint over parkerizing). No fixing the holes on the side of the receiver (well, they *can* be fixed, but probably not economically), but at least it wouldn't look as bad as it does now. Shoot it first, and see if she's even a candidate for partial restoration. |
|
Thanks for the suggestions.
I traded for this figuring it would be project. The headers were not worth that much to me. I have had them for sale for months. They were just plane janes. They were slightly used anyways. So 400$ may of been a bit much of a asking price. I have been doing a little research and I do feel bad for this rifle. It has not been chopped it's just be slightly bubbized. I have put a few rounds through it. 3 to be exact and all seems ok. I wasn't aiming just seeing if it would fire. |
|
Quoted: There is a Monte Carlo style synthetic stock made for the SMLE, and a no drill scope mount from a guy in Canada, which is what I did: http://i271.photobucket.com/albums/jj151/bryanjstrong/guns/CFC569CD-9C1E-4F07-A830-6C6DC7896ECD-5751-000013211CB75FD9.jpg View Quote I like the wood look as well. The 40$ price difference doesnt bother me for the wood but the synthetic stock looks darn good too. So many directions. |
|
|
Quoted:
180 of the rounds are Remington UMC Military Core-LoktThe other 20 are PPU. View Quote View All Quotes View All Quotes Quoted:
Quoted:
What kind of ammo did you get? All non corrosive, and the soft points sweeten the deal a little more. The Remington ammo retails for $37 a box, so that is not a terrible deal. |
|
Quoted:
It is not uncommon to see that. Years ago they were inexpensive surplus and no one gave a second thought to sporterizing surplus rifles. My first hunting rifle was a sporterized Enfield that I paid 69 dollars for. It was accurate but heavy as hell. View Quote View All Quotes View All Quotes Quoted:
Quoted:
Why do people do that? See how it shoots. Fast action. It is not uncommon to see that. Years ago they were inexpensive surplus and no one gave a second thought to sporterizing surplus rifles. My first hunting rifle was a sporterized Enfield that I paid 69 dollars for. It was accurate but heavy as hell. This..... I Picked up a Bunch of Bubba'ed M-98's over the years...most were salvageable, only one was just FUBAR.....if it had one, it had about 15 holes drilled for scope mounts ALL over the place.... Waffenfabrik marked too |
|
Quoted:
You got a mangled No. 4 Mk. 1/2. It probably shoots pretty well. Keep it as a beater gun. View Quote Looks like a Mk. 2 to me, as all the Mk. 1/2s I've seen (including mine) have a wood filler for the screw in the fore end, and not just the screw. I suppose the fore end could have been replaced... But you certainly know better, so educate me! |
|
|
Save that brass. Before you fire those rounds they say to use an o-ring around the base. Some interesting stuff here. http://www.milsurps.com/showthread.php?t=1154&page=3
|
|
Sadly it'll cost you more than it will be worth to restore it I think.
Last I knew welding up stupid holes was about $15-20 each. the stock set will cost $100 easy for anything of sound quality. Then you have the missing parts. Personally I would have passed on that offer unless the heads were warped. |
|
Quoted:
180 of the rounds are Remington UMC Military Core-LoktThe other 20 are PPU. View Quote View All Quotes View All Quotes Quoted:
Quoted:
What kind of ammo did you get? I just looked it up. Thats like $300 worth of just ammo. |
|
My poor bubba'd Jungle Carbine. My grandfather had it done to her in the 60s as a deer gun then never went hunting...
No idea what mount, shitty tasco scope, the works. I'll fix her up soon The part that made me almost get dusty? The bastard "gunsmith" (not my grandfather) ground the rear sight and feed ramps clean off... |
|
Quoted:
I'd take off the mount and replace the rear sight, then do this. http://i151.photobucket.com/albums/s122/cr74nva/Mobile%20Uploads/image_zpsb9u39tzm.jpg View Quote This I love tastefully bubba'd milsurps |
|
Quoted:
I just looked it up. Thats like $300 worth of just ammo. View Quote View All Quotes View All Quotes Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
What kind of ammo did you get? I just looked it up. Thats like $300 worth of just ammo. Yep, that's why I didn't talk about value so much as the merits of the rifle as a project-either to restore or to build into a more tasteful sporterizing job.Between the ammo and cash, OP is close to asking price on the parts, and the rifle is gravy. |
|
Quoted:
Looks like a Mk. 2 to me, as all the Mk. 1/2s I've seen (including mine) have a wood filler for the screw in the fore end, and not just the screw. I suppose the fore end could have been replaced... But you certainly know better, so educate me! View Quote View All Quotes View All Quotes Quoted:
Quoted:
You got a mangled No. 4 Mk. 1/2. It probably shoots pretty well. Keep it as a beater gun. Looks like a Mk. 2 to me, as all the Mk. 1/2s I've seen (including mine) have a wood filler for the screw in the fore end, and not just the screw. I suppose the fore end could have been replaced... But you certainly know better, so educate me! Serial number on the wrist marks this one as having originally been a Mk. I. Lots of the 1/2s picked up Mk. 2 wood somewhere along the way. Posted Via AR15.Com Mobile |
|
I understand wanting to mount optics but why do people cut down the stock at the front?
Military rifles that are meant to have a a full length stock look so much better with one. |
|
Quoted:
I understand wanting to mount optics but why do people cut down the stock at the front? Military rifles that are meant to have a a full length stock look so much better with one. View Quote Weight savings and free floating (properly done) are considered good things in a hunting rifle. |
|
AR15.COM is the world's largest firearm community and is a gathering place for firearm enthusiasts of all types.
From hunters and military members, to competition shooters and general firearm enthusiasts, we welcome anyone who values and respects the way of the firearm.
Subscribe to our monthly Newsletter to receive firearm news, product discounts from your favorite Industry Partners, and more.
Copyright © 1996-2024 AR15.COM LLC. All Rights Reserved.
Any use of this content without express written consent is prohibited.
AR15.Com reserves the right to overwrite or replace any affiliate, commercial, or monetizable links, posted by users, with our own.