New Addition: .22 Short Mk IV*

[Lance]

Not a rare girl, but there has not been anything outstanding available to pick up lately in the "reasonable" price range. The big reason I got her to go along with the other .22 Short Mk IV*'s in the toy room is that plain and simple, I am a butt man. I love my cartouches, and with this girl she is one of the last factory applied cartouches, per my observations, as they seem to discontinued stamping the butt's in 1908. (would love to see later factory examples!)

She started life out as a very early Enfield SMLE Mk III in 1908, a "B" series rifle making her the 13, 572 Mk III made at Enfield assuming they started the s/n range in 1907 with "A", if not, tack on another 10K before her. Sent to New Zealand and accepted into service in 1909. She appears to of been a rack queen as it never had it's volley sight's upgraded to Mk VII ammo and upon its conversion to a .22 Short Rifle IV* by NZ in 1928 retained most of her 1908 factory parts. The barrel (1927), sights, and bolt head are all of Enfield manufacture keeping her bloodline pure. Her only down side (besides not having its original 1908 .303 barrel) is that the bolt itself seem to have had the s/n scrubbed and restamped to match the rifle. The font of the bolt s/n is correct so it was done at the time of conversion.

Information

Warning: This is a relatively older thread This discussion is older than 360 days. Some information contained in it may no longer be current.

[browningautorifle]

I've always like the full size sub cal rifles. They always shoot like a dream, one of those in particular would be welcome but their cost here is unreal...

[CINDERS]

Same in Aus Jim pushing between $950 ~1,600/AU dependent on what your prepared to pay

[browningautorifle]

At least I ain't alone...

[Brian Dick]

I have one exactly like it. Built on a 1912 Mk.III. I love the trainers too.

[gsimmons]

They are great rifles, aren't they.
Attachment 66325Attachment 66326Attachment 66327

[bigduke6]

Nice rifle Lance, I recently made a purchase, not Enfield but still trainer based..... all will be revealed in the next few days, only downside is I have put my No1 MkV on the market, very reluctant but considering whats taking its place I think its a fair trade.


The item I mention above arrived for anyone interested in trainers and conversion kits it may be of interest see link below

.22 Erma K98 Conversion kit

[Roy]

Nice find Lance, I've rebuilt a few from skeletons but have nothing as original as that. Does it still have windage adjustable sights and its .22 stamped magazine? Also has the rear sight been modified for .22 RF? I'm not sure if the NZ Army bothered to modify the sights though the Patt 14 .22's which were imported to NZ from England I believe had the modified sight. Many of the .22 trainers in NZ were modified in the late 40's by removing the rear right, installing a peep sight and cutting down the woodwork. Yours is a nice survivor.

[Colonel Enfield]

It's a lovely looking rifle, but as far as I know they were still stamping markings into the stocks well after WWII? Not necessarily the cartouche, but I've definitely seen post-WWI Australian .22 trainers with .303 military markings along with the conversion to .22 markings stamped on their butts.

[Lance]

Greetings Roy. To answer your questions the mag is a .22 stamped "type 4" standard SMLE III mag for the Mk VII ammo, so not her factory "08 mag. Rear sight (EFD marked) was also upgraded to the later SMLE Mk III* pattern, not .22 marked but is s/n'd to the rifle in similar fashion that Lithgow s/n'd their WWI rear sights, across the leaf over the axis hole. Maybe Enfield supplied the .22 barrels with rear sights installed?