Help identifying my 1918 Enfield

[TheEnantiomer]

I can find rifles online that have these markings, but haven't seen any that look like this one. Is it a mismatched rifle or something? I'm obviously not experienced with Enfield Rifles.

Thanks for your help.

---------- Post added at 06:19 PM ---------- Previous post was at 06:18 PM ----------

hmm The pictures didn't show up when I made the thread.

Here is a link to them:

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.

[Son]

Your rifle is a Short Lee Enfield MkIII* (from 1926 known as a No1 MkIII*) made by BSA co. It has been altered to it's current shape by somebody who may have used it for hunting, and has cut the woodwork down to reduce weight and lose the military look- commonly called "sporterizing".
Here's a pic of the same model rifle (this one made by Lithgow in Australia) to show what it would have looked like before being cut down.
The term "missmatched rifle" means when some of the serial numbered parts are not numbered the same. These bits are the receiver, numbered on the ring where the barrel screws in; the barrel numbered just forward of the receiver number; the bolt, numbered on the back of the handle; the rear sight, numbered under the leaf (it just lifts up to 90 degrees to see); the nosecap, which has been removed; and the foreend uderneath just back from where the nosecap was fitted- this area has been cut off yours.

[TheEnantiomer]

Interesting. We've had the rifle forever and never knew anything about it. Thanks for the info.

[Badger]

Check this entry in our Milsurp Knowledge Library for a comparison to yours, plus a lot of good information on your rifle, as to how she originally looked...

1917 ShtLE (Short Lee-Enfield) No.1 MkIII*

Regards,
Badger

[TheEnantiomer]

I had a chance to look at the gun again today and noted that the bolt, receiver, and sight all have 682 #'s, so I guess they all match.

However, I was surprised to see that on the left side of the receiver (left side if you were to be aiming the rifle) said "M" over "VII" (pictured). Also, on the opposite side of the primary markings (i.e., Crown - GR - BSA - 1918 - SHLE - III*), there was a 3 instead of 682. Does this mean that the gun is actually a "VII" with the wrong primary markings?

[Amatikulu]

The "D" with the broad arrow ( "^") in it marking is an Australian military marking. the "M" over the "VII" is probably Australian related as well ( the VII would be for the mark VII ammunition)

[TheEnantiomer]

I see. So would the history of the rifle best be described as Birmingham/English built and then passed on to the Australian military?