WW2 UK dispersal SMLE production

[mrclark303]

Hi all,

I have been pondering a deeply anorak question regarding WW2 SMLE production.

Quite a few of the 1942/43 rifles on the market today appear to be made up from unused/dismantled WW2 parts, or subject to the massive post war BSA refurbishment program .... I suspect this (and the PH/Interarms enormous bulk Enfield buy) is also the origin of many of the available SMLE bolt/action bodies still floating round the trade.

As a result of this, they tend to have No4 butts fitted. Nothing wrong with that as this was common place anyway, as Peter, Roger and others have said many times in the past.

What I'm pondering is this, were these dispersal rifles fitted with SMLE pattern butts 'as originally assembled' in WW2, or were they fitted with the No4 butts?

Told you it was an anorak question!

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.

[Simon P]

All the late SMLEs I have had comes through with 1940 dates that have been mostly fitted with the correct SMLE butts, all in Walnut

I have had a few of these post WW2 FTR SMLEs with FTR dates between 1953-56.

All have beech fore-ends and No4 butts modified for the SMLE

[mrclark303]

Thanks Simon, that's the information I have been pondering!

[newcastle]

I have one marked identically to that FTR 1953 which is a .22 LR with BSA stacked rifles on the barrel.

[harry mac]

My first LE was (is) a 1941 Dispersal. When I got it, it showed no signs of ever having rebuilt and had a proper SMLE butt fitted. However, 23 years later and the only original parts left on it are the body, nose cap, foresight and rear sight. The whole stock, the barrel and the bolt are all new replacements.

[Brian Dick]

I have one dated 1940 that also sports an FTR stamp under the butt socket markings on the right side. It's still sports it's walnut SMLE butt complete with a brass marking disc. The forend and rear handguard are beech and the front handguard walnut. A nice rifle still full of grease as it was imported by the dreaded Century Arms. It's got a nice barrel. matching serial numbers and is right as rain.

[mrclark303]

I have one dated 1940 that also sports an FTR stamp under the butt socket markings on the right side. It's still sports it's walnut SMLE butt complete with a brass marking disc. The forend and rear handguard are beech and the front handguard walnut. A nice rifle still full of grease as it was imported by the dreaded Century Arms. It's got a nice barrel. matching serial numbers and is right as rain.

Thanks for all your feedback guys, so we can say with some of the provided clarification that the 1950's BSA FTR program is largely responsible for No4 butts, with some being service REME replacements and others being modern builds,from parts, either broken down rifles, or less likely, unused parts.

A further point, what's the option of the group on unused action bodies and bolts?

I accept that there must have been left overs when production stopped, but could these be rejected parts, if so, were they marked as such I wonder?

[Charlie303]

My 1942 dispersal SMLE is fairly typical, and matches the description and photo in Skennerton's The Lee-Enfield Story (P176/177). Walnut butt with unmarked brass disc, beech fore end (stamped with s/n), beech front hand guard, walnut rear hand guard. No FTR stamp.

Has 4 groove barrel (also referred to in Skennerton as a BSA simplification measure) - how unusual is this?

Charlie

[browningautorifle]

Has 4 groove barrel

Four groove .303? Really...

[Charlie303]

Attachment 100486Attachment 100487