No1 MkIV* .22

[capt14k]

This No1 MkIV* is one of my new favorite Enfields. Original date is 1915 Enfield. Then has multiple dates on the other side of the receiver band that I assume are rearsenals and one is the conversion date? Can someone explain how to read the dates? All the numbers match, but the rear sight is obviously forced matched since the previous number is crossed out. Is this normal on .22 conversions? I assume some of the other numbers are not original? I was told the sling is incorrect, but it is stitched. I'll be honest I don't know how to remove it. Any help and any other info as always is appreciated.

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.

[Buccaneer]

A nice looking rifle that was at so time down graded to Drill Purpose, as denoted by the barred out "DP" on top of the barrel knox form.
The PH just in front of it was put there when Parker Hale sleeved the barrel to turn it into a .22 No2 MkIV*.
The butt disc is a very modern copy probably just put there to fill an empty space and it has no relevance to the rifle at all.
The vast majority of the markings are from its military past, the exception being the "England" mark that would have been applied when it was imported to the US, the other is the BNP mark which shows that it has been through civilian proof at the Birmingham proof house.
With regards to the renumbering of the rear sight, this could have been done at any time during its life in the service and was not specific to the .22 conversion, it is of no consequence.
It is often said that the US & the UK are two nations divided by a common language but I hate the term "force matched", nothing on these rifles were ever "forced" they were re-matched and "refitted". This applies especially to bolts that do not carry the matching rifle number,these items in particular have to be fitted properly for safety and functionality, they would never be "forced".
You have a very nice rifle and I know that you will enjoy it but be careful Enfield Rifles have a habit of multiplying....

[browningautorifle]

Very nice old rifle, I've always wanted one because I think they likely shoot like a dream. No movement at all when they fire...steady and solid.

[Roger Payne]

Yes, that's a very nice rifle & I would gladly give it a home! One minor point is that the magazine (or at least the magazine case) is from a No4 rifle, but this is not a big issue at all. The magazine case on these rifles only served to act as a receptacle for spent cases anyway, but ideally a SMLE case with '.22' stamped on the side, would be the part.

Also agree with Paul on the other point: I'm usually quite pragmatic about terminology; I prefer the correct word but don't spit my dummy out if someone uses a different word or phrase so long as we all understand it & it does not cause confusion, but the term 'force matched' makes the hairs on the back of my neck stand on end! If the bolt or rear sight has been re-matched then why not use that term? If it has been replaced without being number matched, then something like 'mis-matched' covers it, & is a more accurate description. If it was done in service there would have been nothing 'forced' about it.
No offence intended to the OP or anyone else that uses the term 'force matched', but although it seems to be in common use it is misleading.

Again, lovely rifle.....

[Gil Boyd]

Lovely piece of PH history there 1915!!!

[capt14k]

Forced matched is out of habit since I originally collected Finnish Mosins. Parts weren't so much replaced and rematched but they were renumbered to match, thus force matched. I agree it isn't correct for Enfields, and really should be called rematched for Finns too since it was done when they were built from old parts.

Thank you for comments. Does anyone know how to get the sling off. It is stitched at both points that I would usually be able to slide one part out. Is this normal? Are you supposed to cut the stitching? Lastly does anyone have a correct sling available for purchase?

And yes Enfields became quickly just as addicting as Mausers. I have 3 more on their way. Plus the ones I already have. Trying to get the best examples for the least amount with my limited knowledge, but this forum and Mr Skennerton's books have helped immensely.

[capt14k]

Now that I think about it collecting Enfields again has brought me full circle. The first Milsurp I bought and bothered spending anytime to research it was a 1941 Long Branch No4 MkI no asterisk matching. Paid $90 with a hard case. I still have that rifle and likely always will.

[Roger Payne]

If it's really impossible to get the sling off without cutting it, one option would be to remove it with the swivels still attached. If you want to do that, pm me & I'll send you two replacement swivels. That way you don't have to damage anything & your rifle will still be complete. That's unless anybody's got a better suggestion....

[capt14k]

If it's really impossible to get the sling off without cutting it, one option would be to remove it with the swivels still attached. If you want to do that, pm me & I'll send you two replacement swivels. That way you don't have to damage anything & your rifle will still be complete. That's unless anybody's got a better suggestion....

That's the only thing I could think of too. I've only seen 1935 Chilean Mausers stitch the sling on before this.

[NORTHOF60]

What's really nice is that the sight has been graduated for 25 yd. shooting during the conversion.