Short, Magazine Lee-Enfield Rifle Mk1*

[Buccaneer]

This has been a recent addition to my collection and is the best example of the marque that I have seen. The rifle appears to be in original condition with a complete set of numbers throughout, apart from the magazine that appears to have been refinished the rest looks to be original finish. The rifle had to be stripped to be proofed and I think that it was possibly the first time it had been done as the nose cap cross screw was still center punched to keep it in place. All the serial numbers match and are in the correct matching font and even the cocking piece is serial numbered to the rifle. I have tried to show all of the inspectors marks that are visible with the woodwork in place, the pictures speak for themselves apart from the marks on the woodwork that you would expect on a rifle of this age the metal work is unmarked apart from the screws that were removed to allow the proof testing to take place. I have included pictures of some very feint markings on the sling, I'm sure tat someone out there will be able to say what they are.

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.

[5thBatt]

Very nice & in superb condition but not as it was manufactured in 1906, the EFD markings & the RE stamps on the underside of the butt wrist & on the barrel would indicate a Enfield repair/rebuild

I notice it's been resighted for MkVII ammo but retains the Barleycorn sights so it retains the Mk1* designation & not Mk1***
The mag is the wrong pattern, should be the type 3 being converted to HV

[Buccaneer]

I notice it's been resighted for MkVII ammo but retains the Barleycorn sights so it retains the Mk1* designation & not Mk1***
The mag is the wrong pattern, should be the type 3 being converted to HV

Thanks for that but as it is still marked as a 1* according to Ian Skennertons description the number "2" stamped magazine would appear to be correct.

[5thBatt]

Thanks for that but as it is still marked as a 1* according to Ian Skennertons description the number "2" stamped magazine would appear to be correct.

It's been resighted for MkVII ammo so a type 3 would be correct, if it was still sighted for MkVI then a type 2 would be correct

[Bindi2]

The metal has been reblued and the timber redone. It has not seen much abuse.