Spring Clean Up

I've had these 2 rifles for a long time (mid/late 90's) and decided to use the nice day to finally get the cosmoline out of the No1 MkIII. That made me get out my (what I thought to be No4 MkI) No4 Mk2. I got both from Rose's Department Store. I don't think I paid more than $50 for either.

https://www.milsurps.com/images/impo...DSC00745-1.jpg

NoI MkIII
She's been through an FTR but I can't figure out what was replaced (unless a new barrel was serial numbered after replacement. The only stamp that "appears" to be out of place is the 44. I'm guessing rebarreled in '44 because all the numbers match (stock, bolt, rear sight, end cap, magazine, and barrel).

Using a .30-06 MW gauge it stops at 4 (guessing it's a 1 or ~.304). Any ideas on value?

https://www.milsurps.com/images/impo...DSC00750-1.jpg

https://www.milsurps.com/images/impo...DSC00748-1.jpg

https://www.milsurps.com/images/impo...DSC00751-1.jpg

No4 Mk2
I always thought the electropenciled numbers were from Century but just realized that they are factory from ROF Fazakerley. I read there was a way to determine what contract/destination but can't locate that info on the web. Any help would be great.

The crown is beat up so the .30-06 gauge won't go past 2.5.

https://www.milsurps.com/images/impo...DSC00754-1.jpg

"...Using a .30-06 MW gauge..." They mean nothing on a .303 barrel. A .303 barrel isn't a .308" ID diameter. Enfield barrels can measure from .311" to .315" and still be considered to be ok. You need to slug the barrels. Hammer a cast .30 cal bullet or suitably sized, soft lead, fishing sinker through the barrel with a 1/4" brass or Al rod and a plastic mallet and measure it with a micrometer. That'll tell you the actual barrel groove diameter. Over .315" the barrel is shot out.
"...The crown is beat up..." That needs fixing. Mostly if the assorted dings are into the barrel though. Not such a big deal if they're on the outside. Brownell's sells recrowning tools. Being very careful with a fine file will do.
Check the headspace before you even think about shooting either rifle. Matching numbers does not guarantee that the bolt heads haven't been changed at some time. If it's bad, the No. 1 is a more expensive fix. Isn't much better for a No. 4 these days, but No. 1 bolt heads are not numbered. Takes a handful to check with headspace guages until you find one that doesn't let the bolt close, completely on a No-Go guage, If it does, try the Field. If the bolt completely closes on a Field, the headspace is excess and the rifle is not safe to shoot with any ammo.
"...can't figure out what was replaced..." Could be just a stock or sight part. FTR means that anything that need fixing got fixed as long as it didn't cost too much.
Lithgow is Australian made. Your's was made in 1919 and was owned by the Brits. The Broad arrow next to the '44' says that.
Go here for good info about the markings. Under Part One. The Lee-Enfield Rifle

Actually, it means something, but figure that the nominal BORE diameter is 0.003" larger, so (0.303" bore versus 0.300" for a US .30 cal.), you aren't doing too bad. I quit worrying about all those wear guages a LONG time ago on non-match rifles (and on those only at purchase, the rifle will tell you when something's amiss at the range). Just shoot it and see how it does.

Grooves don't "shoot out" BTW, They're either large or not.

Don't, please, Bubba up the muzzle on the No.4 Mk.2 w/ a file!

Funny thing, there. Don't see any British proof marks on the receiver of the No.1 ...Mind you, this isn't the best monitor!

Jmoore,

Don't worry... I would't go near the muzzle with a file!

Is there somewhere else I should be looking for the proofs?

I actually only cleaned the cosmo out of the stock. I have shot it but it's been a long time.

Concerning the SMLE:
Well, I'm just not so sure it was a British rebuild. During the week, the computer I use shows most pics as too dark to make out details. I was hoping for some input from others, don'tchyaknow?

The top of the receiver ring looks like it may have had Australian ownership markings that were removed.

The barrel was replaced in 44 with a British one if i read the stamps right. It also is marked for rust in the throat. The FTR mark is not Australian. I think it is BSA if the barrel stamps were clearer it could be confirmed as such.

Dang, I can't see the "FTR" at all! (Is it actually on the rifle, or just inferred? I'm working blind here, apparently.)

It seems to me that the "FTR" is mostly a British mark. (Indian reworks got "FR".) Australia, Canada mostly just dates, yes?

jmoore,

look at the picture of the right side of the 1919 butt socket. The FTR is at the bottom of the butt socket.

I have never seen an FTR mark placed there so cannot comment further.

It looks like it's been electro-pencilled as opposed to stamped

Thanks for all the information. It's always fun to learn new things!

If you need other pictures, etc let me know and I'll do my best.

The FTR does seems to be electro-penciled. It's definitely NOT stamped. It's a Century import.

I won't be able to "see" a thing until Friday. The monitors at work are quite wretched!

Oh, BTW, this thread got me to thinking: Is not the "FTR" a purely post WWII marking?

I've seen plenty of No.1 MkIII* rifles that were completely rebuilt in the 1930's w/ no sign of the FTR marking, unless it's Indian w/ the "FR" on the butt socket.