Help for identifying bayonet to fit Navy marked No. 1 Mk II Cond

This is an interesting rifle I have had for twenty years. It started life in 1898 at Enfield as a Lee Enfield Mk I (long lee) and was converted to a No. 1 Mk II Cond (Converted) in 1905. Presumably it was fitted with the No. 1 Mk I nose cap. In May 1913 it passed through the Navy Ordnance facility at Portsmouth and socket marked N. The stock is marked RMS 400 indicating possible Royal Marine use.

Past this point I don't know what happened, the nose cap was deleted and a US Krag type front band was fitted. The unmarked band is not Krag, does not have the machined boss for the screw and it does not accept a US Krag or Springfield bayonet. It will not accept the British 1907 blade family. Given a marine association, as they used Japanese and Canadian Ross rifles, I tried those with no luck either. I considered a movie gun but what good would it be if it won't take a bayonet.


Band bottom to top of shoe is 0.119 inches. Thickness of shoe is 0.127 inches. Width of shoe is 0.424 inches. Centerline of barrel to bottom of shoe is 1.22 inches approx. Suggestions???

Attachment 76216Attachment 76217Attachment 76218Attachment 76219Attachment 76220Attachment 76214Attachment 76215Attachment 76213

I was looking for substitute standard pieces I could use for a Ross front band, and I figured the Springfield 1903 style was commonly available and "close enough" for my purposes, the one on your rifle looks like a similar, if not the same piece.

The Krag bands have a circular boss machined in the band that supports the screw. This band does not have the boss and therefore is not a US Krag band. Thanks for the thought. p.

My Enfield 1907 ConD 11* was found in a small gunshow in Wisconsin some 20 years ago by a good friend who sold it to me. The barrel matched the receiver number 6446 over x and had the early Mark 1 rear sight and
barleycorn foresight. It was without the HV or SC barrel makings - does your barrel have the HV or SC barrel markings ?

It would be my opinion that if your rifle did not have the HV or SC barrel markings then the correct bayonet would be the Pattern 1903 with the Mark 1
nosecap

I think he's asking what possible bayonet would fit? If the 1907 doesn't fit then the 1903 won't either. The only thing it seems you haven't tried would be the P13/M1917 blade. Don't know if the lug is down far enough. I still can't figure what the whole front band is from in the first place. Not the P14/M1917 though... Can you get hold of a blade to try?

The Pattern 1913 bayonet is the same as the 1907 with regards to the design and size of the hilt. Only the difference in length between the center line of the barrel and the location of the bayonet t slot is different.

I am not so worried about fit of muzzle ring to bayonet but would like to know what bayonet fits the band shoe.

The 5th picture along, post 1, there is actually a P.13 stamped onto the barrel. I don't know if this mark refers to the bayonet type that this rifle has been modified to fit or to something else but I'd say there's a good chance it's the bayonet.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by breakeyp

The Pattern 1913 bayonet is the same as the 1907 with regards to the design and size of the hilt.

---

OK, that shoots that theory...back to we don't know.

Eleven o'clock last night, I had a thought and realized had been looking at this the wrong way. Where did the band come from. The band came from a Winchester model 1895 musket (probably Russian contract). I confirmed it by comparing my 95 with the rifle's band. So we know the band takes the musket bayonet. I can get the bayonet dimensions and can measure my rifle to see if the Winchester bayonet will fit.

Thanks for all the help. Now is it Estonian/Latvian or bubba?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by breakeyp

Winchester model 1895 musket

---

That was one that didn't occur to me either. The bayonet might be harder to get than you think though. It will probably take it or they wouldn't have done it.