Christmas Present to Myself

Two Lee Enfield rifles:

The No 1 is a mark III Century Arms import from 1928, but has features of a mark III* and the brass butt stock disk has been replaced by a wooden plug. It works fine.

The No 4 is a mark I French Enfield from Navy Arms from 1944. I'm still fussing with the magazine. The reproduction mag that it came with was terrible and I've replaced that with a recently manufactured mag. Better, but still not right. The follower tends to stick.

Once the weather here in Wisconsin improves it is off to the range.

I take it the repro mag was one of those Promags? Those even look horrible. The sticking follower might just need a touch of file to free it up. Unless it's a civilian made copy of the original, which all bets are off. Sounds like a nice pair for Christmas...let us know when you get them wrung out.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by browningautorifle

I take it the repro mag was one of those Promags? Those even look horrible. The sticking follower might just need a touch of file to free it up. Unless it's a civilian made copy of the original, which all bets are off. Sounds like a nice pair for Christmas...let us know when you get them wrung out.

---

I don't know who made the original reproduction mag. It looks ok, but just doesn't work. The mag pictured I obtained from Liberty Tree Collectors. It's better, but still not quite there. I've just ordered an original Savage mag from Apex. We'll see how that works out.

Apparently, inter-changeability is not a Brit strong suite. Here are three No. 4 mags:
https://www.milsurps.com/vbpgimage.p...5&d=1703800964
On the left is the original reproduction follower, with a little bit of filing, inserted into the mag body from Liberty Tree, in the middle is an original Savage mag, and on the right is the follower from Liberty Tree inserted into the original reproduction mag body. Of these, the left most one is working out the best. The Savage mag has a tendency to pop the left-most cartridge out of the receiver. Notice the more pronounced hump on the follower. The right most follower has a weak spring. Cartridges will sometimes not get popped up enough such that the bolt head passes right over the round.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Neuraleanus

pparently, inter-changeability is not a Brit strong suite. Here are three No. 4 mags:

---

It is a well known fact that magazines have to be individually fitted and 'tuned' to correctly fit, and, they are not interchangable.
The 'ears' can be just a 'few thou' out of position and the rifle will not load correctly, this is why magazines were not designed to be removed (that is why they had chargers) or kept in pockets or pouches. because of the high risk of knocks.

I also got myself a No 4 for Christmas. Mine is one of those nice unissued Long Branch rifles from NZ.
The magazines are not considered interchangeable and only meant to be removed for cleaning. Some magazines are even numbered to the receiver. The early ones are even chained to the rifle. I have been lucky with most of my No 1 magazines that they all work.
One of the flaws in the design are the feed lips. They aren't as strong as the ones found in modern magazines and are very easily bent out of shape.
You may need to mess with adjusting them until it works. It's a lot easier to guess and check one mag at a time with a good supply of magazines, but they aren't all that common in WI gun stores. I sometimes see No 1 and No 4 magazines at the Bob and Rocco shows, but only a couple at best, and 1's and 4's are further not interchangeable.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Neuraleanus

Once the weather here in Wisconsin improves it is off to the range.

---

Long wait there. A few Spotted Cows might make the time go mor quickly.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Neuraleanus

The right most follower has a weak spring. Cartridges will sometimes not get popped up enough such that the bolt head passes right over the round.

---

That's because the right spring in picture belongs to a #1Mk3 rifle magazine. When you look at them you see they're different. As stated your mag needs to be fitted when new and then stay with the rifle. They're mild steel and can be twisted so they misfeed. The one that pops rounds out needs lips reshaped. They should snap in cleanly or the spine needs to be altered a touch. Peter Laidler spoke of having buckets of them salvaged and just sliver soldering a new locking spine on before fitting.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by browningautorifle

That's because the right spring in picture belongs to a #1Mk3 rifle magazine. When you look at them you see they're different. As stated your mag needs to be fitted when new and then stay with the rifle. They're mild steel and can be twisted so they misfeed. The one that pops rounds out needs lips reshaped. They should snap in cleanly or the spine needs to be altered a touch. Peter Laidler spoke of having buckets of them salvaged and just sliver soldering a new locking spine on before fitting.

---

That's interesting. Are you saying that because of the increased curvature on the left side? It does resemble the follower in my No 1, Mk III. I know that the mag bodies are different, they are not interchangeable between rifles, but I did not know that the followers are different. This is odd in that it came from a No 4 mag. I'll take a look at Laidler's stuff.

On the issue of the Savage mag, how would I go about reshaping it? A bit of hammering with a ball-peen?

I have found that these magazines can fit and work if you adjust them. I have four that I use for practical rifle competitions that function flawlessly, drop out without problems as long as you handle the exceeding strongl magazine spring.