Help Needed with Recent Gun Show Purchase

I've just started collecting Enfields and at a recent gun show bought a No.4 MkI/2 that is in really good condition. The left side of the receiver/action body is marked in electro-pencil No4 MkI/2 (F) FTR /54 F11035. The left side of the butt stock socket is marked M 1942 F11035. There is no US import mark that I can find, but it does have the British export marking of "ENGLAND" and a crown/proof mark on the receiver/action body.

From what I've been able to determine using Stratton's Lee-Enfield No. 4 and No. 5 Rifles (Vol. 2) book, this was a No. 4 Mk 1 rifle made at Malt by in 1942, which then went through FTR and updating to the Mk. 2 configuration at Fazakerley in 1954.

Now for the question -- the barrel is only about 22 3/4 inches long and has no bayonet lugs. The barrel ends just after the front sight, giving the rifle at first glance the appearance of a No. 1 Mk III. Any chance the barrel was shortened as part of the FTR process, possibly to salvage a barrel that was damaged at the muzzle?

The other curious item is that the magazine is shorter than normal by a about 5/8 in. -- it appears that someone took the magazine apart, cut out a section from the middle and then brazed the two ends back together -- any thoughts on why this would have been done?

Thanks in advance for your help.

Jim
:sos:

Neither of those modifications is anything to do with its former military service - I think its just been "improved" by a recent owner. The magazine mod sounds as if someone was trying to make a 40-70 conversion or similar.

Hi Jim,

Sounds like just one extra step from the "standard" sporterization (Bubba's work) of a No4.

The barrel was cut to remove the "unsightly" bayonet lugs.

The magazine was cut, probably so it could fit flush with the forend.

Some companies commercially modified Lee Enfields, some did actually work reasonably carefully (Parker Hale) while some other companies disfigured the rifles.

Can you post a few pics?

Lou

Thunderbox and Lou, thanks for the quick response. I was afarid that "Bubba" had worked on this one. It is a real shame, as the stock, bolt, and magazine were all numbered to the receiver/action body. I've got it stripped down for cleaning and inspection right now -- as soon as I get it back together, I'll post a picture or two.

I guess at this point, I would have to replace the barrel and the magazine to restore it to military configuration. I found a few magazines at the gun show this past weekend, but wasn't willing to spend $50 for one right now. I noticed Numrich has replacement barrels ... would it be worth replacing the barrel?

Thanks again for the help.

Jim

Might be a five shot "Santa Fe" mag

Don't worry about trying to salvage that rifle, enjoy it for what it is - unless the price of a more intact one would be out of reach compared to the amount of money you'd spend on a spare mag and barrel and labor. Up here in Canada, sure wouldn't be worth it. A nice sporterized with intact metal goes for $100 to $150 Canadian... I know it's a bit different in the States though.

I have one such sporterized rifle (No4Mk1 with shortened barrel). I refinished the stocks (removed ugly varnish, used linseed oil, reshaped the sanded butt to a more reasonable shape), I pretty much used parts that couldn't be used on a proper refurb. I scoped it and I ain't ashamed to bring that rifle deep in the bush. In the picture below, from the bottom it's the 6th rifle. There's a 10-round mag on it in that picture but now I got a 5-round, flush mag on it. (sorry I didn't find a better picture!):
https://www.milsurps.com/images/impo...llection-1.jpg

Get your rifle checked for headspace before you shoot if you can,

Lou

No, it is not a commerical magazine -- someone went to the trouble to cut down the original 10 shot military magazine. You can see clearly see the brazing. The real kicker is that the magazine is marked with the rifle's serial number in electopencil. I'm assuming this was done when it was FTR'd.

Jim.

Wow -- what a nice colllection of guns. I've got a little over $200 US in the gun now -- a new mag and a new barrel would put my investment at over $300, so I agree -- probably not worth it. I'll just have to be more careful in the future. I'll try to post a picture later today or tomorrow.

Thanks again for your help.

Jim

Jim, I've a sporterized No. 4 similar to Lou's. In an idle moment I dressed it up in some spare beechwood furniture I have and, while odd compared to the standard No.4s, the lack of the bayonet lugs gave it somewhat of a safari hunting rifle appearance that all-in-all looked rather nice.

Thousands of L-Es and other mil-surps were sporterized in the '50s and '60s, they are what they are and still can and should be enjoyed.

Brad

The magazine may have been shortened to comply with local game laws requiring five shot magazines.

Here are a few pictures, as requested. Sorry for the delay -- I've been fighting with Photobucket for a while now -- think I've finally got it figured out.


Thanks again to all for their help.

https://www.milsurps.com/images/impo...DSC02339-1.jpg

https://www.milsurps.com/images/impo...DSC02343-1.jpg

https://www.milsurps.com/images/impo...DSC02345-1.jpg

https://www.milsurps.com/images/impo...DSC02346-1.jpg[/IMG]

https://www.milsurps.com/images/impo...SC023471-1.jpg

https://www.milsurps.com/images/impo...DSC02348-1.jpg

https://www.milsurps.com/images/impo...DSC02344-1.jpg

Jim.

Jim, That's what my rifle looked like, but I didn't use the front sight protector.

Brad

Brad, thanks for the comments and the help. I plan to just shoot it and enjoy it --- only problem is that it has been too hot and humid here (I'm on the south side of Houston, about half way between downtown Houston and Galveston) to go to the range.

Thanks again for your help.

Jim

jbird,

Having looked at your pictures I can confirm a few things:
1. It was originally made at maltby in 1942 and underwent a Factory Thorough Repair (FTR) in 1954 at the Royal Ordnance Factory (Fazakerley) ROF (F) when it was also converted to a Mark 1/2 (trigger hung from receiver).

In appearance, the "FR" on the butt stock has been associated with Indian Military service and is believed to mean "field repair"

The cut barrel and the shortened magazine are almost certainly civilian conversions. The barrel for asthetics or to affect a recrown :)

The magazine conversion is to allow the rifle to comply with hunting regulations in most states where 5 shots is max.

You should be able to find a magazine for around $35 at a gun show (at least thats the price in Florida) and a barrel should cost you around $50.

The difficult part is removing a No.4's barrel - they're on tight!

Thanks for your help and the additional information on the possible Indian Military servcie. This was an impulse buy at a recent gun show, and if nothing else, has taught me to be more careful with my purchases. I'll enjoy shooting it for now and if I can find a replacement barrell at a good price, it will be one more project for me to take on.

At the last Houston area gun show I went too, only one vendor had Enfield magazines and he was asking $50 for them - more than I was willing to pay.

Thanks again for your help.

Jim

Hi again Jim,

Are you in the States? There are sources of No4 mags in the US which sell them for quite less than $50.

Have you tried her out yet? :)

FR is Indian, and is the equivalent of the British FTR.

Jim

I'm in the Houston area. I figure my best bet for a magazine at a reasonable price is the HGCA show in October. Haven't made it to the range yet ... it has been too hot and humid here to do much of anything.

Jim

Any guess as to when the rifle was sent to India? I guess one possiblity is that the rifle saw service in England &/or Europe during WWII, went to India post-war and underwent a re-arsenaling there, returned to England and underwent FTR and upgrade to the Mark 2 configuration in 1954, and then came to the US in the late 50's early 60's. I realize that there is no way to really know, but would like you thoughts on the possible history of the rifle.

Thanks again for your help.

Jim

Louthepou, I finally had a chance to get to the range in the last week. Couldn't keep this one on the paper ... I don't think it was me or the ammo, as I didn't have the same problem with the other two Enfields I shot that day. After taking a closer look at the barrel, I don't think it was ever re-crowned after being shortend. I'll take it to my local gunsmith in a week or so and get his opinion on it.

Thanks again for your help.

Jim