.22 Enfield's Part 5

Rifle No. 7 Mk I

Per the literature this rifle was created for the RAF in 1948 using conversions of No. 4 Mk I rifles. My example has no visible previous markings on the receiver and I have not seen an example that had part or any of its original receiver markings. I would guess that maybe spare receivers that were never assembled into No.4’s were used for the No. 7. Anyone out there have one with original markings??

This rifle, like the missing .22 No. 5 Trials rifle, had a new bolt head design making it unique to just its series of rifles. It also makes it a pain to find certain parts to keep these girls going. It is also the only series of .22 Enfield rifles that came with a factory 5 round magazine. Many incomplete rifles were imported into North America by Springfield Sporters missing the critical bolt and ejector parts.

My example is unusual as it has been fitted with a PH5D rear sight and a tunnel forsight. Someone also in his wisdom custom fit the forend and bedded it with fiberglass. Why oh why?????

These rifle’s were originally fitted with tubed barrels but some have been noted with solid barrels also

As Arm .22 LR

A unique Belgium conversion of No.4 Mk I rifles to .22 status in 1948. As Belgium was equipped with the No. 4 rifle a trainer was needed, these rifles were fitted with a spring loaded loading platform similar to the earlier .22 MLM Mk I* and unique spring loaded extractor that slides into a groove in the modified bolt head. Also of interest is the ground and remarked Mk II rear sight and the large tubing of the barrel (sorry poor pic, the crown is not the tube but look careful at the outer ).

Quantity converted is unknown, estimated at less than 1,000. This example was a 1943 Maltby Mk I before being converted.

Rifle No. 8 Mk I

A special rifle with the only factory adjustable trigger and with another unique, to the type, bolt head system. This rifle was produced BSA Shirley and Fazakerly using surplus No. 5 and No. 4 receivers. A very common rifle, they were well used and are mostly found today in less than perfect condition.

This rifle can be found with its factory calibrated rear sight especially made for this rifle or with a Parker Hale fine adjustment rear sight and its special broad forend designed for better grip.

A pretty common rifle that does not command the value it should. My example is one of the 2000ish BSA produced rifles under New Zealand contract, made with a No. 4 style receiver and fit with standard factory sights.

.22 RF N. 9 Mk I, previous known as the Rifle No. 9 Mk I

Modified by Parker Hale in the late 1950’s to early 1960 for the Royal Navy it is a rebuilt No. 4 rifle of varying original mark design fitted with a tubed barrel and standard milled rear sight with a 25 YDS mark on the left side. Unlike the previous British post war .22 rifles is assembled using mostly standard parts similar to the C No. 7.

This rifle is fairly uncommon but surprisingly not extremely popular from what I have observed, maybe due to its plain appearance?

My example is a conversion of a No. 4 Mk 2 and is one of the last 150 assembled.

This is the end for me, anyone with later .22's please pick this up, hope you enjoyed it.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Lance

Rifle No. 7 Mk I

Per the literature this rifle was created for the RAF in 1948 using conversions of No. 4 Mk I rifles. My example has no visible previous markings on the receiver and I have not seen an example that had part or any of its original receiver markings. I would guess that maybe spare receivers that were never assembled into No.4’s were used for the No. 7. Anyone out there have one with original markings??
.

---

Mine is a Mk1 action, totally scrubbed, there are some 'possible' markings on the right hand side Butt socket which with a little imagination could be
a broad arrow
a small crown (part of a proof mark ?)
letters R C

I know No4s are normally marked on the left hand side of the butt socket or on the left hand side of the action so I cannot imagine what these marks are / were.

The only other markings are :
Left hand side of action "BNP" and No7 Mk1
Rear sight F (Fazakerly)
Left hand side rear of action (near the cocking piece) a 'star' and ???
Butt marked "N over 49 over /|\" (Broad arrow) (N49 = H Morris Glasgow)
Action and bolt marked with serial number
Butt trap door marked "M607"
Safety marked "M47C" (BSA)
Metal band on top of front handguard marked "M813"

Interesting TR foresight Lance; you occasionally see "covered" No 4 foresights and also tunnel foresights set into foresights protectors, but that is the first "open" tunnel type that I have encountered.

Brindles Engineering did some prototypes where they simply covered the No 4 foresight but they were never produced as a commercial proposition.

Unfortunately there are no markings on the tunnel forsight as it is a great piece of work. A little light causes the brass dot "glow" making it very enjoyable to plink in the back yard.... Damn ground hogs.....

Lance My No8Mk1 is also one of the NZ contract BSA rifles. It has a lower serial number and a much higher rack number than yours and uses the No5 action. Here in Canada No8’s are few and far between and when they come up for sale command a premium. I have yet to see a Faz. on the open market here. Doesn’t mean much I guess but I will say the few I have seen available were all NZ marked BSA’s.
https://www.milsurps.com/images/impo...60Medium-1.jpg
https://www.milsurps.com/images/impo...62Medium-1.jpg

The only No8 I've seen for sale in the UK was a BSA on a No5 action, PH tunnel foresight. Serial No DA143.
It made £720 at auction (8th September 2009)

How come when Fazakerly made 15,000 and BSA made only 2,000 all we ever see are the bSA ones ?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Alan de Enfield

How come when Fazakerly made 15,000 and BSA made only 2,000 all we ever see are the bSA ones ?

---

My guess:
New Zealand sold off their rifles and they were all BSA's well the Faz. Examples were used within Briton and not sold to the public.

Because BSA only made the No8 on cotract to the UK Government, it marketed and sold the No8's to NZ in contravention of the patent rights. Naughty, I know! That's why they had a special serial nukber batch. So said, to keep their books correct but the Ministry of Supply suggested that it was to cover their tracks with their underhand deal

From this, can we assume that the BSA private sales and NZ purchases were all BSA guns? I feel so. This was well known among Armourers and was first told to me by ASM 'Jock' Annandale when I was a young Armourer at the Base Ordnance Depot Workshop at Ngaruawahia in NZ where we had a load of No8's with odd-ball serial numbers but otherwise identical to our UK spec No8's.

There were a few reasons why BSA sold them off privately..........

We still have a load of No8's in the UK Military system but many now have re-numbers using the UE66Axxxx or the SA89Axxxx numbers

NZDF sold off 285 No8s earlier this year, some were A prefix Fazakerley No8s.
From that auction i picked up 2 BSA No8s both with the same serial number DA156
https://www.milsurps.com/images/imported/deleted.gif
https://www.milsurps.com/images/imported/deleted.gif

Many of the UK Military No8's weren't made with the ejector screw hole either drilled or drilled but not tapped (was it 3 BA?). This was a C class/non immediate but do it if you see it or it needs doing sort of importance-modification or a Miscellaneous Instruction. Does anyone still have an undrilled/tapped one

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Peter Laidler

Many of the UK Military No8's weren't made with the ejector screw hole either drilled or drilled but not tapped (was it 3 BA?). This was a C class/non immediate but do it if you see it or it needs doing sort of importance-modification or a Miscellaneous Instruction. Does anyone still have an undrilled/tapped one

---

Both of mine are undrilled.
Interestingly the BSA contract is stated as being for 2000 No8s, the No8s at the auction were from s/n DA101 though to DA1126, in every lot of 100 s/n eg 100-199 there were 20 to 30 rifles in that s/n range except DA1126 which was on its own & there was none with a higher serial number, this would leave about 1000 No8s unaccounted for??

What contract do you mean? The BSA/NZ Government contract? or the UK Ministry of Supply/BSA contract?

BSA sold to some of the small bore shooting clubs, commercially available No8 rifles within the DA range. After all, they were actually designed and formulated for the very purpose of acting like the No4 rifles but being as accurate as a commercial target rifle of the era. Even going to the length of having the rifling in the barrel tapering towards the muzzle.

Don't forget, BSA was a private company who made the No8 on contract t the Min of Supply and it was this commercial activity that brought the MoS attention to BSA! The MoS's main aim was to keep their OWN government factories employed so they stopped any further commercial sales by BSA and directed further orders to Fazakerley. Only Fazakerley, bless 'em couldn't come up with the goods so nobody got any more....., certainly commercially. That's not strictly correct because the MoS did supply South Africa (?) and certainly Rhodesia, Kenya and probably a few of the other armies down there. Can any of the expats from those places confirm this. Rhodesia certainly had them.

Where were we? Oh yes, where are the missing 1,000? The NZ order or the TOTAL BSA order?

Peter,

Thanks for clearing up something I have wondered about since March of1994, when I obtained my No.8.

It is a B.S.A., made in 1954, serial number A22859, built on a No. 5 action and wasn't drilled for the usual ejector screw. It was one of 75 imported from South Africa, through John Appleton in Virginia, for Victoria Trading Company, (prepare for incoming!), in early 1994. This was when V.T.C. was importing a large portion of the South African spares that went on the world market then. Of the 20-odd rifles I examined, only a few had South African property stamps on the receiver ring. Not surprisingly, those so marked had been used the most, so the relatively unissued example I selected does not have S.A. property marks, but, as all 75 that V.T.C. imported sold, I'm sure someone with one of the few S.A. marked examples can post a photo.

When I bought this rifle with the odd, (for a B.S.A.), serial number prefix, "The Lee-Enfield Story", was of no help, as this serial number range by B.S.A. was unmentioned. The later version, "The Lee-Enfield", also omits this information, but, oddly enough, in one of the books many typos, on page 559, where the serial number prefixes for Enfield and B.S.A. production No. 8's are transposed, this rifle actually makes the B.S.A. info partially correct, as it does have the "A" prefix.

Previously, on another forum, I asked about this particular B.S.A. contract and got no response. No one even hinted that there was the possibility of another B.S.A. contract, other than the one for New Zealand. Now we know differently, so thanks again, Peter, for another pearl of wisdom.

Regards,

Terry

I had an identical BSA No.8Mk.1, also a South African owned rifle, sn. A22772. It was imported by myself from Canada along with 15 more BSA manufacture No.8's back in December 1996. It's since been sold along with the rest except for one other New Zealand owned BSA I kept for myself that's in need of some TLC. Incidentally, (I'm sure I'm repeating myself), when I applied for the import permit from BATFE Imports Branch, I was turned down flat as the No.8 wasn't included on the U.S. Curio and Relics list. I had it added with the usual petition process and used the advert from Victoria Trading, Co. to prove they'd been imported before. I guess John Appleton used some creative paperwork to get the previous batch in. We'll never know as he's now deceased.

I can't imagine many clubs would have brought the darned things. They did nothing that a Martini International couldn't do and I'll guess they were more expensive. Pretty much like the Champ/Land Rover choice ...

You're NEARLY right Mk7! When BSA was selling them, they WERE competitive. After all, BSA, as a private company knew how the market was. But when the Ministry decided that it was THEIR job to sell them, they didn't have to take into account market forces so they priced then to NOT sell. After all, they don't NEED to be competitive. As they say in Government financial circles '........other peoples money is no object'

I'm just telling it how it was and related to me and ...................

Peter, my understanding was, 2000 No8s by BSA for NZ all with the DA prefix s/n.
So does the 2000 apply to the contract size or the number of DA prefixed No8s?
I am now wondering if those A prefixed rifles at the auction were Faz made or not:dunno:

5ht Batt asked about the missing 1000 or so DA numbered No8's. I would just assume that in the passage of time a largish quantity were worn out and scrapped. But these DA No8's were sold by BSA 'out of the back door' as a commercial deal between them and the NZ Government, without the knowledge of the property rights owner, the Ministry of Supply. They used the existing and now redundant No5 rifle bodies that were left over.

You'll probably notice that BSA never made No4 rifles for commercial sale as they did with No1 rifles. This was because the MoS contracts tied them down. They did of course FTR hundreds of thousands in the 50's for other nations

For your interest. Herewith a copy of page 35 of a South African military stocklist dated April, 1975 on which the No.8 appears.