First SMLE

This summer I walked into a local gunshop and they had a, Lithgow built, Lee-Enfield No1 Mk3 for $245.:D From the looks of her, she seemed to have led an adventurous and active life. Her stock was dented and dirty, the metal finish worn bare in places, but her bore was bright and the rifling sharp. She headspaced fine, and all her numbers matched; action body, barrel, stock, fore stock, butt stock, rear sight, nose cap, all except for the replacement bolt. So since she was looking for someone to take care of her I bought her.

I ran a couple of patches down her barrel and headed for the range. She was great, tight groups and a real joy to use.

So I thought that I might as well clean her up and try to return her to something closer to her WWl configuration.

As far as I can tell she was originally built in 1915 and re-barreled in 1936. The stock looked original and had been extended by the Australians by adding a dovetailed piece to the rear of the butt stock.

I limited myself to some steaming out of dents in the wood, general stock and metal cleaning plus replacement of some screws with butchered heads and missing or out period hardware (rear sight protector, pilling swivel, cocking piece, etc) I also replaced the hand guards since the ears had been trimmed off.:ugh:

The clean stock received a Tung oil finish and the metal was cleaned and cold blued if required.

She was reassemble all hardware lubricated and tightened and off to the range we went. She shot just as sweet, but everything just seemed smoother! :cheers:

Here are some before and after pictures, I hope I haven't over restored her…..:eek:

D. :cheers:

Very pretty, friend!

You have restored the old girl to roughly what she would have looked like had she not been just plain abused.

Some guys will say 'too much'.

I, for one, would be very happy if I owned a 1915 that looked as good as this one and shot as well as it looked.

Beautiful piece.
.

That rifle spent more time in the Brits hands than the Aussies. The butt is a brit replacement the fore end is a Mk111* relieved for the cutoff ,normal FTR . The screw you replaced in the nose cap and other bits are FTR replacements the rifles history which show it was used abused repaired and sent back out for it to all happen again.

Anyone care to add anything about the extended butt? I have never seen a military butt extended and have never seen any reference to such an operation in our bibles. It seem to be a typically Armourers method of doing it. Dovetailed, glued, probably pegged too, made off and butt plate fitting perfectly etc etc

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Peter Laidler

Anyone care to add anything about the extended butt? I have never seen a military butt extended and have never seen any reference to such an operation in our bibles. It seem to be a typically Armourers method of doing it. Dovetailed, glued, probably pegged too, made off and butt plate fitting perfectly etc etc

---

Have the same butt on my SMLE Sht .22 IV, would say its been extended from a short butt, as its now same length as the butt on my BSA Co commercial SMLE (issued to the South African Police)

https://www.milsurps.com/images/impo...DSCF3435-1.jpg
https://www.milsurps.com/images/impo...DSCF3432-1.jpg
https://www.milsurps.com/images/impo...DSCF3433-1.jpg
https://www.milsurps.com/images/impo...DSCF3427-1.jpg
https://www.milsurps.com/images/impo...DSCF3437-1.jpg

I have had two SMLEs with identical extended butts, I have no evidence, but was told a few years ago by another collector in the HBSA that these were Australian conversions? but I have seen no evidence to this fact only rumour.
The two I had were early LSA & BSA with Australian ownership marks, these were extended to the long length.

Peter,
Found a reference to extended buttstocks in the "Collectors Only" book SMLE (No.1) Rifles Mk1 and Mk lll, Volume 1, 3rd Edition , Revised. by Charles R. Straton (North Cape Publications, Inc).
On page 74 of this publication Mr Straton observes that some buttstocks (specially on British made rifles in Australian service) had 1-½ to 2 inches of wood carefully dovetailed and fitted to the rear of the buttstock. He speculates that this might have been a "field" response to the need for longer buttstocks. He also notes that these modified buttstocks are the same length as the "Long" which were in short supply.

The buttstock on my rifle is the same length as a "Normal" so I guess there was a scarcity of the "Normal" length too….

I have attached some additional pictures of markings on my rifle and some more of the extended buttstock, with and without the buttplate.

D. :cheers:

Thanks for those pics Dad. The tung oil makes clear pictures difficult but the sheer quality of the work and the 'factory' shapes of the butt plate end lead me to say that these are a factory method of ectending butts. Without ANY doubt, there will be, somewhere, a relaxation in standards order that has authorised such a change in standards.

If I had to think out aloud, I'd say that this was a relaxation, allowed at a factory (or factories) in order for them to make the best use of the existing resources available to them. This was quite common. I'd say that factory X or so had a lot of wood offcuts say, and in order to save waste or additional expense, would have submitted an example like this, had it approved after testing and given the go ahead. I would also suggest that if the order was for, say 900 medium butts and there were already 250 short butts there, surplus, then they'd modify thhese to save waste and resources. That's only my opinion based on nothing more than the quality of the work and the way the system works. We recently had some slightly undersize XX-XX xxxxx parts that were not exactly to the specification but after a short trial were deemed acceptable and approved for service

I asked the old retired post war examiner about these in a phone call yesterday and he said that he has been asked to extend butts for individual shooting team members in the days of the No4 but when it came to push and shove, the rules always banned any modifications like that (I'm thinking Service SR(a) or SR(b) anyone for comments..........). So I don't think that they're ARMY/in service modifications. It definately wouldn' be a 'field' response because these are machine made fittings, finished on the factory, butt turning pantograph machines

I have to say what a pleasure it is to see such quality woodwork. I took copies of the pictures to the Armourers shop and the ex apprentices all made glowing comments............. Wow............

Thanks, y'all! It's the real reason I hang out here- learning "new stuff" about "old stuff". (Pardon my language, to some of you anyway.)

I'll have to go down to the Vault where all my fun toys are lurking.

I have something very similar on a Ross Target rifle (Mark II) which extends the butt length all the way from "Mountain Man" to "Gorilla". It is definitely off the scale for mere humans, but the work is very nice and the rifle was shot this way quite enough that I despair of the bore.
.

Peter,
Yes, Tung oil makes it very difficult to take detail photos…..:banghead: I agree with you that this buttstock extension seems to have been performed in a factory environment. If you examined and handled this item in person you would be astonished at the workmanship! The dovetail joint is almost invisible, all the holes are perfectly aligned and you will not feel any joints or steps in the bore for the oiler storage! The buttplate mating surface profile is identical to that of a normal buttstock. All in all a great bit of work!:super:

I do believe that Mr. Stratton's statement of this being a "field response to the need for longer buttstocks" actually referred to the "battlefield need for longer buttstocks" and not as a "field" (local armorer} initiated and performed modification.

I'm glad that the ex apprentices enjoyed the pictures.:beerchug:

D. :cheers:

I have one of these butts too in my odds and sods bin.
A couple of questions -
How long is a long butt ?
On the end of the butt the number 10 has been stamped 3 times,does this signify anything ?

ATB Kevin

Thinking about these butts, you just can't extend a short butt to make it into a LONG butt............ well, you can but the angular geometry would be all up the creek. Let me explain......... If you just simply lengthen a butt by adding a piece, the butt plate will simply be too short to cover the new heel-to-toe length of the butt. The whole of the knuckle to toe angle will have to be altered (decreased) so that while inserting a lengthening piece, the heel to toe length remains the same. Likewise, if you shorten the butt, the heel to toe distance would be too short for the butt plate. And there is only one size of butt plate.

My updated view now is that these butts were a factory relaxation in standards and the whole wood blank was lengthened by using an extended piece THEN machined in the usual way. By virtue of the angular geometry, this wasn't a means of using up old/existing short or medium butts to make a longer butt because some of the extended butts are in fact short!

Peter,

The factory bit does make sense, but looking at the pic the butt disc and sling swivel, there is a difference in location, which to me would mean the butt disc and sling swivel recess were cut before rather than after the piece was fitted, ( I gather these would of been done on a jig so would be standard throughout regardless of the butt length and the rear being the datum) and as you pointed out this still leaves the question on the angle required for the butt plate.

https://www.milsurps.com/images/impo...DSCF3437-1.jpg

Mmmmmmmmmm. Still thinking about that!

Is it possible wood has been taken off the top &/or bottom to keep the proper overall shape while still allowing the extension to fit the butt plate?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Peter Laidler

And there is only one size of butt plate.

---

There might be just one part number, but there are at least two sizes of No1 butt plate. Quick look through my 40 or so spares shows about 5 which are about 1/4" shorter than the rest. This might be manufacturing variation, but I do notice a difference when it comes to fitting plates to short and long butts.

It always blows me away when I consider the volume of timber, and good quality timber, that has been utilized in the manufacture of small arms. And it also impresses me as to the general quality of the workmanship across the board.
Just the difficulty in stocking up one of these **,000,000 SMLE's and No4's, and the fact that many of them when you buy them, between 55 and 100+ years old, are still well fitting, and good shooters.
Never seen those mod's but what a beautiful job, even at a factory.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Thunderbox

There might be just one part number, but there are at least two sizes of No1 butt plate. Quick look through my 40 or so spares shows about 5 which are about 1/4" shorter than the rest. This might be manufacturing variation, but I do notice a difference when it comes to fitting plates to short and long butts.

---

In fact -having just looked through about 80 buttplates loose and on rifles - I'll go out on a limb and observe that there appear to be at least THREE sizes of No1 buttplates, and that they appear to be in 1/8" increments.

Placing them between straight edges gives a rough indication, because there is some variation in the angle of the top tab on the butt plates:

https://www.milsurps.com/images/impo...93511486-1.jpg

Lining them up on the common screw hole locations, however, shows that the difference in length occurs in the tail:

https://www.milsurps.com/images/impo...93511487-1.jpg

Take it from me chaps, there's only one size of butt plate for the rifles. The size variations stem from the fact that in fitting butt plates, the wood of the butt MUST be proud of the actual butt plate. So when fitting a butt plate to a butt. brass is taken off from around the edges to fit it correctly. No fit, no pass the out inspection bay.

It follows that if a worn out old butt is scraped and made good for the umpteenth time in its life, then the butt plate will be adjusted to fit and each time, it gets shorter and shorter, narrower and narrower and................

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Baal

Is it possible wood has been taken off the top &/or bottom to keep the proper overall shape while still allowing the extension to fit the butt plate?

---

+1

Yes you would be able to make a short one longer but not a long one shorter.As you say the extra material would need to be taken off and shaped to suit.

Where the junction of the join is on mine the fixing bolt/oiler hole is stepped to the top of the hole and the weight hole is stepped at the bottom.This to me would indicate an added section to an existing butt ?
I would have thought that if done from a blank unless the boring bit was not long enough the operation would have been done from one end in one pass ?

Is anyone else's stepped ?

(edited to add that my butt is not fitted so can be easily viewed)

ATB Kevin

It took me three years and a trip to France before I found a decent SMLE butt plate (wasn't using internet then) , now I see where they've all gone !