My New Enfield No. 5

I recently posted to another thread that I acquired a No. 5 "Jungle Carbine" thru an online auction. While I am quite pleased with the rifle's overall condition, I am unable to verify its manufacturing date due to the fact that the etchings on the left side of the receiver are very faint. Does anyone on the forum know how I can date the rifle by the serial number or other marks? Photos below:

https://www.milsurps.com/images/impo...5enfield-1.jpg

https://www.milsurps.com/images/impo...5receive-1.jpg

https://www.milsurps.com/images/impo...5receive-1.jpg

https://www.milsurps.com/images/impo...5receive-1.jpg

https://www.milsurps.com/images/impo...no5bolt1-1.jpg

https://www.milsurps.com/images/impo...5receive-1.jpg

https://www.milsurps.com/images/impo...5safetyl-1.jpg

https://www.milsurps.com/images/impo...5trigger-1.jpg

https://www.milsurps.com/images/impo...5nosecap-1.jpg

https://www.milsurps.com/images/impo...no5bolt3-1.jpg

https://www.milsurps.com/images/impo...5rearsig-1.jpg

Gary

Well as you have not given us the S/N or any decent photo's of anything else, you are making it a tad difficult.
At the moment, assuming it is a genuine No.5 than somewhere between 1944 and '47.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by muffett.2008

Well as you have not given us the S/N or any decent photo's of anything else, you are making it a tad difficult.
At the moment, assuming it is a genuine No.5 than somewhere between 1944 and '47.

---

That's odd, I uploaded about a dozen pics. Somehow, all but the first one vanished. Give me a sec and I'll repost them.

Looks like it's been reblued to hell and back and the stock's been Tru-Oiled up to the nines. Usual London commercial proof on top of the chamber, otherwise the markings seem to have gone. they are often very faint on these ones.

Photo's are up, It's a Fazerkerley, although a pic of the right side of the receiver and an overhead of the receiver are needed to ensure it's bona fides.
At this stage I would give it a date of 1946, but others may clarify once we are certain of it's originality.
I have a P series 1945 with side etchings so faint as to require crack test dye to decipher, my understanding was that these markings were improved on, as yours has been severely scrubbed and I am unable to use the full rescourses of my computer to improve your images, all is just theory.

geez, that is some smooth looking machining.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by muffett.2008

Photo's are up, It's a Fazerkerley, although a pic of the right side of the receiver and an overhead of the receiver are needed to ensure it's bona fides.

---

Here you go:

https://www.milsurps.com/images/impo...5receive-1.jpg

https://www.milsurps.com/images/impo...5receive-1.jpg

Heres a sample of Fazakerley No5 serial numbers & dates from another forum, yours should be August 1946
W1279 - 5/46
W20XX - 5/46
W544X - 6/46
W5588 - 6/46
W7321 - 7/45
W86XX - 7/46
X1214 - 8/46
X1518 - 8/46 - mine
X22XX - ?/46
X37XX - ?/46
X4388 - 9/46
X5426 - 9/46
X5904 - ?/46
X8123 - 10/46
X8726 - 10/46
X9154 - 10/46
X9923 - 10/46
Y40 - 10/46
Y530x - 11/46
Y670 - 10/46

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by 5thbatt

heres a sample of fazakerley no5 serial numbers & dates from another forum, yours should be august 1946
w1279 - 5/46
w20xx - 5/46
w544x - 6/46
w5588 - 6/46
w7321 - 7/45
w86xx - 7/46
x1214 - 8/46
x1518 - 8/46 - mine
x22xx - ?/46
x37xx - ?/46
x4388 - 9/46
x5426 - 9/46
x5904 - ?/46
x8123 - 10/46
x8726 - 10/46
x9154 - 10/46
x9923 - 10/46
y40 - 10/46
y530x - 11/46
y670 - 10/46

---

y91xx 12/46
x41xx 9/46
My two No 5s added

Perhaps we need to start a No. 5 registry on this forum. Any takers?

I agree that it's been blued to within an inch of its life and varnished as to make it virtually impossible to handle if it ever rained - which it's prone to do in the jungle. Personally speaking GBalke, that No5 needs stripping down and the wood de-varnished and dunked in linseed for a day or so. Then I'd get the whole thing bead blasted and properly phosphated and painted. This'll turn it back from a wall queen into the real McCoy. Not just that, but into a good looking real McCoy too. Just my 2c's worth

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Peter Laidler

I agree that it's been blued to within an inch of its life and varnished as to make it virtually impossible to handle if it ever rained - which it's prone to do in the jungle. Personally speaking GBalke, that No5 needs stripping down and the wood de-varnished and dunked in linseed for a day or so. Then I'd get the whole thing bead blasted and properly phosphated and painted. This'll turn it back from a wall queen into the real McCoy. Not just that, but into a good looking real McCoy too. Just my 2c's worth

---

Well Peter, that is certainly something to consider, however cost would definitely be a concern. I would image that this is something that BDL Ltd could handle. If this was to be done, would it be correct to have the receiver inscribed with the No. 5, Fazerkerley, the date and serial number?

Gary

Ah, good question and I'm pleased that you took my suggestion in a positive way. To be honest, some of the stuff that came through our big Base workshops during what I used to call 'the programmes' was absolutely attrocious. We didn't give a hoot about the manufacturers or year marker data, only serial numbers so if one was unclear or had been rusted out or had beel obliterated in the sand booth, then the number would be re-stamped on the wrist or re-engraved on the body side, (totally lost and un-recovered numbers had a new oine allocated from the ZZ-xxxx range or from the SA year A-xxxx series)

I'd just ask your local engraving/trophy shop to just engrave the serial number on the body side or someone to carefully re-stamp the number on the butt socket and have it sand blasted/phosohated and painted again. That way it'd look absolutely no different than any of the other hundreds and hundreds that went through the workshops. I kid you not............., some of those that went through had had a seriously hard life. But they all came out looking perfect. The jungle is an unkind environment to steel - and men!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Peter Laidler

Ah, good question and I'm pleased that you took my suggestion in a positive way.

---

Peter, as they say on this side of the pond, "You're the man!" I like the suggestion of taking it to a local engraving shop. Was there an army regulation dictating the character height for the engravings or was it basically up to the engraver's desgression?

Gary

I don't remember seeing any specific height or depth but we had engraving cutters as opposed to the more modern scratchy pen things and only one type of straight forward readable font. Obviously we'd be a bit more brutal than the factories but so long as it was deep enough and readable, then I always used to just follow what the usual size that was there!

Peter, one last question. As far as paint, what is the preferred color, just a flat black, or did the British military have a specific color specification, much like the US military does for EVERYTHING?

Gary

It was a baked on spirit based hard/tough paint. It was a matt paint and had to be kept stirred or it'd go satin. If you got an old tin, it could almost go gloss!. I have heard that hard motor cycle exhaust paint does the job but it MUST be baked on properly. The answer is that it's matt or satin. But matt still goes slightly glossy once it's been through the oil bath - so take your pick!

OP: I think you'd do better to find another No.5. This one has been very heavily buffed and the rounding over of the surfaces is very noticeable. You should be able to find one with original finish and markings quite easily. The numbers were restamped because the original electro-penciled markings were erased by the heavy buffing, largely erasing any collector value in the process.