Enfield Sht 22 IV trainer

Printable View

11-23-2006, 08:03 PM
Cantom

Enfield Sht 22 IV trainer

I traded for one today, my 870 shotgun for one that's been for sale on the EE for a few weeks. Here's the pics, including two off the net showing the same rifle.

https://www.milsurps.com/images/imported/deleted.gif
https://www.milsurps.com/images/imported/deleted.gif
https://www.milsurps.com/images/imported/deleted.gif
https://www.milsurps.com/images/imported/deleted.gif
https://www.milsurps.com/images/imported/deleted.gif
https://www.milsurps.com/images/imported/deleted.gif
The Canadian Cooey rear sight shown above used the leaf from the Ross rifle
11-23-2006, 09:04 PM
stencollector

Nice trade.
I bought one at a Wpg gunshow about 6 years back for $150 (wood had been shortened but the ross sight was there). It was a fun rifle.
870 shotguns can be found anywhere, but Enfields are a limited breed.
11-24-2006, 12:29 AM
Cantom

Quote:

Originally Posted by stencollector

Nice trade.
I bought one at a Wpg gunshow about 6 years back for $150 (wood had been shortened but the ross sight was there). It was a fun rifle.
870 shotguns can be found anywhere, but Enfields are a limited breed.

My thought exactly...Enfields represent an enduring value...
11-24-2006, 07:15 AM
Claven2

nice snag with the Ross sight. Don't worry about that crack in the stock. It's likely been there since the rifle was rebuilt. .22 recoil will never affect it.
11-25-2006, 12:08 PM
Cantom

Quote:

Originally Posted by Claven2

nice snag with the Ross sight. Don't worry about that crack in the stock. It's likely been there since the rifle was rebuilt. .22 recoil will never affect it.

The 870 I traded wasn't a run of the mill one, it was a Police Magnum 14" in new condition, so this rifle isn't coming cheaply. I just felt it was more what I wanted to own, especially with C/|\ marking on it...
11-28-2006, 04:51 PM
Cantom

Quote:

Originally Posted by Claven2

nice snag with the Ross sight. Don't worry about that crack in the stock. It's likely been there since the rifle was rebuilt. .22 recoil will never affect it.

I need a part for this- the rifle is in excellent shape, nice bluing, matching numbers, but I need a part and have a question.

The rifle is missing the original lanyard like screw on the left side of the sight assembly as shown here.

https://www.milsurps.com/images/imported/deleted.gif

The rifle I got has this screw in it's place: (that is the C/|\ to the right of it)

https://www.milsurps.com/images/imported/deleted.gif

It's otherwise very nice.

https://www.milsurps.com/images/imported/deleted.gif
https://www.milsurps.com/images/imported/deleted.gif
https://www.milsurps.com/images/imported/deleted.gif

Another question- the magazine is a hollow shell. I've seen Canadian .22 rifles with a ramp to feed single rounds into the chamber. Should this rifle have one of those mags or was that a later invention for No 4 based trainers like the No 7?
11-28-2006, 06:57 PM
Claven2

The correct mag for a Sht.22MkIV* is a hollow shell with 22 stamped into the side. Sometimes they weren't stammped 22 though. The CNo.7 trainer does have the feed ramp you are referring to, but it's based on a No.4 action, not the same setup as your rifle.

As for the screw... no ideas there. Maybe ask your gunsmith to make you one? If so, provide him GOOD pics to copy.
11-29-2006, 10:02 AM
Cantom

Quote:

Originally Posted by Claven2

The correct mag for a Sht.22MkIV* is a hollow shell with 22 stamped into the side. Sometimes they weren't stammped 22 though. The CNo.7 trainer does have the feed ramp you are referring to, but it's based on a No.4 action, not the same setup as your rifle.

As for the screw... no ideas there. Maybe ask your gunsmith to make you one? If so, provide him GOOD pics to copy.

Does anyone have a CNo.7 .22 magazine in good cond for sale?
I have a couple of possibles for the sight part coming on line...I also have a real camera coming courtesy of credit card bonus points...

https://www.milsurps.com/images/imported/deleted.gif
11-29-2006, 12:11 PM
Claven2

Even if someone had one, it wouldn't fit well in that rifle and also it would be very incorrect to put a CNo.7 mag into your rifle. What's wrong with using it as-is?
11-29-2006, 12:16 PM
tiriaq

Strictly speaking, a CNo. 7 magazine wouldn't be correct for a .22" IV* rifle. I think the magazine shell used would have been a SMLE pattern, with 22 stamped on it. Doesn't mean that No. 7 magazine couldn't have been fitted, the rifles overlapped in use.
When I was in high school, cadets was part of the program. We had Cooey 82s, No. 7s, No. 4s, Brens, and until '59, Stens in the school. One of the older schools in town still had IV* rifles. The Cooey sight bases apparently would work loose, so the shop teacher brazed them on.
11-29-2006, 12:17 PM
Cantom

Quote:

Originally Posted by Claven2

Even if someone had one, it wouldn't fit well in that rifle and also it would be very incorrect to put a CNo.7 mag into your rifle. What's wrong with using it as-is?

It's for something else I just grabbed...:beerchug: A No 4 based .22.
11-29-2006, 12:19 PM
Cantom

Quote:

Originally Posted by tiriaq

Strictly speaking, a CNo. 7 magazine wouldn't be correct for a .22" IV* rifle. I think the magazine shell used would have been a SMLE pattern, with 22 stamped on it. Doesn't mean that No. 7 magazine couldn't have been fitted, the rifles overlapped in use.
When I was in high school, cadets was part of the program. We had Cooey 82s, No. 7s, No. 4s, Brens, and until '59, Stens in the school. One of the older schools in town still had IV* rifles. The Cooey sight bases apparently would work loose, so the shop teacher brazed them on.

The magazine shell in the Sht 22 IV isn't stamped .22 unfortunately. I was told it could have been either way.
11-29-2006, 12:28 PM
tiriaq

I wouldn't be surprised if they could have been marked or plain.
Let us know more about the No. 4 based .22 when you've got it.
11-29-2006, 12:36 PM
Claven2

I've had three MkIV*'s that I know were all original given their source. Two had 22 marked shells, the other had a shell not marked 22. I think it could have gone either way and replacements likely weren't marked.
11-29-2006, 01:11 PM
Cantom

Quote:

Originally Posted by tiriaq

I wouldn't be surprised if they could have been marked or plain.
Let us know more about the No. 4 based .22 when you've got it.

You're just going to hate this...it wasn't me that Bubbaed it, but I can see the value in it. I just sold my Jungle Carbine and now this popped up...some nice work there. I like oddities like this...and .22's are a lot cheaper to shoot.
Collector value nil but as for resale value...can't see how I could lose on it.

Do you think that's a barrel sleeve or a real No 4 .22 barrel? The action looks like it may be a No 4 Mk 2, see the screw head at the back of the forend. Numbers are matching too. Looks like a Numrich 4-5 flash hider, and an actual JC buttstock. Note the correct 800 yd JC rear sight, someone went to a lot of trouble to assemble this. The stock is crying out for some BLO...

https://www.milsurps.com/images/imported/deleted.gif
https://www.milsurps.com/images/imported/deleted.gif
https://www.milsurps.com/images/imported/deleted.gif
https://www.milsurps.com/images/imported/deleted.gif
https://www.milsurps.com/images/imported/deleted.gif
https://www.milsurps.com/images/imported/deleted.gif
https://www.milsurps.com/images/imported/deleted.gif
https://www.milsurps.com/images/imported/deleted.gif
https://www.milsurps.com/images/imported/deleted.gif
11-29-2006, 01:38 PM
tiriaq

A while back, I sold an unfinished No. 7 barrel with the muzzle end of the bore damaged by corrosion (the buyer knew this) to a chap who wanted to make a .22 No. 5 clone. Wouldn't be surprised if this is it. It is certainly an interesting rifle, nicely done, and should be a lot of fun as a shooter.
As far as I am concerned, there are plenty of rifles around that have been sported, altered past any reasonable restoration, and there is absolutely no harm in using them for projects.
I think we have all seen mudpuppy's photographs of his Delisle clones, and I would just love to get enough information to be able to make a simulated Charlton. I have a copy of the original Charlton patent, but that is hardly a set of dimensioned drawings.
11-29-2006, 01:54 PM
Cantom

I could ask the guy I'm buying that JC from where he got it...it'd be nice to know some background on it. He doesn't know anything about Enfields...couldn't anwer any of my barrage of detailed questions...:)

Charlton- this would sure be one difficult thing to copy...

https://www.milsurps.com/images/imported/deleted.gif

11-29-2006, 03:52 PM
tiriaq

Many of the new parts are lathe turnings/cylindrical/tubular. The bolt camming piece on the operating rod has been reported to show hand forging marks, and is probably the single most complex piece in the conversion. The Charlton conversion is rather basic compared to the Huot conversion of the Ross. At any rate, it would be an interesting project, and the parts/materials cost would be pretty low.

11-29-2006, 04:41 PM
tiriaq

Just occurred to me - when I mentionned that the barrel I sold had some corrosion in the bore at the muzzle - the chap wanted it for a No. 5 style project because once it was cut to proper length, the bore would be perfect. IF it is the same project rifle, don't worry about the bore condition.

11-29-2006, 04:57 PM
Cantom

Quote:

Originally Posted by tiriaq

Just occurred to me - when I mentionned that the barrel I sold had some corrosion in the bore at the muzzle - the chap wanted it for a No. 5 style project because once it was cut to proper length, the bore would be perfect. IF it is the same project rifle, don't worry about the bore condition.

Judging by the attention to detail I see on that rifle, I actually wasn't worried about that at all.
Usually .22's have perfect barrels...how did it corrode? (hopefully it wasn't like that story about the guy who lent his perfect LB No 4 T to a "friend" who proceeded to shoot off a bunch of Canadian military ammo in it and then didn't clean it afterwards...when it was returned he panicked and checked the bore only to see that it was well and truly beotched...he said it truly took every ounce of self control he could summon to keep from buttstroking the guy right then and there...I can well imagine. He ended up getting it converted to 7.62 at LB with the attendant new barrel)

Do you remember what part of Canada the guy that was building that lived in?

11-29-2006, 06:22 PM
Claven2

If it's the rifle I'm thinking of, Ottawa.

11-29-2006, 06:42 PM
tiriaq

The barrel went west. Back in the days of the old Gun and Knife site. The barrel was brand new, unfinished, never trimmed to length.
Incidentally, I did a No. 4 conversion to .22, using odds and ends of parts. Took a piece of scrap .303 barrel, and turned it until it resembled a .303 case. Soldered it into a crappy .303 barrel, then ran a drill through end to end, and installed a liner. Used a No. 7 bolthead. Set the barrel back one turn, to bring the barrel face back to the boltface. Many .22 liners are 8mm/.315" diameter, so a .30 or .303 bore is very easy to size, simpler than sleeving a .22.

11-29-2006, 10:21 PM
Cantom

Quote:

Originally Posted by Claven2

If it's the rifle I'm thinking of, Ottawa.

Hey, it might be the same rifle. I just got the response from the seller, he bought it at a gun show in Eastern Ontario a few years ago. He's not into it and was glad I wanted it. I'd say it's a high probability that it's the same rifle. How many of these can there be?
How many years ago was that barrel sold?

11-29-2006, 10:39 PM
Cantom

Quote:

Originally Posted by tiriaq

The barrel went west. Back in the days of the old Gun and Knife site. The barrel was brand new, unfinished, never trimmed to length.
Incidentally, I did a No. 4 conversion to .22, using odds and ends of parts. Took a piece of scrap .303 barrel, and turned it until it resembled a .303 case. Soldered it into a crappy .303 barrel, then ran a drill through end to end, and installed a liner. Used a No. 7 bolthead. Set the barrel back one turn, to bring the barrel face back to the boltface. Many .22 liners are 8mm/.315" diameter, so a .30 or .303 bore is very easy to size, simpler than sleeving a .22.

BTW, now that the ebay auction is over, I want to personally thank you for giving me the heads up on that Ross sight screw- I got it, it cost me a total of about $22 shipped. Many thanks for that, that will improve this Sht 22 a lot...

https://www.milsurps.com/images/imported/deleted.gif

11-30-2006, 06:31 AM
tiriaq

Sold the barrel a few years ago, but I do not remember to whom. Glad that you got the screw. It was a remarkable coincidence that it just happened to appear on eBay at the same time that you mentionned needing one.

11-30-2006, 09:31 AM
Cantom

Quote:

Originally Posted by tiriaq

Sold the barrel a few years ago, but I do not remember to whom. Glad that you got the screw. It was a remarkable coincidence that it just happened to appear on eBay at the same time that you mentionned needing one.

Talk about the moon and the stars aligning at a propitious moment...:dancingbanana:

12-04-2006, 02:48 PM
Cantom

Quote:

Originally Posted by tiriaq

Sold the barrel a few years ago, but I do not remember to whom. Glad that you got the screw. It was a remarkable coincidence that it just happened to appear on eBay at the same time that you mentionned needing one.

I received the Jungle Carbine .22 today, won't get to open it till tonight...

12-04-2006, 02:52 PM
Cantom

Some new pics of the Sht 22.

C Broad Arrow (on stock to the right of the disc)

https://www.milsurps.com/images/imported/deleted.gif
https://www.milsurps.com/images/imported/deleted.gif

https://www.milsurps.com/images/imported/deleted.gif

12-04-2006, 10:55 PM
Cantom

Quote:

Originally Posted by tiriaq

I wouldn't be surprised if they could have been marked or plain.
Let us know more about the No. 4 based .22 when you've got it.

I just got the .22 Jungle Carbine out of the box 15 minutes ago.

It's nicer than I expected. Two issues, one, the front sight is semi loose in the Numrich aftermarket hider dovetail(easily fixed by spreading the slot in the sight), and one of the pins is loose that holds it on the bbl, but that's about it.
It is apparently built from a 1942 Maltby No 4 Mk 1 receiver, per the CFC. Matching numbers. And, strangest of all....a big C Broad Arrow on top of the receiver ring! Now that is unexpected...:eek: :D You can just see it in the second picture. I don't have my camera tonight or I'd take a pic of that mark.

The buttstock appears brand new, the flashider is aftermarket, I believe this rifle was built up using a No 7 barrel and one of these kits.
http://www.e-gunparts.com/DisplayAd....rSuperSKU=&MC=

The bolt cycles like butter...everything appears to work very well, the finish on the receiver and bolt is like new.The bore is shiny and perfect.

The mag is just a shell, but I have a No 7 .22 mag on the way...

12-06-2006, 10:03 PM
Cantom

I tried swapping in a CNo7 rear sight but no joy there, gave up on that. I noted that this rifle has a Long Branch bolt head number 0. That's a very nice firing pin setup they have, first time I've disassembled and inspected one.

The receiver has C/|\ on the top as seen below...I wonder why that is on a Maltby receiver? Sorry it's so blurry.

https://www.milsurps.com/images/imported/deleted.gif

12-07-2006, 11:17 PM
Cantom

Better pics...

New today: New camera(!), Ross sight screw(thanks Tiriac!), .22 No 7 mag which works better in the Sht 22 IV than it does in the No 4 Jungle Carbine .22.(I still have the 2 shell mags that came with them of course)

https://www.milsurps.com/images/imported/deleted.gif
https://www.milsurps.com/images/imported/deleted.gif
https://www.milsurps.com/images/imported/deleted.gif
https://www.milsurps.com/images/imported/deleted.gif
https://www.milsurps.com/images/imported/deleted.gif
https://www.milsurps.com/images/imported/deleted.gif
https://www.milsurps.com/images/imported/deleted.gif
https://www.milsurps.com/images/imported/deleted.gif

Maltby .22 Jungle Carbine C Broad Arrow marking...

https://www.milsurps.com/images/imported/deleted.gif
https://www.milsurps.com/images/imported/deleted.gif

All times are GMT -4. The time now is 02:34 PM.

Powered by vBulletin™
Copyright © 2025 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.

Username Changing provided by Username Change (Free) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2025 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.
Thread / Post Bookmarks provided by Thread / Post Bookmarking (Free) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2025 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.
Copyright ©2006 - 2024 by MILSURPS.COM - All Rights Reserved
Your IP Address: 216.73.216.74 | OS: unknown | Browser: Mozilla 5.0