Printable View
Hello, I'm new here, but I can already say this is a great site. Lots of information. Anyway, I am looking to buy a Lee Enfield in the future and figured that I should start researching now and broadening my knowledge. So, here are my questions.
Who made the most accurate and most durable Enfield during WWII?
How much are all matching sniper rifles now?
I have many more questions, but I'll try to research some more before I ask them.
Thanks, Matthew
First, I read your member intro and have to say it's nice to see a young man such as yourself interested in history. 14yrs old is a little young to worry about the price of No's matching No.4T snipers because they run into the thousands of dollars. Every marker made durable and accurate rifles but generally the British arsenals and the Savage rifles are more desirable. Good luck on your quest of knowledge and remember,, Those who don't learn from history are doomed to repeat it.
SS Sniper: Treat yourself to a copy of the big Ian Skennerton book on the Lee Enfield and settle in for a month of good reading after which you'll probably know what rifle/rifles you want to chase down. All Lee Enfields started out durable and moderately to very accurate but they're all pretty old now and the challenge is finding well preserved, reasonably original (ie. as issued), and mechanically sound examples from any of the original factories. Use that book (and others) to find what interests you and study the great technical material available in this forum so that you can recognize a good example when one confronts you. Endless fun with these rifles!
Ridolpho
book title: "A Century of Lee-Metford & Lee-Enfield Rifles and Carbines", Ian Skennerton. Usually available on e-bay
Or go to Ian Skennerton's site and it and other books direct.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk 2
A no4 mk2 made 1949 to 1954 would be amongst the best made quality wise and most accurate, otherwise a Canadian post WW2 no4 mk1* rifle.
My son's 14 1/2 and shoots, ignore these oldies...nothing like knowing what you want I reckon.
---------- Post added at 01:45 PM ---------- Previous post was at 01:39 PM ----------
[/COLOR]Those that do, are doomed to watch those that dont, repeat it.Quote:
Originally Posted by WarPig1976
regards
I checked out an No4 Mk 1 enfield at a pawn shop today. It was a sporterized version without hand guards or forestock that had the wood hacked off on the bottom stock and sanded to look more sporty. It was without any iron sights at all( only had some weird german named notch blade welded onto the barrel above the chamber). They wanted $325USD. I said politely, "No that thing is missing sights, handguard, stock and it ain't worth that to me. I wanted to trade a sks for it. They told me to give em 50USD and the sks. I said no thanks bye. Does $325USD sound like a reasonable price for a rifle without barrel bands,stock, handguard or sights? What should I look to pay for a No4 Mk1 nowadays in good condition with all it stock and hardware intact (including sights lol)? Any and all help is appreciated.
I just got a No4 Savage with South African marks. $400. Better price than I paid for my other No4.
SS Sniper all of us have made that bad purchase at some time. I don't know if it's a completely unavoidable experience, but as everyone here has said, learn as much as you can. That is the best defense. Find a few things you want to find and stick to that first. Really get to know everything about the specific rifles you want before you start looking for them. Otherwise you're flying blind and the guy on the other side of the counter or table is always looking for the guy who will take it for top dollar.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Happy Budgies Guy
No its not worth it (unless it was a No4T)
Quote:
Originally Posted by SS Sniper
They're all good. Long Branch, Maltby, Fazackerly, BSA Shirley, and Savage No4 rifles. Maltbys were built using many subcontracted parts from very early on, but by this point in their history, many No4. rifles will have parts from all over.
Then there's the No.1 Mk.III* SMLEs produced in Australia and India. Most folk prefer the Australian rifles, but I think that's mostly because the Indian versions are harder to find in good condition. They are equally as tough as the No.4 rifles, but were more costly to mass produce and have very different rear sighting systems. Which is better?...Nah, not going there!
As far as the sniper rifle's prices? Getting out of my "impulse buy" range for sure. Multi-thousand US$. But tomorrow will likely make today's price look cheap.
To SSsniper best to look for a while sometimes things fall into your lap as happens to some, you will know when you find the right one whether its a No.4 or No.1 Mk III I have both and they both have their quirks like when you put the bayonet on a No.4 and watch how that affects the trajectory of the round :rofl: I have a teak stocked No.1 Mk III with a nice featured knot on the front bottom wood and it looks real grand and being a bit heavier wood soaks up a bit of recoil.
Visual stuff is not really important unless it looks like a Tiger shark has gnawed on it, look for the serials matching, screw slots not butchered, have the barrel bore scoped to look for pitting from the mercuric primers they used to use, throat erosion damaged crown on the barrel, rust marks worn bolt race, any missing bits and so on.
Be wary of persons that say it shoots really good was my grand dads in WWI always but always get them checked by a reputable gunsmith or ask the moderators here bloke as they are a holy grail of knowledge as the knowledge on this type of weapon is slowly marching away and unless those of us who really care about a battle proven weapon through wars and still going through conflicts keep the faith then it may be lost.
As one can read books till the sparrows fly backwards and the dodo lays the golden egg but the loss of technically gained experience cannot be imparted through a fax machine or a thumb drive.
I sincerely hope you find your weapon look slowly soak up the info and I am sure you will find the "Smelly"of your choice and keep the faith.:super:
From one of my WWI books(Sadly no one really wins in a war as there are losses to both sides but freedom must be maintained for the future of the generations to come)Quote:
The German skirmish line was advancing towards the British line and troops with full magazines in their 303's, when the British opened fire such was their volume of fire poured from the rifles the Germans broke and reported there was a machine gun battalion in the British line"
Thanks to all of you for taking your time to help me out. I will consider getting the book, and most likely will. I'm interested in a Mauser right now, and will get one. The Lee-Enfield will probably be my 2nd gun, because I plan on getting all 5.
Thanks, Matthew
Not to me, Ppl in here have picked up first class no4 mk2s for around that money.
Mathew that's a dirty word on this forum (Mauser) but If I was starting out and looking for a Enfield to shoot and if there is a good source of milsurp ammo, I,d go for a Ishaphore 2A1, cheap rifle and cheap to run. (and you can fix a proper bayonet on it)
Not to be a prick, but SS_Sniper, you might want to rethink your handle, especially if you are 14 years old. I say that on two accounts:
1) Not a lot of folks that like UK equipment are all that enamored of the SS organization overall; even the Waffen SS are viewed with a wee bit of suspicion and some measure of scorn.
2) To the older WWII generation and those that knew them, Snipers are viewed as being just a few steps above serial killers and frankly, not deserving of any sort of quarter in the heat of battle or after. The modern world sees that specialty otherwise, but that worldview is still very much alive among the older crowd.
Just something to think about. Regardless I hope you find Enfields and history behind it as enjoyable as we older chaps have.
You're not being a prick. I choose this name because I like reading about the SS, specifically their snipers. I am, by no means, supporting what they have done. I don't agree with your statement about snipers in general, they are no different than a recruit.Quote:
Originally Posted by Frederick303
Thanks, Matthew
You should agree with Freds statement about snipers Matt..... I was the snipers Armourer for a couple of years and then went back older, wiser, more mellow but much senior in rank many years later. I'll say no more except I know the sort of lads that go in and come out 6 weeks later.
Matthew,
I do understand that young folks today see sniping as something a bit glorious and endearing. My specific comments were related to my father’s generation that fought WWII and his father’s generation that fought WWI. Many of my friend’s fathers were Korean War vets, so I guess it covers that cohort as well, but I cannot say I ever heard that conversation among Korean vets.
To those who were actual combat vets of that era, snipers, the real item, not the chaps banging away during battle, but dedicated snipers were viewed with contempt. If caught they were killed, no quarter given or expected. In the pacific, if they were burning from a flame thrower hit, (a rather horrid death) no effort would be made to shorten that agony, they would not waste the bullet. It was one of the few topics I recall the vets being somewhat strong worded about and they did not speak much about that sort of thing around young chaps such as I.
I recall asking my father about this, most likely around your age or slightly older. He was not a combat vet, (entered too late) but was around those vets that remained in the US Army between WWII and Korea. His comment was that a sniper shot men who could not fight back, at times when they were helpless, like taking a crap or whenever vulnerable. To shoot a man who could not fight back was seen as being not that far from cold blooded murder. As he described it to me, such conduct was seen as lacking in some basic moral underpinning or character on the part of the dedicated sniper. I cannot be more precise, as it was just sort of the atmosphere growing up and I absorbed it as it was.
Now I never heard the same sort of view of the enemy common soldier, at least in the ETO (attitudes were much harsher in the pacific). The enemy draftee, or regular soldier was viewed, at least 20-some years after the war as a fellow pretty much like themselves, at least as regards combat.
By the way among the folks I knew growing were both German and American vets, of both WW I and WWII, and these views were shared by both sides. I cannot comment on how the Commonwealth solders saw it, but I would expect it would not be all that different.
None of the above is meant to chide you, just to explain how prior generations viewed the world. You are a young man starting out in the world and are interested in firearms, battle and all that is related to that. Part of that knowledge is learning how the prior generations saw the world. The views of the modern day are in some ways different. As you grow, experience life, loss and garner wisdom you may find that these prior generations worldview to be more refined and civilized than the one we find ourselves in now. Welcome to the forum and I hope you stay on and become part of the next generation of collectors, competitors and shooters.
I couldn't have said it better myself. I don't see sniping as a " role of beauty" in war and don't admire it at all. I only enjoy the history and like to see how people carried themselves in a time of war. I agree 100% with what you have to say. All of my Grandparents from both sides served in WWII, Korea, and Vietnam, but they died before I could ask them any questions about them. I'm sure what you said above would be the same answer they would come up with.Quote:
Originally Posted by Frederick303
Thanks, Matthew
And keep away from them Mausers :lol:, but on a serious note there are a few wise words to be had from Fred, maybe his first post was a bit staright to the point, as we have all been 14 at sometime on here, some more recent than others !!! at that age I was collecting medals and bayonets and digging up old .303 cases, mortor fins etc on an old training ground, but most of the time I was thinking about Christine Tyson, in fact I still think about her....Quote:
Originally Posted by Frederick303
I like it when people are straight shooters and get straight to it. Besides, it's only my "internet feelings" he would have hurt. Anyway, why do you all dislike Mausers so much? Is it because they have a waay better action and look better.Quote:
Originally Posted by bigduke6
Sporterized like that is about $150 at best.Quote:
Originally Posted by Happy Budgies Guy
Probably because this is the Enfield forum and most of these guys are Enfield guys and comments like that could be considered fighting words.Quote:
Originally Posted by SS Sniper
Mauser guys talk Mausers on the Mauser forum.
I have interests in all of them so I roam about all over the place. I can't say I have a preference between Mausers and Enfields, My favorite rifles are the Swiss straight pulls, if you want to learn about them, go to that forum. I've shot and hunted with Enfields. Nice smooth action and fast. The 10 round magazine gives them a strong advantage over the Mausers. I've only shot Swedish Mausers and found them to be accurate with nice tight actions, less recoil but they were smaller calibers than the 303. I've shot Carcano's and found them to be a pain in the royal behind for a number of reasons. I've shot Arisakas and found them to be very enjoyable. I've shot Mosin Nagants of several types and didn't get excited about them but they were fun. The Swiss, can't say much more than once I shot one, I wanted more and if I had to take one surplus rifle with me into the wilderness, it would be a K31.
On your handle. I read a lot, always have since I was younger than you. There are a lot of things people consider to be evil in the world, the SS is one of them. Were they all evil, no but enough of them were that they deserve the reputation. The Waffen SS were more army like, were also not all German and didn't share the same ideals but the regular SS were "bred" to be that way. They were taught from a young age to believe in their superiority and that all others were beneath them, so far as to be consider animals in many instances. I personally would not want to be associated with them in that way. I often see young kids portraying them in re-enactments and I find myself wondering if they really understand what they represent. I never want to hide the SS from the world, I would enjoy having something from their history but only so I could share it with others and remind them what they represented. If you don't know history or don't remember history, you're somewhat doomed to repeat it. The SS does not deserve repeating.
I agree with the above. The handle "SS Sniper" does you no credit and will not win friends and influence people on forums like this.
Perhaps I might politely suggest you read, learn, and understand a bit more about the SS. History might show you the difference between honourable elite troops (here I am thinking of the SAS, SBS, Commandos, Marines, Seals etc.) and contemptible, sadistic, murdering scum - (here I am thinking of the SS). Sorry if this sounds impolite, but not all soldiers are the same - some are good, some are bad, and some beyond contempt.
Mod feel free to delete this post if it offends the SS and their fans.
Thanks. I realize my name is a problem. I will change it.Quote:
Originally Posted by RobD
Oi Count Couto - lets see how a Mauser handles mud being a front locker and after you have expended your five rounds and are stippering another 5 in I still have 5 in the mag LMAO, all battle rifles have there good and bad points as does the 303's it is a matter of choice.
As for the handle SSniper lets get one thing perfectly straight snipers are trained to eliminate high value targets sorta like a chooks head meets the axe, the Waffen SS were very highly trained and dedicated troops but such was their training they could be construed as Commando's, look up their leaders instructions what happened to our or the British Commandos if captured by them or any Werhmacht unit.
Anyway I have already been held to task about getting political, my father in WWII went through New Guinea, Wewak, Mindanao and Moratai shaking hands with the Japanese Imperial forces he did not talk about his experiences except to my brother in law who is a Vietnam vet that the Japanese bombed them once and it was not nice. Consider changing the handle bloke as for some the memories of war are like yesterday and unless you were there and in the midst of it you do not know the fear and noise and not knowing if you are going to die one moment to the next.
I have 2500 + books on conflicts spanning mostly WW1-II and believe me there is nothing glorious in war like in the first day of the Somme WWI the British lost 60,000 men and for us Australians 2 battles stand out Fromelles and Pozieres so please consider the request from those that have endured the heat of battle and lets move on I mean Mauser Marty is not to bad a nick!:dunno:
Post script Note: Thank you for changing your nick but you may want to consider what I suggested I mean MM is as good as chocholate
I know they were terrible people.Quote:
Originally Posted by CINDERS
Thanks, Matthew
I,ve Nothing against them CC in fact I have one, but its a Portuguese Mauser, The build quality and finish in these is excellent and being a pre War rifle the quality aspect is there and not the quantity.Quote:
Originally Posted by Count Coutu
I,ve a few M1903,s , Martini Henry, Martini Enfield, have had many in the past such as P14, M1917, Swiss K11, AR15....... the list is long but distinguished and have recently purchased a Springfield .45-70 1888 model, So not biased when it comes to Milsurps, but generally prefer Enfields.
I often browse the other forums here at Milsurps, they are excellent viewing and all of them worth a visit, a world of Knowledge at your fingertips and don't be afraid of asking anything or PM anyone for advice as it may save you some embarrassment in the future I,ve bought my fair share of lemons in the past and a few PM,s could of saved me some grief.
When you do get your first Milsurp then have a look at the range reports forum, and maybe have a go at the Milsurps target Cometition and shoot , see link below:
Milsurp Target Competition and Shoot (2013),
( good move on the name change )
Welcome Count Coutu! You have come to a good place.
All the best.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Count Coutu
https://www.milsurps.com/images/impo...stuff047-1.jpg
https://www.milsurps.com/images/impo...stuff056-2.jpg
K98k with Zf41 mount
https://www.milsurps.com/images/impo...41710001-1.jpg
https://www.milsurps.com/images/impo...41710011-1.jpg
A WWI Gew98 with mud cover.
I actually like very much the 1889, 1891, and '93/'95 Mauser variants and prefer them to the '98 types. Hard to find in good shape anymore, though. What I do not like about Nazi era Mausers is the massive fakery associated with the scoped variants. My one was the center of some controversy, even though it has been well researched. (A Gew 98 Simpson rework for the SS before the war. Still not inclined to share photos of that one!)
Welcome Count. I am a newcomer here myself and have to agree that there is a wealth of knowledge to be had here. I only started collecting and shooting rifles 2 years ago at the grand old age of 65.When I started I bought most everything I could find at a cheap price if I could find it. My first was a 1943 K98 Mauser (bcd 43) and was a vet bring back from WW2. It has all matching numbers and if you check what the bcd code is you will understand the history of where it was assembled. I then got a sporterized 1942 US Government No4 Enfield then a 1942 Arisaka 99. After shooting all 3 (I still have them) I settled towards reading about Enfields and started to collect them. I now have 6. There is a feeling when you hold and fire these rifles no matter which side they were used on. You sit and think My God what a nightmare it must have been for the poor men who carried them. Given that I count myself fortunate to never have served I find myself drawn to the more human aspect of the men who carried these. I have a 1914 Enfield LSA that would have been carried in the trenches of WW1. All of this leads me to better understand history and the totally futile waste of war. I am glad you are interested in all aspects of the weapons. If you can then try to find away to handle and shoot as many different types as you can before investing in any given type. I found I really enjoy shooting the .303 round as well as the Enfield history and mechanics. Great bunch of folks on here from all walks of life and ages that have helped me as I learn about the weapons.
I have several 7mm Mausers (Boer Mausers) and love to shoot them. The rifles are excellent.
The fakes out there **** me off. There's so many, especially for the K98 snipers. The other rifles( Lee-Enfield's, Springfields, Mosins) don't get faked as much for whatever reason. It just turns collecting into a minefield.Quote:
Originally Posted by jmoore
Thanks, Matthew
Quote:
Originally Posted by jmoore
ARGGHHHH :move eek: wtf is that ugly thing doing here!!!
Nah just kidding :D:madsmile: love that mud cover
Whilst i believe the Mauser is a better rifle, a better battle rifle it is not, i laugh my Ts O everytime i see a Mauser vs Enfield thread as there are 2 different answers to 2 different questions but only 1 question ever gets asked.
True. There is ups and downs for both, so personal preference plays a big role.Quote:
Originally Posted by 5thBatt
It plays the biggest role, i never set out to collect the best rifle or best battle rifle only what i like & thats the SMLE, i like the Longlees & the No5 but think very little of the No4, don't ask me why about the No4......:dunno: its a preference thing :DQuote:
Originally Posted by Count Coutu
If i could be bothered to upgrade my security & get the right endorcements on my licence (& could afford it :() i would have a nice collection of M1 Carbines as well.
To Count Coutu
Nice that your handle has changed.
If you are interested in history, have a look at the Warsaw uprising of 1944. In 2 months, the Waffen SS killed 165,000 Polish civilians (not Jews, they'd all been killed a few years earlier). That's 3x the US losses in Vietnam, so imagine a wall of Polish names 3 times the size of the US memorial wall in Washington. Now, that wasn't the biggest crime of the Waffen SS by a long way.
To make life easy, you don't need a book, go to Google Images and type in "waffen SS warsaw uprising".
Rob
I have read about that in some of my books. That's Horrible. I don't know what's worse, that, or the Holocaust.Quote:
Originally Posted by RobD
Hi guys, just a reminder that this is an Enfield Forum, for discussion of Enfield Firearms and Accoutrements.
I have given this thread some latitude already because our new member Count Coutu was getting to know some of our members and that is good, but this is WAY of topic and it ends here.
Cheers
Tom