Printable View
Hey guys, I've got a question for you.
I'm looking at buying a Canadian (Longbranch) Enfield. I'm wondering if anyone here has any experience with them? Are they every bit as good as a British made SMLE? Was the general fit and finish more or less the same as it's British brethren? Or are they perhaps even more nicely polished and tuned than your average example from across the pond?
All facts and opinions are welcomed, as I'm trying to expand my SMLE knowledge as much as possible.
Let's start with Longbranch did not make any SMLEs only No.4sQuote:
Originally Posted by Kiverson
At school, we had a mixture of No.4 Mk1s and No.4 Mk1*s. (Longbranch only made the latter.) As a Cadet Armourer, I didn't like the the No.4Mk.1*s because cadets could and would break the boltway where the bolt head engaged. No.4 Mk1s did not have this problem.
Othera will give you their views on other aspects of Longbranch production however, should you buy a Longbranch, examine the bolt way cut-out VERY carefully.
Make sure it is matching,bolt,mag etc. You will not loose money and maybe could consider it an investment. Extremely desireable in the No4 Mk1* community. In Ontario Canada I found out for the first time this year they still celebrate the production of Longbranch/Small Arms Ltd. at the abandoned facility. Longbranch had a major impact on the area and on the war effort in general for Canadians as an employer and supplier of fine weapons to the allied soldiers. This is also a biased opinion as I live in Canada.
Out of my Long Branches (Ranging from 1941 - 1950) the ones that overall shoot best and are well fit were / are the 1949 and 1950's. I like the early blued 1950 for great looks.
I agree with checking the bolt release slot fit carefully. I have one that the bolt head pops out frequently.
For SMLE's my favorites are the late Lithgows. My favorite is one of my 1953s.
Shooting (For me):
Out to 500 yards (Meters) No 4s.
Long shots the SMLEs.
The biggest thing is that these weapons are only our for a short time. Changed , adjusted and modified repeatedly over time. The stewardship by previous owners (Military or civilian) matters a lot on their current condition (Fit and function).
Can't remember where I read it but one opinion was that Longbranch made rifles were the best of the wartime production. I have had no trouble with the ones I have owned and have built a 4T replica on one that came with pads fitted.
I've never heard of the two terms meaning distinctly different things: I had always thought that "SMLE" was just a broad term, while "No.4" referred to a specific SMLE.Quote:
Originally Posted by Beerhunter
Why does SMLE only refer to the older No.1's?
---------- Post added at 09:36 PM ---------- Previous post was at 09:34 PM ----------
I won't take that too literally, but with a grain of salt. But that does still testify to the general quality of Canadian-made Enfields.Quote:
Originally Posted by Robert303
Thanks!
A gun made after ww2 in Canada or UK would seem to be the best option for "well made" with good finish. Many UK no4 mk2s would seem to have been sold out of service but only ever stored (1952~1955). Being a hung trigger the no4 mk2s would tend to be the most accurate and have the best stock sights. From what I can read you should be able to pick up a good one in Canada for very reasonable money. Otherwise, yes a late LB gun, 1949 ~ 1950 is supposed to be also well made and finished.
Maybe consider why you want one. eg I won Enfields and Mosins, the enfields are far better made but still no where as accurate as say a modren savage or Tikka. But I use my guns for service shooting, I also shoot Palma/FTR. I love it all but banging my AJ Parker accurised no4 at up to 600m is the most fun....but I wouldnt hunt with it.
Why the SMLE for long distance? Is it just those particular rifles shoot better, or is there something inherent to the SMLE that lends itself to longer range shooting? I (with little practical experience) have always theorized the opposite: because of the No.4's sight, and its longer sighting radius. You've piqued my curiosity, and I'd love to hear your bit on that.Quote:
Originally Posted by 3mctoledo
I live in Minnesota, US. While my state does border Canada, the area here is truly vast and expansive, and to drive to Canada to buy a rifle would take about 8-10 hours of driving. Or maybe you meant to have one shipped? I have no idea how importation of weapons to individuals in my country works, but it sounds like it'd be a complicated hassle...it may not actually be, but it seems like it would.Quote:
Originally Posted by ssj
While I do love an accurate rifle, modern sporters like a Remington 700, Browning A-bolt, or Winchester M70, do nothing for me. They simply are not interesting to me to any degree, and seem so soul-less and generic..despite being hot performers. I'll take an old surplus rifle that shoots 3-4 inch groups at 100 yards/meters with open sights, than a new Weatherby that manages .75 MOA at the same distance. While I don't hunt anymore, I did enjoy taking my 98k and K31 into the woods with me, and my first ever deer fell to one shot from that old Yugoslavian-captured K98k..and I wouldn't want it any other way :)
I really appreciate the input, and it will go into my considerations for my first Enfield purchase.
---------- Post added at 09:55 PM ---------- Previous post was at 09:52 PM ----------
That was an immensely interesting read, thanks!Quote:
Originally Posted by Badger
1) "...(Longbranch only made the latter.) ..." thats not quite right , they started off making no4 mkI rifles but quickly changed to the expedient mkI* as did savage in the US ,
2) the SMLE was the original designation of the no1 rifles pre-20s , the no4 rifle is an evolution of these but significantly changed to earn its own designation , closest thing you will find is a no1 mkV
3) IMHO the american made rifles are every bit as fine as the british made , and i own both , i will allow that the bolt release has proven a weak point over the years , but we are taking many years , the matching numbers is important as the commonwealth did not consider these bits interchangeable , they were mated for life
4) its worth doing research before "investing" in the future , know what you are looking at before you buy ,
the two in the middle are longbranch , the outside ones are FAZ in this photo .....
https://www.milsurps.com/images/impo...3874fcd8-1.jpg
these are SMLEs .......
https://www.milsurps.com/images/impo...73201611-1.jpg
My mistake.....so anyway.........LOL.....USA is probably cheaper if what Ive seen is any indication. If you really want a LB, OK, but if you want a good' un then there are good no4 mk2s about in the USA.Quote:
Originally Posted by Kiverson
I know what you mean on modern guns, my newest is 1955, I think its the wood I like as much as anything. Enfields are now getting hard to come by here in NZ in good condition and target barrels are approaching $1000NZ so kind of reluctant to over use my ones. Lots of New Zealanders do however still hunt with them....still a good demand for them.
regards
No such thing as a No1 MkV the MkV SMLE never received the No1 designation but i get the feeling you meant the No1 MkVI ;)Quote:
Originally Posted by A square 10
I have 5 Long Branch made from Wartime to 1950...they are great shooters. The best of all is my 1950 rifle. Fore end are generally well fitted and bore slugging reveals tight barrels, if they aren't worn. Bolts are well fitted and wood quality is high. Check your rifle and , definitely, you will no loose your money.
PM sent.
I think that as a general rule, the North American No. 4's (Long Branch and Savage) were better made than the wartime British production. After all, the North Americans weren't under constant threat of bombing, and perhaps could take a little more time.
thanks 5th , a typo mkVI was what i meant , that as they are nearly mistakable visually , mkVs were made prior to the nomenclature change , but wasn't the change in designation retroactive ?
as to 'better production' i disagree , 'better production environment" - perhaps ,
even with the collectors perception of maltbys production based on their poor markings , IMHO all produced great rifles ,
My 1941 No4Mk1 Long Branch that I was told was re barreled in 1961 in South Africa shoots fairly well.
As for the Model 70 Winchester being soulless..:eek:. May you bite your tongue until it bleeds.:( ;)
Very good point!Quote:
Originally Posted by Alexander A
Actually the MkV never existed... with regard to the LoC at least anyway. As it was never given issue status, it wasn't approved and therefore didn't exist as far as the nomenclature changes in May 1926 either.Quote:
Originally Posted by A square 10
The SMLE or Short, Magazine Lee Enfield came to be from changes made to the MLE or Magazine Lee Enfield. It's direct predecessor was the MLM or Magazine Lee Metford. The names were derived from the designer of the action, James Paris Lee, and the designer of the barrels, first Metford, then the engineers at the RSAF Enfield. When the rifle was shortened from a 30" barrel to a 25" barrel the overall design hadn't been changed much, the biggest being the charger loading bolt head system on the SMLE MkI from 1903. This was developed to became the charger bridge on the MkIII in 1907.
There were a few cosmetic changes over the years, the only major ones being the barrel length and the charger bridge.
The MkV came and went as a trials model in 1922 to 1924. After the changes in 1926, the MkIII became the No1 rifle. (the No2 rifle was the MkIV .22 trainer; the No3 rifle was the Pattern 1914) The next development was the No1 MkVI. By this time, the archaic manufacturing methods having been used for 50 years making Lee Enfield rifles went through an overhaul. The design changes made to the action were to suit more modern and much more streamlined manufacturing practices that resulted in faster production. More improvements were made also, like the receiver mounted rear aperture sight, and a heavier profiled barrel. Being a totally new design, the SMLE designation was dropped and the rifle became simply the Rifle No4
As the Mk1, MkII Cond & MkIV Cond were all "omitted from Vocabulary" & never redesignated as No1s i would have to say no.Quote:
Originally Posted by A square 10
Mk1 SMLE
MkIII SMLE (No1 MkIII)
MkV SMLE
No1 MkVI
https://www.milsurps.com/images/impo.../11/u1k1-1.jpg
The MkII & MkIV SMLEs were conversions of the earlier LongLees to Mk1 pattern (MkII ConD) & MkIII pattern (MkIV ConD) ConD = Converted