1912 ShtLE- restoration project

I've had a lot of luck with this forum, so I figured I'd give it another shot.

I'm going to a local gun shop to have another look at a 1912 ShtLE III I saw there the other day. The stock has been cut down, with the forend cut to sporter length and the forward hand guard is MIA. The disk on the butt stock is also MIA. However, the barrel is intact and everything I saw a SN on matches, even the magazine. If I can get it for a good price, which I think I can considering the asking price on it, I'm going to likely come home with it as a restoration project.

As I understand it, the 1912 should have a magazine cutoff and volley sights. Is that information correct? As I understand, it was around 1916/17 when they removed them from production rifles. However, I can't find definitive information in that regard.

I didn't see the remnants of the volleys on the forend, but I didn't look at the receiver to see if anything was there. The same with the magazine cutoff. I've found a couple of places with the magazine cutoff, but none with a forend with the volley sights or the piece of the volley's that go on the receiver.

Am I going to be on a major quest to find the forend and the other pieces for the volley sights? Working on the assumption this rifle would have had them, of course.

I'm also doing what research I can to find out some history about these rifles. I have a No 4 Mk I and other milsurps I've thoroughly enjoyed researching the history of, and it's become one of my favorite parts of owning these guns. Any links or resources of interest are always appreciated.

Yes, a 1912 would have been fitted with the volley sights, and magazine cut-off. It would also have had the milled rear sight ears, and the windage adjustable rear sight.

Go for it.

Question Regarding Volley or Long Range Sights on the No 1 Mk III

This recent thread directly relates to your project. Good luck and have fun.

Hope you can get it cheap and re-build the stock set. When looking at the price, bear in mind that the early type SMLE magazine with the hinged front alone is valuable - see SMLE No. 1 Magazine Early Type - BRP CORP Store

On your 1912 Sht LE, do you have the HV or SC stamps behind the rear sight ? photo of my 1909 BSA showing both HV and SC. Yours should have the HVAttachment 58617Attachment 58618

The fore-end with volley sight is very difficult to locate

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by RobD

Hope you can get it cheap and re-build the stock set. When looking at the price, bear in mind that the early type SMLE magazine with the hinged front alone is valuable - see SMLE No. 1 Magazine Early Type - BRP CORP Store

---

Standard No4 type magazine would be equally correct for this rifle.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Homer

No4 type magazine would be equally correct

---

How would that work? For a 1912 rifle? You mean it would fit...

I haven't checked this thread in a couple of days. I appreciate all the input!

I went by yesterday to have another look, but the owner of the store wasn't there and the guy covering him wasn't able to haggle at all. They're asking $189, but I'd like to be closer to $150 or less on it considering it's a restoration project. I honestly don't know the fair value on one this old, but it seems most sporters are around there.

The magazine at closer look has had the SN changed. The previous is crossed out and the SN to this gun has been stamped on it. The SN on the rear sight matches, but it doesn't have the windage adjustment (though I have found a place that appears to have one for replacement). It has the mag cutoff slot, but the cutoff has been remove (have located several of those).

The forestock matches in color and all to the rest of the wood on it, but I don't see any indication of there ever having been a volley sight on it. I also don't see anything on the safety area that indicates there was one there. But I have no idea what that should look like had there been one. The No 1's are new to me, but I've been wanting one.

I didn't pull the magazine, but I will when I go back, assuming they still have it. The bore is dirty as hell, but the rifling looks good. I couldn't get a real good look at the end of the rifling, but it almost looked like it had been counterbored. Did the Brits do that? It might also be that dirty. My No 4 looked like it barely had any rifling, but when I cleaned it it had great grooves left.

If anyone has a line on the proper stock with the volley sights, let me know. Thanks again!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by browningautorifle

How would that work? For a 1912 rifle? You mean it would fit...

---

The SMLE magazine with the fixed front feed lips is marked as "4".

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Roy

Question Regarding Volley or Long Range Sights on the No 1 Mk III

This recent thread directly relates to your project. Good luck and have fun.

---

I GREATLY appreciate that link, Roy.

From what I'm gathering, is that it's entirely possible at some point the volley sights were removed and a stock without them put on. However, it could still have had the magazine cutoff (as this one has the slot exposed, so I'm thinking it was removed during sporterizing).

If anyone can confirm that, I'd be grateful. I'm guessing it'll be far easier to find a forend with the magazine cutout relief and no volleys, and it'll still be accurate as far as what it would have left it's last arsenal.

Yes, it just depends on what you want to go for. and if there are rebuild marks that give clues. The latter option without volley sights would certainly be cheaper and easier to find even if the end result is less eye catching.

Went by the shop today and ended up walking out with this gun. $150 out the door, so I can't complain. I've started taking it down for a good cleaning, as it looks like it's been a while since it's had one.

I'm searching the web for resources to help me decipher the various markings. If anyone knows of any sources or can help out, it'd be greatly appreciated. All I can tell by it is that it's a 1912, so far I can't even discern the manufacturer.

All the numbers match on the parts I can find numbers on: receiver, barrel, rear sight, and even the magazine (though a previous SN has been marked out). The magazine is a "4" marked mag, which I understand is proper for this model?

Now I'm going to be on the hunt for a stock set (this one has been cut down and the butt stock has a big split in it) and front piece. As far as I can tell, there was no volley sights on it when it was sportered and that it's quite possible it has been rearsenalled and this is correct for it. I don't see any indication of a rear volley sight having been on the receiver or where it'd attack if it should. It does have the magazine cutoff slot, so I'll also be hunting a replacement down for it.

Thanks for the help you've already provided!!!

https://www.milsurps.com/images/impo...1fef8341-1.jpg

https://www.milsurps.com/images/impo...f82155dc-1.jpg

https://www.milsurps.com/images/impo...e29e9bc7-1.jpg

https://www.milsurps.com/images/impo...ee5dd1b4-1.jpg

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by RCS

On your 1912 Sht LE, do you have the HV or SC stamps behind the rear sight ? photo of my 1909 BSA showing both HV and SC. Yours should have the HVAttachment 58617Attachment 58618

The fore-end with volley sight is very difficult to locate

---

It has both. What is the significance of those markings?

HV - High Velocity. i.e. Mk 7 ball ammo, as opposed to the more pedestrian, round-nosed heavy, Mk 6-bulleted stuff.

SC - Refers to a modification of the Short Cone _ a part of the chamber.

This is usually accompanied by modifications to the bedding brought about by the significantly different vibration modes generated by the new ammo.

The change to Mk7 ammo meant that the rear-sights had to be recalibrated / replaced.

The “*” on the more common “III*” rifles refers to a series of “relaxations” to speed up rifle production in the First Great Unpleasantness.

The long-range volley sights on the left side, the rear-sight windage adjustment and the magazine cut-off were deleted.

Interestingly enough, the “*” variation was supposed to be an “emergency measure” for the “duration” and was subject to change back to the earlier form after the shooting stopped. Sometime later, it was quietly agreed that the “bells and whistles” deleted for the “*” variation were not really necessary and subsequently went, forever.

Any that survive “un-modernised” probably floated around in quiet colonial outposts or in private hands from early days.

I appreciate that info. Helps a bunch.