Printable View
What I have been told about this gun
Issued to a Bought By Canadian Artilleryman late after the war
may have never been probably fired
I got it after his death from the friend of the original owner
the Bolt was missing at that time
Also has been refinished
So i am soliciting (More) Comments and Commentary
Ultimately what is the Approximate Value +/-
No 5 Jungle - jeffreyasmiths Photo Gallery - Military Surplus Collectors Forums
Update in post 19
It's a genuine No5 & made at the Royal Ordnance Factory at Fazackerley, Liverpool, UK in August 1944, the first year of manufacture (they were made from 1944 to 1947 inclusive). However, I don't know about it being unfired. It's possible, but I doubt it judging by the wear to the finish on the metalwork. The wood has also been sanded - you can see it has been done, but there are still numerous stock 'dings' visible in spite of this. But it's certainly a real Jungle carbine, & like all old milsurps it has a value.
I'm not a jungle carbine 'expert' by the way - others may be able to chime in & tell you a lot more about it.......
As nice as the 'story' is there is an element of wishful thinking.Quote:
Originally Posted by jeffreyasmith
After the war the UK MOD sold it off into the UK civilian gun market (hence the UK civilian proof-marks), the some time after it was sold to a dealer in the USA - does it have any import marks ?
Thank you for the Feedback
its just what I was looking for
I made sure to take pictures of all the marks (that i could find) that were on the gun
and please feel free to point out what the markings are
as i am not knowledgable as to what they are
but i am quite sure the person who owned it prior was Canadian Military
and it came right from him to me via his longtime friend
Perhaps he bought it as a sentimental piece similar to what he was issued
(i am not insistent at all about the story; the UK civilian proof marks refute it)
but other than the owners i am not aware of its previous life at all
Quote:
Originally Posted by Alan de Enfield
Jeffery -- a nicely refinished JC (I have two in VG-EX condition).Quote:
Originally Posted by Roger Payne
Alan de Enfield is correct (he's a recognized expert). The markings show it was surplused out of commission (proof marks of barrel pressure certification). Most likely it was purchased by your Canadian Artilleryman after the war (it normally wouldn't be issued to the artillery, as this was an Infantry gun). It's amazing how stories get a little embellished over the years after someone dies. (I have an M-1 Carbine with an almost identical, but embellished, story.)
Roger Payne (another recognized expert) identified the "refinishing" of the stock. As a antiques "restorer" I can affirm that the stock was undoubtedly sanded (which removed the wood's patina), then probably was bleached (thus the very light colour of the wood, which is not walnut's natural shade), and finally a coat of gloss varnish/polyurethane applied (Boiled Linseed Oil or Tung Oil would have been appropriate, although RLO would have been technically accurate, which would have left the wood with a satin finish).
It's more than likely been shot a few times (the war in Europe still had 6 months to go after the gun might have hit the battlefield) -- nothing to be concerned about as long as the barrel is shiny and it is within spec. Some of the JCs are very accurate shooters -- check out YouTube to see a few endorsements of their accuracy despite the "wandering zero" problem. Be sure to get the right replacement bolt with the hollowed out handle-ball.
Robert
Please Keep the remarks coming
the commenters probably have forgotten more that i will ever know
and i appreciate their correction
as i said i am not Sticking to the "Story"
i much prefer the Facts of the gun as stated today and proven
So my next question
What s the Approximate Value +/-
of a Refinished 1944 Jungle Carbine without a Bolt
Bolt is probably still somewhere in the house. Lots of people listened to the propaganda about gun safety that went something like remove bolts/magazines and store in a separate part of the house and the ammo in yet another. Can't tell you how many I've seen come into my buddies pawn shop missing one or the other or sometimes both because the owner had died and the kids couldn't find the rest of the gun.Quote:
Originally Posted by jeffreyasmith
Well it "lived" in the M.I.T. Faculty resident apartments over 24 years ago
No telling where it is now
He also had a Broom Handled Mauser
The Cambridge MA PD would have a field day ;)
See Lee Enfield No. 5 Mk 1 Jungle Carbine #5 : Bolt Action Rifles at GunBroker.comQuote:
Originally Posted by jeffreyasmith
for a JC sold recently that has the proper finish, arsenal repaired shortly after the post war in VG-EX condition. It sold for $368 (a very good price). Others in this condition will sell for $100-$150 more. A fair one will sell for $250-$275.
Well mine isn't Finished properly
So i learned today
and No Bolt
Interesting, the pistol grip is completely gone. Never seen one of those.
You scared me Jim
i thought you meant mine and not the one on GB :)
Jim, you are VERY observant. I bought the gun and have examined the missing pistol grip with a large magnifying glass (playing Sherlock Holmes). Here's what I surmise:Quote:
Originally Posted by browningautorifle
1) The gun definitely went through an Arsenal Repair -- small chip repaired in the butt just behind the receiver ring, new Suncorite, new rubber butt (that sounds obscene!), and cleaned up finish.
2) The stock is definitely 100% authentic -- took the butt plate off, and the interior is exactly like a No. 5 should be (not a converted No. 4)
3) The missing grip may have had been chipped, then the Armourer carefully shaved/planed off the entire grip.
Or an alternate theory: The gun was used by a Sergeant Major who had really big hands and his hand was too big for the gun's wrist.
Experts chime in if you have another idea --see Lee Enfield No. 5 Mk 1 Jungle Carbine #5 : Bolt Action Rifles at GunBroker.com
Robert
Sorry...Quote:
Originally Posted by jeffreyasmith
Or whatever, yes a rasp would remove it and then some judicious sanding... I'm sure Peter will give us an example very shortly. Appears to be a nice clean job. After all, a #5 butt IS different than a #4 and not just a bit.Quote:
Originally Posted by Seaspriter
Your poor rifle has had the woodwork thrashed with a sander to within an inch of its poor life and is beyond any sort of help by a total amateur with a belt sander. That's only my opinion Jeff as one who had fixed and range tested a few - thousand!
Just a small point, the Technical instructions and Amended parts list shows that from the early 50's, ALL No4 similar parts supposedly 'special*' to the No5 rifle, such as the sear, bolt, backsight screw and nut - and probably a few other odds and sods - were obsolescent. And annoted alongsine is 'WSE, see OPL5593'. In short, this is the standard No4 parts list. Thereafter the No4 parts became the norm/standard. However, it was clear that what'd really happened was that parts supply had been standardised.
So in the real world of an Armourers shop - as opposed to the fairy-tale world of collectors and concours fiends, in the main workshops a standar No4 bolt or, say, sear would be used in the normal way.
Just as a matter of interest, if your No5 has a thin steel plate between the butt pad and the butt, then get rid of it if it hasn't already rusted out/ These steel plates were a pain in the ar....., bottom, as being totally enclosed, they'd start to rust out and the wet steel corrosion would run downwards into the butt plate cup and destroy the long two-part retaining screw/nut OR if the rifles were kept muzzle down - as many were. just run into the stock bolt and set about that too. A real menace!
Incidentally, anyone out there got butt plate cup(s) with small 'U' shaped recesses cut into the top, bottom, l and r sides around the bottom edges? That was one of our modifications to let the festering water out of the butt. How did the water get in trhere? It's called the monsoon. Lasted from the beginning of September until midway through the following August. Or so it seemed!
Nice rifles but really not as manageable and tough as No4's
* some of these so called 'special' parts weren't really special at all but just natural progression - like waisted trigger guards that became the norm eventually
Capt. Laidler: Thanks for your advice on this. (.....this water-collection cup problem is also inherent in my M-1 carbine.) Last week you also warned:Quote:
Originally Posted by Peter Laidler
As someone who's learned 'in theatre' the importance of grease between the wood and steel and the effects of not having it does, I look on eyes agog when people spend ages getting rid of it. It's there for a good reason. Not just a GOOD reason but a xxxxxxg good reason I say!"
The Enfield Armour's Manual from 1931 called for a mixture of "mineral jelly and beeswax" to be applied to the wood/metal interface.
I think the reason why is explained here (from the M-1 Garand/Carbine Civilian Marksmanship website -- Wood Cleaning Article | Civilian Marksmanship Program):
"The almost black color along the metalwood lines of firearms would indicate....... over time, gun oil dissolves the resins in wood and makes it mushy. For example, the compression effect of Garand receivers/trigger guards crushing the wood is in part caused by oil damage to the wood." To this I will add that iron, when it rusts, leaves ugly black marks on wood.
I checked British versus American English definitions of "mineral jelly:"
Noun 1. mineral jelly - a semisolid mixture of hydrocarbons obtained from petroleum; used in medicinal ointments and for lubrication petrolatum, petroleum jelly; Vaseline - a trademarked brand of petroleum jelly.
Based on the Enfield & Garand instructions, I bought a block of beeswax at Michael's (in the candle making section). Pure beeswax at room temperature is very hard and solid, like candle wax.
Melted 50/50 Beeswax with Vaseline (petroleum jelly) in an old shoe polish can. Put a small piece of red candle in the mix to give it a slightly reddish color so it is bit more visible. Once cooled, it is the consistency of stiff shoe polish, somewhat like putty -- pliable but not gooey. (I'm definitely not sure, but this may be the predecessor of the mysterious XG 297 grease). This beeswax/mineral jelly combination repels both water and oil while preserving the wood.
Then I took apart a newly acquired No.1 MkIII Lithgow Enfield and cleaned every area where metal came in contact with wood, especially where gun oil was deteriorating the wood, as Capt. Laidler recommended. After scraping out as much gunk as possible with a screwdriver blade -- there was a lot of crud, grease, oil, dirt, grit, etc. -- I used turpentine with a brush to clean out the remainder of the gunk on the forend; especially in the area under the receiver and around the magazine. Dried it all out and applied the beeswax/mineral jelly mix it to every wood area that had been exposed to gun oil and wherever wood/metal contact. Used the flat side of a screwdriver like a spatula to get in small areas.
I'm taking apart all my guns and applying the mineral jelly/beeswax concoction to every metal/wood interface. I'm confident this will solve the vexing problem of steel screws in butt plates and sling swivels mounts that have rusted in place over the years and are extremely hard to remove without buggering the heads. :nono:
Always looking for more good advice .... always learning, Robert
May have a long butt, or may just be the photo. They did make them, I have one. Woodwork is heavily worn, probably sanded by someone who didn't know what they were doing: gaps between handguard and stock.
No5 was issued to some airborne formations towards the end of WWII, and probably afterwards for a time, so an artilleryman on attachment to such a formation might have been issued such a piece, but HIGHLY unlikely that he would have been able to make off with it, or that it would be in that condition, unless he carried it in the woods for years, literally.
First let me say I want to thank everyone for their Responses and Expertise
I came here expecting Details & Facts and I was not disappointed at all
But I have a Longbranch and a Jungle Carbine both in Questionable condition
I know that these are Great Guns both Historically and as Shooters
but I have come to own them not of my own doing as they were gifts
They each need work to bring them up to par
Work that I have Not the Skill, Facilities, Tools, Resources,
and I am afraid even the Will or Desire to do.
I can attempt to sell them giving the buyers as much honest information as possible
I wouldnt want to be “the Guy” who sells Bad Goods without being forthright to the Buyer
I can sell them separately
I can take the Bolt from the Longbrach and use it in the Carbine
Something I believe Peter says was done after the war as the parts bins shrank
(I in fact was given the Longbranch to use the bolt for the Carbine)
or I can sell them together as a package deal and let the Buyer sort things
(which is the option that I most find acceptable)
I don't want to just give them away either
just because they are Not in top form
doesn't mean they are not at least Somewhat valuable
So I am asking you for more Feedback
What do you think they are Generally and Honestly worth
I know what I would like to get for both of them
and I don't think I am expecting to much
or trying to Soak the Buyer with Bad Goods
But I Need and want to know what the General opinion is
Thank you
You can Private message me
I would say sell them as is and let the buyer sort it out. You'll never recover coin spent on such a refurb. Can't say what they're going to sell for but if you put them on Gunbroker, seeing as you're in Fla, you can look and compare with others that are no doubt for sale already.
XG-297 is mysterious as there is no record that this code was ever used.Quote:
Originally Posted by Seaspriter
XG-279 however has been mentioned before but there's nothing mysterious about it, it's plain regular automotive grease.
The relevant Defence Standard defines it as:
General purpose lubricant for automotive and artillery applications,
operated over the temperature range of minus 54°C to plus 105°C.
It is based on mineral oil with a metallic soap thickener. XG-279 is a UK designation, the Nato equivalent code for it is G-403.
Thanks for the correction, clarification and translation into Nato Code. This operating temperature range runs from severe arctic conditions (Like Alaska, North West Territories, Finland) to above boiling.Quote:
Originally Posted by RossM10