Well it's a new one on me. What do other people think?
VERY RARE PROTOTYPE ENFIELD WW1 SPARE MAG. CARRIER FOR SMLE RIFLE FITS 08 BELT | eBay
Well it's a new one on me. What do other people think?
VERY RARE PROTOTYPE ENFIELD WW1 SPARE MAG. CARRIER FOR SMLE RIFLE FITS 08 BELT | eBay
Some one was very inventive great leaping into a trench or legging it across no mans land a bubba not a MoD piece of equipment.
Perhaps maybe P L can chime in or other well versed persons but really in practicality in a war zone!
No idea if it's authentic or not. Doesn't seem particularly practical.
They didn't carry spare mags. That's a new invention that came later.(Spare mags that is)
Interesting item. Could be authentic, but obviously not something which saw a lot of use in reality. I'm curious what they're referring to "also carried the longer magazine".
Ed
? But they didn't carry spare mags, they used mag chargers...the mags were fitted to the rifle.Quote:
Originally Posted by boltaction
Just shooting from the hip here but was not there originally an intention with the MLM/ MLE to use additional mags? With the main magazine chained to the rifle you just drop it out and let it hang while inserting no.2? The lack of charger guide on the MLE was, of course, one of its main shortcomings in the Boer War/wars.
Ridolpho
The link was to keep them from changing mags with another. Not what he's suggesting at all. Quote(Very Rare Prototype Enfield WW1 )Unquote...
The fact is that spare magazines were not authorised and if they're not authorised, who would authorise a carrier for something that wasn't authorised per-se? But you'd have thought the remains of these would have turned up on the battlefield wouldn't you. After all, even remains of the even rarer 20 round mags have been dug up
Makes as much sense as the shovel with the hole in it...which unfortunately did make it to initial stages.
What I was suggesting is that it may not be WW1 vintage. From the list of Changes regarding the Magazine Lee Metford (actually Rifle, Magazine, Mark I): "One magazine is attached to each rifle, being secured from loss by a chain link; a spare magazine is also issued with each arm". That spare would have to be carried somewhere.
Ridolpho
I think it is a civilian fabrication. Probably for a hunter who had no access to chargers.
The Mk1 Metford was originally issued with a spare magazine but they were ordered returned to stores in late 1890.Quote:
Originally Posted by Ridolpho
Is there any anecdotal evidence of soldiers who used MLE's 'acquiring' spare magazines and keep end them to speed up the rate of fire in an emergency?
Ease of digging really Jim as the hole was already there you just had to place your holey shovel on the ground and there you go Ref: Page 32 of Field Operations Manual Hole Digging Physical By Major Longdrop......:D
Is there any anecdotal evidence of soldiers who used MLE's 'acquiring' spare magazines and keep end them to speed up the rate of fire in an emergency?
As far as I know, spare magazines were not used during the Anglo Boer War.
From what I have gathered, during independent fire the idea was for the soldier to load rounds singly with the magazine cutoff in the "closed" position. Then in an emergency (rapid fire), the cutoff would be opened and the magazine used. I have no idea how well this worked in practice, but from the number of live MkII .303 rounds I have picked up on ABW battlefields, I would say a hell of a lot of ammo was fumbled and dropped.
Not Lee Enfield, of course, but it's progenitor the Remington Lee was advertised as being used with multiple magazines and, according to Myszkowski ("The Remington-Lee Rifle") was used in this manner in combat. As per the LoC, the concept was initially somewhat similar in British use but rapidly "evolved" to easily removable, but not to be removed, magazine, initially with no facility for stripper clip use.
Ridolpho
I have no axe to grind here, & I do not know for sure whether it is what it claims to be, but the general standard of manufacture of the steel box does not look to be what I would have expected on a WW1 (or possibly pre WW1) piece of equipment.
The tensioning spring at one end is a SMLE mag auxiliary spring (though I suppose that could have been found satisfactory & used).
But what I find most surprising of all is that something so 'hard & pointy' would be accepted into service to be used by Tommies who would risk at best bruising ribs, if not breaking them, when throwing themselves around with something that rigid on their belts.
I have seen the approved 20 round magazine pouches, & these were made of leather - much more suitable.
The EFD stamp does look good, but it could have been copied, or a redundant & already marked piece of brassware could have been used in the manufacture of this piece......just as a SMLE mag spring was.
I have very little knowledge on officially issued stuff but is it possibly a 'Private Purchase' item? Catalogues of places such as the Army and Navy store were full of 'Campaign Gear'. Officers bought their own revolvers and speedloaders and I have seen a few 'Private Purchase Rifles that were returned to the families of the deceased.
I think this could be adapted from something else, the brass part looks genuine enough but I doubt anyone would rivet brass to steel.
As mentioned, and shown in the book and the advertisement, here's the Remington Lee magazine and cartridge belt for 45/70 cal. cartridges that I have that rifle was issued with. The Magazines only held 5 rds as opposed to 10 as the later British rifles did. RayQuote:
Originally Posted by Ridolpho
Attachment 60863Attachment 60864Attachment 60865Attachment 60866
I agree with Roger it does not look like anything you would want on you side while crawling on the ground or out of a shell crater. All the brass just make me think Navy??Quote:
Originally Posted by Roger Payne
Well it sold for GBP £83.75 (about US$130)
VERY RARE PROTOTYPE ENFIELD WW1 SPARE MAG. CARRIER FOR SMLE RIFLE FITS 08 BELT | eBay