martini henry MK IV

hello
new on this forum , my first post is for my newly own martini henry ( bought today)
the seller have only information that his father bought it many years ago , but we doesn't kno the story of this rifle
some marking let me thing that this rifle have been in the olds british colony like india or pakistan
the butstock show it was made for a short lever before been modified for a long lever , and the date of 1908 is engraved on it

anyone can tell me if it's only a patchwork of pieces , or a rifle which have been modified during it's duty life ?

thanks and sorry for my poor english :surrender:


the pics :

https://www.milsurps.com/images/impo...89988501-1.jpg

https://www.milsurps.com/images/impo...49959003-1.jpg

https://www.milsurps.com/images/impo...83701102-1.jpg

https://www.milsurps.com/images/impo...74945404-1.jpg

https://www.milsurps.com/images/impo...71112805-1.jpg

https://www.milsurps.com/images/impo...35203206-1.jpg

https://www.milsurps.com/images/impo...44638807-1.jpg

https://www.milsurps.com/images/impo...58822408-1.jpg

https://www.milsurps.com/images/impo...69747310-1.jpg

https://www.milsurps.com/images/impo...61052811-1.jpg

Welcome to the Forum and your english is fine, much better than my french. The butt stock patch also looks fine to me; it's on many of the MKIV's. It is my understanding that many but not all of the MKIV Martinis started out life as another MK/model of Martini that had a shorter cocking lever. When converted into MKIV's, the longer levers were fitted and the redundant butt recess plugged. If it's an ex Nepalese Martini the 1908 date on the butt could be the original export date from the U.K. to Nepal? I've heard it suggested that the MKIV's went to Nepal in 1908?

Welcome to the forum, looks very much like a Mk1 that's been upgraded to a MK4, nice Nepalese contact piece though.

It's missing the retaining pin from the from band incidentally.

Are you thinking about shooting it?

HELLO
thanks for the replies
yes i'll shooting it , le barrell is rust free , and verry clean qith nice grooves .

i already have 24ga shells to convert in 577/450 , and i'll inspect all the interior of the barrell before with an endoscope to be sure .

I have a MK2 as a collector's piece, not a shooter, that has an apparently good bore and the barrel looks good from the top but when the fore-end wood is removed it reveals a seriously corroded underside to the barrel. It has deep rust/corrosion pitting. This doesn't matter to me because it's only owned as a collector's item/ornament but it does highlight why something like this should be carefully inspected if anyone ever considers using one of these.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Flying10uk

I have a MK2 as a collector's piece, not a shooter, that has an apparently good bore and the barrel looks good from the top but when the fore-end wood is removed it reveals a seriously corroded underside to the barrel. It has deep rust/corrosion pitting. This doesn't matter to me because it's only owned as a collector's item/ornament but it does highlight why something like this should be carefully inspected if anyone ever considers using one of these.

---

i have the same problem on a Enfield N1 MKIII
all the barrel is verry clean inside , but deep rusted under the woods
with a "DP" mark for Drill Purpose on the top of the barrel

That's one of the reasons I bought the Martini Artillery Carbine (thread below this) it has no corrosion anywhere, clean as a whistle.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by enfield n2 mk1

i already have 24ga shells to convert in 577/450

---

I started that way, with plastic Fiocci hulls. You could slip the bullets in by hand and if you took the odds to the range you could load while you shot.

i've bought MAGTECH full brass shells , harder to form but i'll have etter results i think

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by enfield n2 mk1

full brass shells

---

Far better...longer life too.

Yours is a straight up legit MK IV rifle transferred from a Brit arsenal in India to Nepal in 1908. It started life as a second pattern of the never issued Enfield-Martini (EM) in .40 cal. Save for the pattern room, all EM rifles never left Enfield before being converted to MH MK IV rifles in 577/450. The EM came in 2 patterns. The first pattern had a number of receiver features that made the receiver uneconomic for reuse in the MK IV program and hence they used new receivers with the "IV" centered under the lock viewer's mark. The second pattern EM rifle receivers were reused and converted to "IV" markings by striking a "V" next to the "I" on the receiver as stamped when it was an EM rifle, making the mark off-center. The third pattern MK IV rifles were assembled from previously unused parts and don't show the signs of conversion, such as the lock markings, the plugged buttstock and "EM" being struck out on the block and a few other parts. We used to follow the guru of Martinis (Skennerton's) labeling of the three types sequentially as described as "A", "B" and "C". However this has been found to be in disagreement with recently uncovered notes from Enfield made during the conversions. Let the academics argue which is which, since it doesn't change what they were and what they were converted to.

The Nepal shipments involved rifles mainly held in Brit arsenals in India and the rifles were refurbished/repaired as needed prior to being shipped. The MK II rifles generally went first and the MK IV rifles followed. It appears that the main shipping date for MK IV rifles was 1906, so the subject rifle would have been one of the last ones shipped. Many of the Nepal rifles show part changes not in keeping with the above described rework of the EM to the MK IV. This can be ascribed to the simple fact that during the subsequent refurb/repair in India there was no incentive for workers to keep a given rifle's parts together to satisfy collectors a century hence.....after all, to someone working the refurb, MK IV parts were MK IV parts. It is all part of the rifle's history and does not make it a "parts rifle."

As for the exterior barrel pitting, after handling literally hundreds of these rifles I've never seen one with pitting deeper than the typical dovetail slot cut for sights....with most of the "nasty pitting" being much much less. There is a lot of quality steel there and I wouldn't hesitate to shoot any of them. The 577/450 operates at around 26,000 psi...or 2,000 psi above the venerable (and even older) standard .22 long rifle. This is a far cry from the modern cartridges operating at twice that pressure. Everyone must do what they believe is safe, but exterior barrel pitting on a MH is the least of my concerns in shooting antique firearms.

The markings on the butt stock suggest to me that the rifle came out of Rawulpindi Arsenal stores in India on its journey to Nepal in 1908.