Real or Fantasy Piece? No5 Help?

I have came across this in another group, the poster claiming he saw it on the interweb.
No end of google image searching has turned up a hit for any of the pics, so I am thinking it might be something he had made up and now looking for gratification.

Over the years there have been a few workshops/ gunsmiths that have offered to turn your "old 303" into a thing of beauty by doing the whole skeletonised rifle bit, for a price of course. The SMLE skeletonised rifles one place near me did were a pretty good copy of the genuine, so I am thinking this might be a repro of something I don't think existed. Pity the barrel looks worn out, doesn't do it's credibility any favours.

There is no writings I can find of the No5 being turned into a skeleton action (butt, bare action and about 9" of barrel) like all of the SMLE models over time and a few No4's done post WW2. Let alone a full length skeletonised rifle in the sense of the Lithgow made examples.

Here are the pics of the No5 as posted and one of my skeletonised Lithgow as an example. As usual, happy to be proven wrong, but is it a fantasy piece??? Anyone got any clues?

Attachment 106664Attachment 106665Attachment 106666Attachment 106667

Attachment 106669

Not impossible, but doubtfull.

Back in History there was a thread about one of these at a base over your way. :dunno:

I own a Maltby No4 Mk1 that was Skeletonized, and presented by REME armourers to "RSM (WO1) J Pettifar, Royal Fusiliers" I assume on his retirement. So I guess its perfectly possible that the No5 was done in a similar way.

I can see two immediate advantages,
1. Solved the wandering zero.
2. It doesn't kick anymore.

I remember seeing a pic of one in A.J Parkers gear.

I really don't know, but someone has put a lot of work into creating it. From what I can see of the photo's it looks well executed. Are they worth THAT much that it'd be worth doing it just as a money (& perhaps kudos) making exercise? I ask genuinely out of curiosity as I've no idea what they fetch, & the value of the finished article is usually the prime motivational factor in doing these things.......unless as Paul says, it was done as a one-off presentation piece.

I know that today is April fools day but I should like to point out that if this rifle were in the UK or even within the EU it would deemed to be "defectively deactivated" as it does not conform to the EU directives, and yes there are more than one each more absurd than the one before, you just could not dream it up but the bureaucrats in Brussels managed it...
:madsmile::madsmile::madsmile:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Roger Payne

I really don't know, but someone has put a lot of work into creating it. From what I can see of the photo's it looks well executed. Are they worth THAT much that it'd be worth doing it just as a money (& perhaps kudos) making exercise? I ask genuinely out of curiosity as I've no idea what they fetch, & the value of the finished article is usually the prime motivational factor in doing these things.......unless as Paul says, it was done as a one-off presentation piece.

---

There are frequently examples at an auction I regularly attend - they now generally make around £150 + 25% buyers premium.
I picked on up at the Auction a few years ago for £30 missing bolt and trigger guard, (soon replaced).

---------- Post added at 06:04 PM ---------- Previous post was at 06:00 PM ----------

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Buccaneer

I know that today is April fools day but I should like to point out that if this rifle were in the UK or even within the EU it would deemed to be "defectively deactivated" as it does not conform to the EU directives, and yes there are more than one each more absurd than the one before, you just could not dream it up but the bureaucrats in Brussels managed it...
:madsmile::madsmile::madsmile:

---

I'm sure I remember Peter Laidler representing (as an expert witness) someone who was accused of having an unlicensed / improperly deactivated SKN rifle - if I remember correctly the final decision was if it had an SKN serial number it was originally built as a non-functioning firearm so the law did not apply, if it did not have an SKN then it was converted from a live firing rifle and the laws applied.

That's how I remember it, maybe others know differently.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Alan de Enfield

I'm sure I remember Peter Laidler representing (as an expert witness) someone who was accused of having an unlicensed / improperly deactivated SKN rifle - if I remember correctly the final decision was if it had an SKN serial number it was originally built as a non-functioning firearm so the law did not apply, if it did not have an SKN then it was converted from a live firing rifle and the laws applied.

That's how I remember it, maybe others know differently.

---

I know that this has been aired on many occasions but since then the EU has issued three different directives regarding deactivating firearms. The first instructing even deactivated firearms to be "deactivated" again to bring them up to what they considered to be their new specification, the second some 18 months later then said that their first attempt at a new "deactivation" was not good enough so they had to be worked on yet again so that the only part that moved was the trigger and that was not allowed to be in contact with any other part. Now we come to the really good part having turned a deactivated gun into nothing more than a piece of welded up metal and wood which could only be used as a club you now have a legal requirement to register it with someone, in the UK I think it is the home office, the fact that you actually own this totally useless piece of wood and metal.
The rifle in the original post could be owned by someone here in the UK but it would be illegal to sell, give, lend or dispose of it in any way except by handing it into the police or possibly giving it to a museum unless it had been brought up to the current EU specification including welding a rod into what is left of the barrel and welding all of the other parts in place.
Out of a matter of interest I took my sectioned / skeletonized No4 to the Birmingham proof house several years ago when the first directive came out to find out if it could be considered to be deactivated as just like the No5 in this post it was obviously way beyond the ability to discharge any form of projectile, I was told that unless the deactivation conformed to the then EU directive then it would still classed as "defectively deactivated" and I would be breaking the law if I tried to dispose of it.
Indecently I bought it many years ago at an auction but it had to be sold as a section 1 firearm even then as it did not have any form of certification to state that it was deactivated and the auction house quite correctly insisted that it had to entered onto my FAC where it still occupies a slot today.
We seem to live in a mad world and with the onset of Covid 19 its become even more so. Stay safe all of you and hopefully at some point we will pop out of the other end of it all a bit older and a damn sight wiser...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Buccaneer

I know that this has been aired on many occasions but since then the EU has issued three different directives regarding deactivating firearms. The first instructing even deactivated firearms to be "deactivated" again to bring them up to what they considered to be their new specification, the second some 18 months later then said that their first attempt at a new "deactivation" was not good enough so they had to be worked on yet again so that the only part that moved was the trigger and that was not allowed to be in contact with any other part. Now we come to the really good part having turned a deactivated gun into nothing more than a piece of welded up metal and wood which could only be used as a club you now have a legal requirement to register it with someone, in the UK I think it is the home office, the fact that you actually own this totally useless piece of wood and metal.
The rifle in the original post could be owned by someone here in the UK but it would be illegal to sell, give, lend or dispose of it in any way except by handing it into the police or possibly giving it to a museum unless it had been brought up to the current EU specification including welding a rod into what is left of the barrel and welding all of the other parts in place.
Out of a matter of interest I took my sectioned / skeletonized No4 to the Birmingham proof house several years ago when the first directive came out to find out if it could be considered to be deactivated as just like the No5 in this post it was obviously way beyond the ability to discharge any form of projectile, I was told that unless the deactivation conformed to the then EU directive then it would still classed as "defectively deactivated" and I would be breaking the law if I tried to dispose of it.
Indecently I bought it many years ago at an auction but it had to be sold as a section 1 firearm even then as it did not have any form of certification to state that it was deactivated and the auction house quite correctly insisted that it had to entered onto my FAC where it still occupies a slot today.
We seem to live in a mad world and with the onset of Covid 19 its become even more so. Stay safe all of you and hopefully at some point we will pop out of the other end of it all a bit older and a damn sight wiser...

---

It's a curious thing, sectioned firearms are such a grey area.

My view is 'deactivated by other means'

I have a collection of them, all comprehensively sectioned, totally safe and not one capable of even discharging a fart!

All pressure baring parts are effectively deactivated by sectioning and as an additional measure, all bolt faces champhered.

Before I bought my first example I sounded out my Police firearms team and their view was sectioned firearms arn't an issue to own off ticket, provided I bought them from an RFD and made absolutely sure no pressure baring parts are reusable in advance.

So due diligence really.

Other police forces may vary....

I bought mine from an RFD auction house, before it was offered for sale, the auctioneer made a big 'speech' about the legality (or otherwise) of the SKN Armourers Training Aid 'rifles'. He had checked with the 3 county police forces adjacent to the auction house (Nottinghamshire, Lincolnshire and Leicestershire) and all had confirmed that in their view it was not a firearm.

It was sold (as have been all subsequent ones) as an 'off-ticket' (non-firearm) item.


I was under the impression that legislation could not be retrospectively applied.

In fact - the latest issue of the Home Office document "Guide on Firearms Licencing Law" specifically states :

"……. are not retrospective. Therefore, a gun de-activated to the old specifications prior to revisions, remains de-activated for legal purposes".


Also from the Guidance :

Section 8 of the 1988 Act is an evidential provision and does not preclude the possibility
that a firearm which has been de-activated in some other manner may also have ceased
to be a firearm within the meaning of the 1968 Act. For example, guns held by museums
that were recovered from wrecked ships and aircraft may be corroded to the point that
they cannot be fired. This should not be confused with wear or missing parts that can be
replaced. The final arbiter of whether the article fulfils the definition of a firearm at section
57(1) is a court


Section 57(1) of the act states : "A firearm is "a lethal barrelled weapon of any description from which any shot, bullet or other missile can be discharged"

"from which any shot, bullet or other missile can be discharged" has to be capable of discharging a missile either in its present state or with adaptation. To prove that a weapon is a firearm, it is essential to call evidence as to whether a bullet or missile can be discharged from the weapon or which can be adapted to discharge any missile: Grace v DPP (1989) Crim. L.R.365 where the conviction was quashed as there was no evidence that the air rifle could have been fired.

(From the Government CPS Website last updated August 2019)

Absolutely, all mine have been procured from RFD's and they certainly wouldn't risk their licence, living and liberty on the sale of a piece, if they had the slightest doubt regarding legality.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by mrclark303

I have a collection of them, all comprehensively sectioned, totally safe and not one capable of even discharging a fart!

---

There in the fine print Clarky you missed it ~ Section 19 Part C) Farting and other gaseous releases by the sectioned firearm are prohibited under Clause 3.2 Depletion of the Ozone Layer

You would have to be pretty keen to section a No.5 rifle which are selling for around the $1,200/AUD here!

I'm sure many will of heard of 'Industrial Archaeologists' (folks who break into old factories to take photos etc of what is left)

Here are some pictures of the Parker Hale factory several years after closing down.

There are 100's of Enfield SKN 'rifles'.

Oh my...what a shame and waste...

It's actually Alfred J Parker's premises in Birmingham. I was there then with a pal of mine when Edna's niece & great nephew offered us the lot. Maybe I should have said yes....

but there were 19 'Chests No15' in the back garden............we left with those. Most of them are still awaiting (extensive) restoration.;)


I believe the issue came to a head when the police were called following sightings of local children brandishing SKN actions in the streets of the neighbourhood.

Apart from the chests Rog, you should of put your name on the machines and the attachments/tools, Tom Senior millers demand a good premium, some of the early pics of the premises show the the vertical milling attachments, these are well sort after and fetch more than the machine.

Hi Geoff. Unfortunately Dave & I were second in, because Edna's niece had delegated the disposal of the stock & machinery. Once the family realised that the assests were being sold too cheaply they put a stop to it & we then made a visit & bought a fair amount of the remaining spares at a something like fair to both parties price. By then though, the lion's share of the stuff had already gone............some of it is still being sold on 'that internet auction site' in itty-bitty packets by the dealers in Lee Enfield spares. I'm not being critical of the person who got in first, as you can't blame them for taking up a bargain offer, but the machinery, barrels, actions & most of the spares went for a song.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Roger Payne

It's actually Alfred J Parker's premises in Birmingham.

---

Yes, Sorry - my mistake.

More info




Invoice and all sorts of paperwork - quotation to the MOD for No8 parts.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by CINDERS

There in the fine print Clarky you missed it ~ Section 19 Part C) Farting and other gaseous releases by the sectioned firearm are prohibited under Clause 3.2 Depletion of the Ozone Layer

You would have to be pretty keen to section a No.5 rifle which are selling for around the $1,200/AUD here!

---

:lol::lol::cheers:

Here's my early Savage No4 SKN rifle, I welded up and redressed the fp hole too, as an additional measure.

First of all I should like to apologise to "Son" for taking this thread in a somewhat different direction than he first intended.
I am an RFD myself and have had long discussions about weather in particular the SKN armourers sectioned rifles were or were not firearms and whether they should or should not be "deactivated" as defined by what was then UK firearms law in both pre and post 1996 specifications.
I know that this a VERY grey area with strong opinions held on either side, I was told by one of the friends I shoot with that an SKN sectioned No4 was used to fire blanks for sound effects during various school plays so they could at least be made to go bang if nothing else.
This however is NOT the point that I was trying to make, after the terrible terrorist shootings in France a few years ago it was discovered that the weapons used had been so badly deactivated that it took minimal effort to restore them to a serviceable condition, it was at this point the bureaucrats of the EU stepped in.
They decided in their infinite wisdom that they would come up with their own deactivation specification that would apply across the EU regardless of what was already in place in the member states, the various bodies here in the UK tried unsuccessfully to point out the specification here in the UK was as good as what they were proposing but to no avail.
A directive was issued that stated that ANY deactivated rifle that did not meet their new specification it would be deemed to be "defectively deactivated" and could not be sold, given or lent unless it was brought up to the new spec, you could however keep it.
This last bit meant that people who had spent quite large sums on both pre and post 1996 specification deactivated rifles would now see the value of their collections vastly reduced overnight without the need for any form of compensation.
As I pointed out in my original post the No5 in question was a firearm when it was sectioned, not an SKN training aid, and therefore it would if held in the UK or any other part of the EU would deemed to be defectively deactivated and could not be sold. The EU directive was not interested in whether it was or was not a firearm in a former life or whether common sense would say that a rifle sectioned in that could of course never been fired, if it did not meet their specification then it failed.
This is why when I asked the proof master at the Birmingham proof house if my sectioned No4 could by all common sense be deemed to be deactivated I was told that it wasn't because of the way that the directive had been worded.
I read with some amusement the accounts of some people buying skeletonized rifles from an RFD auction house having been told that they could sell them "off ticket", if it is the one I am thinking about then they have something of a reputation of being rather generous with their descriptions, a little like the description of the Long Branch sniper rifle with the Griffin & Howe mount that is being discussed at the moment.
I guess that we can chew the fat on this subject until the cows come home and until someone ends up in a court somewhere or we eventually leave the EU and manage to return to some form of sanity we will not see this mess cleared up.

Paul, it might be a slight over simplification, but it's close enough: the EU parliament (democratically elected like our own, & at the time containing UK MEP's) came up with the 2016 EU standards, which were not vastly different to existing UK standards, & which I found quite acceptable in my limited involvement with rifle deacts. They were essentially our specs just tweaked enough to claim that they were 'EU standard'. I understand that the EU Commission (a totally different & unelected body) leapt in late on & with some deft footwork changed things to the current monstrous specs that we have now, the EU 2018 specifications. It will be interesting to see what the UK government do when the transitional period is over. Personally I don't think it's going to be the 'patriot's paradise' that many hope for.

P.S. Sorry Son, back to your No5!

Back to the No5, I would love it, certainly very nicely done.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Buccaneer

This is why when I asked the proof master at the Birmingham proof house if my sectioned No4 could by all common sense be deemed to be deactivated I was told that it wasn't because of the way that the directive had been worded.

---

I think that the confusion is partly (totally) down to the UK Government who (on their website) as late as the end of 2019 have said :

Section 8 of the 1988 Act is an evidential provision and does not preclude the possibility
that a firearm which has been de-activated in some other manner may also have ceased
to be a firearm within the meaning of the 1968 Act. For example, guns held by museums
that were recovered from wrecked ships and aircraft may be corroded to the point that
they cannot be fired. This should not be confused with wear or missing parts that can be
replaced. The final arbiter of whether the article fulfils the definition of a firearm at section
57(1) is a court.


Does the EU ever moving goal posts override the 1968 Act ? (the Government seem to think not)