Printable View
I’m interested in the BSA commercial rifles.
Wondering how common they are and whether they are comparable in value to a military No1 Mk3.
Any other information or comments are most welcome!
It seems every time I think I know of all the SMLE versions out there I discover another one!
Peddled Scheme, Dispersal, Commercial, etc. :banghead:
I have a commercial (no Royal Cypher) BSA No.1 MkIII that was regulated by Fulton and Son of Bisley and is in excellent condition, very accurate, and sports a PH5A micrometer peep sight. I was the high bidder of a Gunbroker auction for it and held off some spirited bidders. I paid a little more then $2,000usd for it and was delighted to be the winning bidder.
Three sold at auction today in Canada. $650, $700, $900, plus commission and tax. Had been set up for competition. One had the extra band added behind the nosecap, so it probably had a packed barrel.
I have one, also set up for target shooting. Decent shooter, although the throat has cordite erosion.
It seems many of these rifles were used for target shooting.
By commercial you meand sold to the public? BSA also supplied many to armed forces all over the world.
Apparently BSA produced rifles in between the first and second world wars that weren’t meant for military service. They look the same but are marked differently. I believe many were used for target shooting.
BSA built no1 Mk3 and Mk3* rifles to military specs without the crown stamp. To shoot at Bisley you needed a rifle of military spec to compete. The only way to do this was by buying a BSA get it passed and stamped so you could compete.
BSA also supplied other countries these rifles as well. who applied their own stamps.. This has created a huge area for collectors.
I'm working on collecting all the models BSA made for competition rifles and so far have found a M.L.E. MkI*, a C.L.L.E. MkI*, and a No.1 MkIII. I'm amazed at how well cared for these rifles are and some have almost as varied a history, judging by the stamps, as a service rifle had. Interestingly, the M.L.E. despite being rebarreled at Lithgow just prior to WWII still sports the longer barrel. I've read that after the S.M.L.E. entered service that all competition rifles had to shorten their barrels to S.M.L.E. specs to be able to enter competitions.Quote:
Originally Posted by Bindi2
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sapper740
It is quite interesting that in comparison tests done at the time 0f the Mk111 being introduced the results showed little difference between the 'long rifle' and the 'short rifle'.
With the difference in FoM at 600 yards being about 1" and only about 1/2" at 500 yards.
Some interesting take-aways from your post: I often wondered if the longer barrel provided a greater muzzle velocity but according to the comparison done the shorter barrel has a higher muzzle velocity. I wonder if handloading with a slower modern powder would give the longer barrel the nod. Next, the two rifles swap having the best FoM back and forth at the various ranges until they're a virtual tie at 1,700 yds. As you pointed out, not much difference between the two.Quote:
Originally Posted by Alan de Enfield
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sapper740
Some more comparisons - this was with the 'long rifle' vs the competition, and barrel life of the short rifle, along with speed of reloading.
You can see the British emphasis on musketry in that table. Even the "ordinarily trained" shooters had an excellent shots fired/hits ratio.Quote:
Originally Posted by Alan de Enfield
Lithgow made Long rifle barrels shorten them to SMLE length and the H barrel was born. Heavy profile and more accurate.
Ian Skennerton talks about the shortened Australian Rifle Club Pattern on p 395 and details the "Rifle Club" pattern sling swivels being installed. My C.L.L.E. has one such sling swivel installed just in front of the magazine.Quote:
Originally Posted by Bindi2
Well, I couldn't resist posting my trio of BSA's. From top to bottom, A MLE MK I (Without a safety on the cocking piece), A CLLM Mk I*, and an SMLE MK III (With cut-off and matching adjustable rear sight, but no volley sights).
The MLE and SMLE are both numbers matching throughout. The CLLM is non-matching. I suspect it was frequently used in competition as certain components match, like rear sight matching to the receiver, but not the barrel. These are fun rifles to shoot.
An absolutely smashing trio!Quote:
Originally Posted by smle addict
Interesting. My M.L.E. has a matching no prefix 5 digit serial number on it's bolt, barrel, and receiver. My Fulton regulated S.M.L.E. has a matching no prefix 5 digit serial number on it's bolt and receiver only. My C.L.L.E. has the number "1" stamped on its bolt and receiver. I've often pondered how a civilian rifle could end up with serial number 1. Perhaps the first civilian C.L.L.E. BSA ever made? A lazy apprentice gunsmith?Quote:
Originally Posted by smle addict
I have a somewhat unusual No.3. It's a BSA made in 1918. I assume, from the condition, that it was made late war and never actually issued. The pictures show some of the interesting stamps on it. You'll note how some military marks have been cancelled, the fact that a second (probably civilian) serial number was applied, and the "Sale Permit" and crown on the knox form. Condition was excellent except for some varnish I had to strip off the stock when I got it. Interesting piece.
Show the stamps on the wrist under the bolt.
I imported 26 BSA Sht. Mk.III years ago that came from the Kingdom of Bahrain. I think they were originally purchased from BSA in the 1920s or 30s. Condition ranged from good to excellent with matching serial numbers and excellent barrels. The worst part were the buttplates which I replaced as they were beaten to death from D&C, (drill and ceremony for non-military types). My Dad and I kept one each and mine is as nice as it gets with a prewar SMLE. I thought they were terribly expensive at the time but not so much anymore.
That is an interesting rifle - the BSA logo on the barrel, the sale permit mark, the varnish finish and the 320B inspection marks all suggest a commercial sale for target use, yet it has a letter prefix and military inspection marks.
Maybe a commercial rifle using up now surplus military production after the war?
As Bindi requested the markings on the butt socket and also has the barrel a square cut muzzle would be of great interest - also any commercial proof markings?
Alas, the rifle is currently out of my hands. When I get back up north, I'll take the snaps you've requested but it'll be a while.Quote:
Originally Posted by Rowdy