Converted MkII* questions.

[Sapper740]

I'm considering purchasing this rifle but before I bid on it I need a little clarification on its stamps. On the left side of the butt socket is the expected Enfield 1907 SHt LE CONd II* (1V)? suggesting this is one of the 22,191 conversions done by Enfield in 1907. Everything is good so far. Take a look at the right side of the butt socket and this is where I get confused. The right side has an earlier stamp of Enfield 1896 SHt .22 III EFD under Queen Victoria's cyphre. According to books I've read the .22 Short Rifle Mk III wasn't introduced until 1912. Am I correct in assuming this rifle was originally an MLE built in 1896, converted to a SHt LE CONd II* in 1907, then into a .22 trainer in 1912 or later? But then there's another question: it has the Mark I rear handguard. I'm pretty serious about buying this rifle but the opening bid is spendy and I want to ensure that everything jibes with history. Please let me know what you think.

[smle addict]

Yes, you are correct in how the rifle began and was upgraded. When the Short 22 Mk III conversion took place, the old MLE designation was scrubbed, and stamped with the new trainer markings.

I wouldn't worry about the handguard. It might have been simpler to just keep what they had on that rifle, rather than modifying the stock for the later mk III sight protector.

I was looking at it too, but I have other priorities that limit my spending.

[Lance]

When most of the .22 Short Rifles were deemed obsolete in 1924. NZ who just rebuilt most of their .22 Short Rifle Mark IIIs in 1922 and 1923 just restamped their rifles "IV*" for .22 Short Rifle Mark IV* (Rifle No. 2 Mark IV*) the current trainer of the line. It is very common to find NZ upgraded marked .22 Short Rifle Mark III's, examples that were not marked "IV*" later in service are harder to locate. This rifle being converted to SMLE ConD II* in 1907 is slightly more unusual as the bulk were done in 1904 and 05.

[Sapper740]

Thank you gents.