SMLE with Winchester A5 on Whitehead-Mount

[Promo]

Yes, it is the rifle which is pictured in all angles in the Knowledge Library here, but I thought some pictures in very high resolution with a neutral white background would still be appreciated.


Edit 18.06.2023: gone pictures re-uploaded.

Information

Warning: This is a relatively older thread This discussion is older than 360 days. Some information contained in it may no longer be current.

[cplstevennorton]

Man that is neat Georg. I don't know much about these at all. Did WRA actually mount them, or only supply the A5's?

[Roger Payne]

Georg, I'm sooooo jealous!

Whitehead Brothers produced the mounts. Scopes were supplied by Winchester, IIRC in two batches, one in 1915 & one in 1916.

[mr.e moose]

There was a thread not to long ago about this scope mount. I had asked the question since the front scope mount was attached to the rear sight protector, how was the rear sight protector attached to the rifle? Was there a method to attach it to the barrel, or was it secured only by the bolt and nut through the stock?

[Roger Payne]

Secured in just the same way as on any other SMLE Mr Moose; a terrible design from an engineering point of view, as the front mount is attached to the wooden forend not the barrel of the rifle.

[Promo]

Yes, completely ridiculous that the front scope foot is mounted to a wooden stock, where as the rear scope foot is mounted to the receiver. And on top of that, the recoil forced the scope to slide forward and had to be pushed back after every shot. And having such a rifle in hand, you wonder what kind of cripple the shooter had to be, to be able and aim through such an offset scope.

War and the lack of material often resulted in solutions which appear completely stupid afterwards. But on the other hand this is what makes collecting so awesome.


Edit 18.06.2023: pictures missing from starting post added to this post.

[RCS]

A small number were tested or used on the French Lebel rifleAttachment 80330

[jmoore]

Yes, completely ridiculous that the front scope foot is mounted to a wooden stock, where as the rear scope foot is mounted to the receiver. And on top of that, the recoil forced the scope to slide forward and had to be pushed back after every shot. And having such a rifle in hand, you wonder what kind of cripple the shooter had to be, to be able and aim through such an offset scope.

War and the lack of material often resulted in solutions which appear completely stupid afterwards. But on the other hand this is what makes collecting so awesome.

I have one of the British A5s on some reproduction mounts which has been to the range enough to discover it's not as wretched as you might think. Has held zero reasonably well and isn't too hard to use, once you develop the muscle memory to automatically put the scope back. (Which also applies to Unertls, Lyman Targetspots, etc.) Not too left hand friendly, but not impossible.

[Promo]

Those on the Lebel are B4 scopes and not A5. Note the knobs.

[Lee Enfield]

Those on the Lebel are B4 scopes and not A5. Note the knobs.

I would point out that the Rings were interchangeable and not specific to the scope.

The Rings were specific to the distance involved. Thank of the Rings on the Lebel as being a modern capped hunting turret rather that a target adjustable turret (as illustrated on the A5).