Enfield Sht 22 IV trainer

[Cantom]

Even if someone had one, it wouldn't fit well in that rifle and also it would be very incorrect to put a CNo.7 mag into your rifle. What's wrong with using it as-is?

It's for something else I just grabbed... A No 4 based .22.

[Cantom]

Strictly speaking, a CNo. 7 magazine wouldn't be correct for a .22" IV* rifle. I think the magazine shell used would have been a SMLE pattern, with 22 stamped on it. Doesn't mean that No. 7 magazine couldn't have been fitted, the rifles overlapped in use.
When I was in high school, cadets was part of the program. We had Cooey 82s, No. 7s, No. 4s, Brens, and until '59, Stens in the school. One of the older schools in town still had IV* rifles. The Cooey sight bases apparently would work loose, so the shop teacher brazed them on.

The magazine shell in the Sht 22 IV isn't stamped .22 unfortunately. I was told it could have been either way.

[tiriaq]

I wouldn't be surprised if they could have been marked or plain.
Let us know more about the No. 4 based .22 when you've got it.

[Claven2]

I've had three MkIV*'s that I know were all original given their source. Two had 22 marked shells, the other had a shell not marked 22. I think it could have gone either way and replacements likely weren't marked.

[Cantom]

I wouldn't be surprised if they could have been marked or plain.
Let us know more about the No. 4 based .22 when you've got it.

You're just going to hate this...it wasn't me that Bubbaed it, but I can see the value in it. I just sold my Jungle Carbine and now this popped up...some nice work there. I like oddities like this...and .22's are a lot cheaper to shoot.
Collector value nil but as for resale value...can't see how I could lose on it.

Do you think that's a barrel sleeve or a real No 4 .22 barrel? The action looks like it may be a No 4 Mk 2, see the screw head at the back of the forend. Numbers are matching too. Looks like a Numrich 4-5 flash hider, and an actual JC buttstock. Note the correct 800 yd JC rear sight, someone went to a lot of trouble to assemble this. The stock is crying out for some BLO...

[tiriaq]

A while back, I sold an unfinished No. 7 barrel with the muzzle end of the bore damaged by corrosion (the buyer knew this) to a chap who wanted to make a .22 No. 5 clone. Wouldn't be surprised if this is it. It is certainly an interesting rifle, nicely done, and should be a lot of fun as a shooter.
As far as I am concerned, there are plenty of rifles around that have been sported, altered past any reasonable restoration, and there is absolutely no harm in using them for projects.
I think we have all seen mudpuppy's photographs of his Delisle clones, and I would just love to get enough information to be able to make a simulated Charlton. I have a copy of the original Charlton patent, but that is hardly a set of dimensioned drawings.

[Cantom]

I could ask the guy I'm buying that JC from where he got it...it'd be nice to know some background on it. He doesn't know anything about Enfields...couldn't anwer any of my barrage of detailed questions...


Charlton- this would sure be one difficult thing to copy...

[tiriaq]

Many of the new parts are lathe turnings/cylindrical/tubular. The bolt camming piece on the operating rod has been reported to show hand forging marks, and is probably the single most complex piece in the conversion. The Charlton conversion is rather basic compared to the Huot conversion of the Ross. At any rate, it would be an interesting project, and the parts/materials cost would be pretty low.

[tiriaq]

Just occurred to me - when I mentionned that the barrel I sold had some corrosion in the bore at the muzzle - the chap wanted it for a No. 5 style project because once it was cut to proper length, the bore would be perfect. IF it is the same project rifle, don't worry about the bore condition.

[Cantom]

Just occurred to me - when I mentionned that the barrel I sold had some corrosion in the bore at the muzzle - the chap wanted it for a No. 5 style project because once it was cut to proper length, the bore would be perfect. IF it is the same project rifle, don't worry about the bore condition.

Judging by the attention to detail I see on that rifle, I actually wasn't worried about that at all.
Usually .22's have perfect barrels...how did it corrode? (hopefully it wasn't like that story about the guy who lent his perfect LB No 4 T to a "friend" who proceeded to shoot off a bunch of Canadian military ammo in it and then didn't clean it afterwards...when it was returned he panicked and checked the bore only to see that it was well and truly beotched...he said it truly took every ounce of self control he could summon to keep from buttstroking the guy right then and there...I can well imagine. He ended up getting it converted to 7.62 at LB with the attendant new barrel)

Do you remember what part of Canada the guy that was building that lived in?