Canadian Enfields

[A square 10]

thanks 5th , a typo mkVI was what i meant , that as they are nearly mistakable visually , mkVs were made prior to the nomenclature change , but wasn't the change in designation retroactive ?

as to 'better production' i disagree , 'better production environment" - perhaps ,
even with the collectors perception of maltbys production based on their poor markings , IMHO all produced great rifles ,

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.

[Son]

thanks 5th , a typo mkVI was what i meant , that as they are nearly mistakable visually , mkVs were made prior to the nomenclature change , but wasn't the change in designation retroactive ?

as to 'better production' i disagree , 'better production environment" - perhaps ,
even with the collectors perception of maltbys production based on their poor markings , IMHO all produced great rifles ,

Actually the MkV never existed... with regard to the LoC at least anyway. As it was never given issue status, it wasn't approved and therefore didn't exist as far as the nomenclature changes in May 1926 either.

The SMLE or Short, Magazine Lee Enfield came to be from changes made to the MLE or Magazine Lee Enfield. It's direct predecessor was the MLM or Magazine Lee Metford. The names were derived from the designer of the action, James Paris Lee, and the designer of the barrels, first Metford, then the engineers at the RSAF Enfield. When the rifle was shortened from a 30" barrel to a 25" barrel the overall design hadn't been changed much, the biggest being the charger loading bolt head system on the SMLE MkI from 1903. This was developed to became the charger bridge on the MkIII in 1907.
There were a few cosmetic changes over the years, the only major ones being the barrel length and the charger bridge.
The MkV came and went as a trials model in 1922 to 1924. After the changes in 1926, the MkIII became the No1 rifle. (the No2 rifle was the MkIV .22 trainer; the No3 rifle was the Pattern 1914) The next development was the No1 MkVI. By this time, the archaic manufacturing methods having been used for 50 years making Lee Enfield Rifles went through an overhaul. The design changes made to the action were to suit more modern and much more streamlined manufacturing practices that resulted in faster production. More improvements were made also, like the receiver mounted rear aperture sight, and a heavier profiled barrel. Being a totally new design, the SMLE designation was dropped and the rifle became simply the Rifle No4

[5thBatt]

but wasn't the change in designation retroactive ?

As the Mk1, MkII Cond & MkIV Cond were all "omitted from Vocabulary" & never redesignated as No1s i would have to say no.

Mk1 SMLE
MkIII SMLE (No1 MkIII)
MkV SMLE
No1 MkVI


The MkII & MkIV SMLEs were conversions of the earlier LongLees to Mk1 pattern (MkII ConD) & MkIII pattern (MkIV ConD) ConD = Converted