-
Legacy Member
Enfield SMLE III
Recently acquired an SMLE III 1914 in amazing condition. She has been sporterized but nothing that can't be reversed.
I was hoping I can pick peoples brains here about the stamping.
I can puzzle out a few of them but I am getting lost in the clutter. Any help would be tremendously appreciated.
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. |
|
-
-
05-23-2020 04:37 PM
# ADS
Friends and Sponsors
-
Legacy Member
Hi Jameson, the rifle serial number is legit for 1914 and has been rebarrelled at Enfield in 1925. This was after the time when the old receiver was given the new barrel number, so the original EFD serial from 1914 was retained and put on the new barrel. What is interesting is that on the LHS of the receiver ring is an Australian ownership mark, the D with the arrow in it, which has been officially cancelled. When things were turning ugly in 1914, there was a lot of Enfield made rifles made for Australia under contract, and marked with the D /I\ at the factory. This contract was cancelled, and the rifles were returned back into British and Indian army stores.
Are there any markings on the flat of the receiver ring?
cheers, D.
-
-
-
Contributing Member
What I am seeing is the chip missing from the top of the wrist on the Butt which could mean ther fitment is not quite what it should be as it is also touching at the bottom behind the trigger guard there should be a small gap all the way around the wrist where it meets the socket.
In essence the fit is like a wedge and it appears in this case that the fitment has been lost to shrinkage over the years the wood need to have drinks of RLO/Min turps mix so it retains it water proofness and its dimensions ao in this case you may need a new butt fitted and if this is the case I would be looking at the draws as well to see if they require work.
Last edited by CINDERS; 05-24-2020 at 04:15 AM.
-
-
Legacy Member
Img15,
I did not notice any markings on the ring but I will check when I am back at the shop with the rifle.
Cinders,
The furniture has issues, not least of which is the sporter-izing. It always makes me sad when I see a piece of history that has been chopped up.
I intend to send this old warhorse in to be restored and dressed as it should be in its original furniture. The barrel, breech and bolt numbers all match. I know I wont ever find the rest of the original numbered fixtures but I’m going to restore it as fully as I can manage. It deserves that level of respect in my view of right and wrong.
-
-
Legacy Member
Show some full photos of the rifle. The sporter-izing as you say may not be Bubba at work even though the rifle is Military.
-
-
Legacy Member
Submitted for British commercial proof in 1950.
-
-
Legacy Member
More pictures of the rifle itself and some close-ups of a few more stamps I found.
Img15,
There are no other stamps on the receiver ring.
-
-
Contributing Member
That A.P on the left rear flat could not be Alfred Paker could it?
Now that really would be to far from left field !!!!
-
-
Legacy Member
That's how I took it, also the HV barrel...why wouldn't it be? Was this one for target? Then cut down as a hunting rifle later.
You’ve lost me. Lol
-
-
Legacy Member
Parkers normally marked theirs on the Nocks form, not there.
-