A .22 Lee rifle, unsure of details.

[STG-98]

I picked up this BSA rifle some time ago, dated 1900, or so it appears.

Missing the dust cover, probably from when it was converted to .22.
Have thought it may have been a Lee-Metford before conversion.

Any other info would be appreciated.
Thank you

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.

[BVZ24]

Looks like a modified Long lee. Probably MLE MK1 Appears to have a 25" SMLE-like barrel. The rear sight base may even be SMLE 3.

The 1900 date is too late for a military Metford rifle. It could have been converted from a commercial model. The bolt could be from an early Metford that would have not had the cocking piece safety, or was modified to remove it. The Metford MK1 had a receiver mounted safety like the SMLE. The Metford MK2 and MLE do not have any recess for a reciever safety.

[STG-98]

No safety on this one. Has a half cock position.

[Brian Dick]

It's a typical Naval service Short Mk.II training rifle. They were converted from military MLM and MLE rifles and aren't uncommon. Is the bolt assembly serial number matching?

[STG-98]

Bolt assembly does not match receiver number.

[Bruce_in_Oz]

I recall seeing a photo on-line of a young Princess Elizabeth firing one of these off the deck of a ship.

Not sure if I "captured" a copy.

If I find it in the "unsorted" directory, or elsewhere, I will post it.

[Bruce_in_Oz]

Here 'tis:

[martin08]

Here is one in the same configuration with South African marks.

https://www.milsurps.com/showthread.php?t=55013

[STG-98]

Very nice rifle. Thank you.

---------- Post added at 08:41 AM ---------- Previous post was at 08:40 AM ----------

Have not seen that before.

Here 'tis:

Attachment 131167

[husk]

The majority of these that I’ve come across have mis-matched bolts.