No 4 Magazine Problems

[Robert303]

I have been having problems with the magazine on my Long Branch No4 Mk1*. at first I thought it was my reloads. However I checked the No 4 magazine against my No 1 MkIII* mag using factory Privi Partizan, Factory FNM and some WW2 WRA rounds. The SMLE mag took 10 of each without problems. No 4 mag would only take 8. It appears to be slightly 'Short' back to front.

The only marking I can see on the magazine is a letter B in a circle at the front of the follower. The magazine does look newer than the rifle, in that the blueing is good and unscratched or faded. It is a No4 mag.

Is anyone aware of any 'After Market' magazines with this mark or problems?

Thanks
Robert

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.

[Enfield_Fan]

Look up the 1945 armorers notes from Peter I am on my mobile now and cannot copy the link but I was reading them today and there is some information in there about some of the earlier no4 rifles that would not hold 10 rounds.

[Peter Laidler]

It'll be absoultely nothing to do with the ammo, certainly if you're trying it with factory type Mk7 ball. Any No4 magazine that doesn't load AND hold/retain 10 rounds with a bit of spare space at the end is defective, regardless of the finish or condition. Identify what's the cause and either a) fix it (it could be a dent or ding in the side or back) or b) Bin it and get another

Make sure that when you get the new one that you fit it properly. Up against the magazine stop face at the front and a nice tight fit at the rear so that it comes up with a tight 'click' against the magazine catch with no shakes or rattles

I can't imagine a day when someone will tool up to reproduce No4 magazine as the nation is awash with them.......... but maybe someone has!

[Robert303]

I'll get another magazine as soon as possible and take this one back to where I got it.

[MKV111Z]

Some were produced in WW11 that couldn't hold 10 rounds thought they were all binned by now. The acceptance mark a small b should be absent if this is one of them.

Cheers
H

[Peter Laidler]

I never saw anything in the UK that related to the wartime magazines that wouldn't accept 10 rounds but I did see some relevant paperwork in NZ. This said, in effect, that these US magazines (and I never understood whether this meant u/s as in Unserviceable or US as in United States.....) were of the fabricated pattern and that the fabricated fold at the rear rounded surface was a (presumably larger?) diameter such that it precluded the loading of 10 rounds and ...........blah...blah....blah and on it went as they tend to do. On this US basis, I can only assume that they meant the wrapped and folded magazines from the US or Canada. But being from the Colonies, well...., bless....., you've got to give them a bit of a start.......

Anyway, they were to be deemed suitable and serviceable but small-arms instructors should be aware etc etc

Does anyone else recall or have encountered these 9 rounders. I don't ever remember seeing or coming across one but they do exist

[muffett.2008]

Well Pete, I've always found, that after you cycle the bolt foreward the first time, then remove the magazine, there's only ever 9 rounds in it.

[drweiler]

I have just noticed a like-new Long Branch magazine in my parts bin, with a 'B' inside a circle on the follower as well. Can't find any reference to a 'circled B' in my reference books.

[Brian Dick]

It's the manufacturer's mark on the follower.

[Robert303]

As this has come back 'Up' the list can I add that I have checked the mag I was having problems with. On the follower there is a circle with a B right at the front of the follower. On the retaining catch at the rear there is an A in a circle.

An ideas as to origin of the mag, apart from what has been said before? I.E. is the A relevant.
Robert