No 1 Mk VI Converted to No 4 Mk I Sporter

[Brian B]

Part 2 of my new sharing initiative. I picked this up a few weeks ago. I don't need any more projects, but this one was too good to pass up.

Obviously, this has been sporterized. Looks like an original No 1 Mk VI that was converted to No 4 Mk I configuration and then "lovingly upgraded" by Bubba.

Bolt is original as is barrel. Mag is a mismatch. Barrel has been shortened!! Kills me!!

I plan to restore, but need some opinions on how to go about it. Should I leave the barrel as is or should I replace and save the old barrel to keep with the rifle?

Thought I would look for a mismatched early No 4 Mk 1 with the cutoff in the forearm and use the donor rifle to replace all of the wood and odds and ends. Could even do a barrel replacement.

Also, would you put an original cutoff back in the rifle during the restoration?

What say ye??

Thanks for the input.

Brian B

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.

[fenian]

Brian, you might want to check out (efdrifles.com) they reproduce rare Enfield Rifle parts and have some original parts sometimes to.

[Lance]

I would restore her definitely.

I would not install a cut off as she most likely did not come with one out of Fazakerly. As for the barrel, my suggestion is to find a talented gunsmith that could graft the end of another barrel onto this one with the joint under the sight block. It would not be easy/cheap but that is what I would try.

Nice find!

[Amatikulu]

Looking at the pictures, I do not believe that rifle was ever a No.1 mark VI. Instead, I think it was originally made as a No. 4 Mark 1 at the Fazakerley Factory in 1941 (Fairly obvious from the butt socket markings ). The receiver came from the No.1 Mark VI trial program but was probably never assembled to a rifle and ended up at Fazakerley as a spare part when Enfield sent all its No.4 parts there.

Still very restorable if you bring it to No.4 mark 1 specs.

[limpetmine]

Your idea to bring it to 1941 specs is on the mark. No cut off, as Lance mentioned. Changing the barrel would be eaiser than grafting. I've been looking for a craftsman gunsmith to do a barrel restoration on my Trials rifle with zero luck. I need to look harder, I guess, because I want to graft mine, as the barrel is serialed to the rifle. A shame, though that a complete 1941 will be sacrificed, but that's what Bubba does every day. If you find a donor rifle, I need the charger bridge off of one, then two could be broght back to life!

[EarlyFours]

Are you sure there is a completed cutoff slot. I have one of these Fazackerly rifles with a No1 Mk VI body and the same butt socket marking except for the
serial number. The cutoff slot was not machined through to the magazine well.

[Beerhunter]

Looking at the pictures, I do not believe that rifle was ever a No.1 mark VI. Instead, I think it was originally made as a No. 4 Mark 1 at the Fazakerley Factory in 1941 (Fairly obvious from the butt socket markings ). The receiver came from the No.1 Mark VI trial program but was probably never assembled to a rifle and ended up at Fazakerley as a spare part when Enfield sent all its No.4 parts there.

I think that you have described the situation admirably, especially as the rifle has an A suffix that denotes a rifle with non-interchangeable parts. I imagine that it is quite a rare beast anyway because those rifles were "actively sought out and destroyed" Post War, according to a regular contributor here.

[jmoore]

If you don't mind sacrificing the rifling in the grafted on portion, it ought not be too hard adding the missing portion. (The last 2 or 3" will be smooth bore.)

Otherwise, yah, that would be tough. About easier to cut a chunk of barrel from nearer the breech end, clocking the rifling, attaching, and then turning down and milling the various lugs. Even then I'm not convinced it would really be a good idea.

[Brian B]

Thank you all for the feedback and for the advice on the restoration process.

I think that you are all correct in that the rifle never was a No 1 Mk VI, but built as a No 4 Mk I. I found some great pictures on the Enfield Rifles forum that showed a couple of rifles just like mine that are in the No 4 Mk I configuration. One has a cutoff installed the second does not.

As a result of the feedback from everyone so far, I will definitely move forward as planned with a No 4 Mk I restoration. Early Fours, there is a slot machined for the cutoff, but I think I will go with Lance and Limpetmine's advice and not install a cutoff.

The barrel is going to be the tough call. I had thought about the grafting idea as I have seen ones on Garand barrels using a Garand back end and an 03A3 barrel. I like the idea of grafting the front portion under the front sight as that was my first thought when it came to the barrel.

Thank you all for the fine feedback and advice so far. I couldn't pass picking up the rifle. It is a really interesting receiver. Has quite a different look to it.

Brian B

[Simon P]

Why not check with the pattern room or the Warminster Collection in the UK to see if they have any No4s with the same markings and if so, you have a correct known example in the right configuartion to base your restoration on.

I would definitley restore it