Some Enfield parts you don't see every day...

[Claven2]

I think it's safe to say these are rare today. Both were different patterns of the WW2 era expedient safety. The helical coil threaded section was left unmachined and therefore the bolt lock was not installed. These safeties only had the cocking piece catch.

The one on the left is the cruder of the two, made of a rough stamped or forged part with the shaft being pressed in. The one on the right is a machined one-piece safety much like the standard pattern apart from the helical coil threads not being machined. Both are British manufacture.




The reason they are so rare nowdays is that they were only used periodically during WW2 productions when shortages of rifles were an issue and shortcuts became necessary. Most WW2 rifles left the factory with standard safeties. Later on, probably beginning in 1945, most of these were ordered replaced to address safety concerns (no pun intended) and essentially all the REME armourers were directed to seek out rifles with non-standard safeties and to replace those parts with standard units. Naturally, all FTR rifles would also have been returned to pattern.

One of these I got on a non-refurb 1942 BSA some years ago (I replaced it with a proper safety as it was a shooter) and the other on a 1943 Faz a friend sold as a shooter two weeks ago (hence he swapped out the part for the new owner). I don't recall ever seeing another still installed in a rifle and I always check this bit - been collecting or shooting Enfields for about 15 years and only two of these encountered. That says something.

Anyhow, enjoy the pics

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.

[Warren]

The reason they are odd is that they were normally used for the 4 inch cup discharger with the short barrel SMLE action. They allow the bolt to be opened and closed without locking it. It just prevents the cocking piece from allowing the action to fire. Want another one ??

[Claven2]

Nope, I don't need more. They are in Skennerton's book as well. I don't think they were made for the discharger guns. For one thing these are No.4 action safeties and for another Skennerton, if I recall, was the one who mentioned they were war expedient.

[Peter Laidler]

These 'bolt, locking' appear in the SAI's, (the Small Arms Instructions) of 1943 somewhere but I'll have to look, to the effect that in order to overcome shortages and bottlenecks leading to stoppages, '........these dimensionally different' locking bolts will be fitted to rifles at the Ordnance factories periodically. So far as I am aware, they were never issued as spare parts through the Armourers system, only at the factories as that simplified locking bolt doesn't feature in the earliest known No4 Ordnance/REME parts list. The post war EMER's did mention it somewhere but can't be bothered to look through now. But suffice it to say, when spare parts were plentiful, it would have been changed as an 'A' class modification or miscellaneous instruction.

As Wheaty says, that locking bolt without the catch just prevents the rifle from being fired which is really as safe as it gets! Although you can still load of course...............

I'm a bit puzzled about its use on the big old tank smoke launcher Wheaty.................. They were only made/based on worn out SMLE actions. Will the No4 bolt locking fit onto a SMLE?

[krinko]

Will the No4 bolt locking fit onto a SMLE?

Just did a test in the parts room----yes they will fit and function.
-----krinko

[Steve H. in N.Y.]

Left is an SMLE expedient safety-Australian? Center for a smoke discharger, stamped "NO SAFETY" on the enlarged thumb piece. No clue on the right one-a No.4 safety with the shaft pushed in, rotated almost 180 degrees and repinned.