Enfield No5 Mk1 Carbine

[Jugs]

I acquired a Faz 9/44 No5 Mk1 recently in the low 'B' 3 digit s/n range and there are two things about the rifle which I am unsure about.

1, The rifle has a squire front cut front end which I cannot find any reference to or any photos of a similar looking rifle. The stock also has no numbers on it but the hand guard is marked N22 with WD arrow on the inside.

2, There are also numbers on the L/H side of the receiver wrist which appear to read WR93168 which again I cannot find any reference to. The L/H wrist has been factory linished up to the point where the numbers are but no attempt has been made to remove them.

The rifle also appears to have had a replacement No4 bolt fitted at some point with ‘0’ bolt head which is British marked with WD arrow etc. The bolt is marked in the lug grove with a large 'R' with the s/n on the handle and no other barred out numbers. Apart from that, the rifle is stock No5 with ‘ALL’ of the weight reduction features in place including the hollowed out stock bolt.

Can anybody help?

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.

[HOOKED ON HISTORY]

Early No5 with a late forend sans metal tip?

[Peter Laidler]

Nope......... No5 rifle with a bodged/bubba No4 fore-end fitted. Need a decent photo to comment on the numbers question

[Jugs]

Thanks Peter. Hmm - that's what I thought hopping I might be wrong although I think the hand guard might be correct. Stock could do with a strip and clean/refinish. Being it is what you say it is, I might try to do a better job on the forend while stripped, we shall see. Will try to get some lower res photos tomorrow that will up load as the ones I took today on macro were too large.

[Peter Laidler]

Don't dispair about the No4 forend being bodged to fit. It's possible, but the butcher just ain't done it properly. At the end of the No5 rifles service life in the Far East - where they were still going strong when I left - all the replacement fore-ends supplied by the MoS/ordnance system were modified No4 type with the remains of the lightening slot at the front end patched in, pegged and shaped to suit. As were a good proportion of the butts too!

[villiers]

As Peter´s said, the fore end has been plugged (and the mark made by No. 4 front band is still visible). I´ve seen plenty of No 5s that have had No. 4 fore ends fitted at some later stage. I´d just re-shape the front end (or fit a metal cap if you can get one). And the bolt is quite common too. Does it have the original butt stock (or is that an ex-No. 4 too)?

[Jugs]

Hi Guys,

Thanks very much for your knowledge. Did Faz not cut down No4 stocks during the war or were proper No5 blanks made? The but-stock is all correct. I have added more photos of the fore-end seeing as I was taking photos of the numbers on the action wrist which are a mystery to me. Hope you can see the numbers.

[Peter Laidler]

I woiuld disagree with Villiers very slightly and suggest that you don't fit a cap to the end of the fore-end. Nothing but trouble! Once the sea water and silt from the mangrove swamps and monsoon rain gets in there, those caps can only rust out and rot the wood while it's doing it! Mind you, without the mangrove swamps........... Nope........., I'd leave it off!

[Jugs]

I agree with you both, in that fitting an end cap is not how the 1944 version would have been (plus also would not know where to get an end cap). But I do prefer the rounded off version anyway. Might have ago at rounding off the corner and reducing the tapper a bit more to remove the original band marks. Mind you, have seen lots of photos lately of rounded off fore-ended versions and they all seem to vary in the amount of rounding off on the ends.

I have mainly bought the rifle as a shooter and shoot very well it does with toughing groups in the black roundel at 100 yards just hand held with the elbow on the bench. Mind you, the test will come when the ranges increase to 200 & 300 yards +.

[villiers]

For some unknown reason, my No 5 really does shoot more accurately at longer distances. Could it be that it takes longer to stabilise the bullet from the shorter barrel? (I can prove that it´s better at 100 to 300 metres than at 50)
PS

I know Peter is not enamoured with the metal fore end cap (and his reasoning is correct). `Tis just that I like the look of it. And there´s not much jungle rot or ebola fever around where I live.