1918 Enfield Small Arms Factory made SMLE No.1 Mk.III* converted back to No.1 Mk.III

[browningautorifle]

I have now think I have worked out what is happening here!

Yes...you didn't quite get the reaction you wished for. And you're embarrassed. And don't get the jelly on your keyboard.

[Thunderbox]

The OP rifle is a recent civilian rebuild, possibly of a sported No1 (hence missing nosecap). Very nicely done, but clearly different from a BSA FTR.

[owengun]

The OP rifle is a recent civilian rebuild, possibly of a sported No1 (hence missing nosecap). Very nicely done, but clearly different from a BSA FTR.

Would 1953 still be considered recent?

---------- Post added at 05:32 PM ---------- Previous post was at 05:28 PM ----------

I didn't know Winston C did restorations. Something else I have to keep an eye out for now!

No, he didn't do the restoration, that's just silly talk, it was his butler who did it from a sporter he picked up at a gunshow then put together with assorted parts in his basement workshop.

[Homer]

It seems this thread hasn't gone particularly well.

Owengun I don't think anyone here gets pleasure in trying to prove your rifle is not an authentic 1953 FTR. Some of us, including myself just like discussing these things out of our own interest/curiosities and its assumed I think, because you've posted photos, you'd be open to this.

So for my curiosity, to you if you care to comment, and the other contributors, I ask this. Were all the BSA 1953 FTR's engraved to indicate this on the action?

[Peter Laidler]

On a purely practical note, I would imagine that they WOULD be marked Homer. I say this because while the BSA FTR'd rifles weren't for the UK Military, they were being done for someone, very probably post war emerging nations wishing to re-arm with good ex military weaponry. As such it'd be beneficial to see that their new weapons, albeit that some were very old in fact, were in fact factory FTR fresh. And what better than from the specialised rifle factory that made a good proportion of them in the first place. A FTR'd rifle was rebuilt to give a further 80% life

After the war, Westley Richards (WR) gained a reputation as THE place to go to for FTR'd Bren guns, for those governments wanting 'new' Brens. WR made a point of sending every FTR'd Bren out in a repainted chest visibly marked with their name and address for all buyers to see.

'new' Brens were impossible to obtain in thelate 40's/early 50's when these nations wanted them because guns from Enfield* were being produced for Korea so WR had a captive audience with their FTR'd guns. WR also pioneered the conversion of fitting Mk2 backsights to drum sighted Mk1 guns.

* Inglis and Lithgow were required to cease production of complete guns immediately due to licensing agreements

Just as an afterthought, when the UK MoD were formulating the current L59 and 60 DP programme for the No4 and No1 rifles still in Cadet Forces and training roles, one of the big stumbling blocks for the No1 rifle was the jigs required to clamp the bodies for the machining process. There were just sooooo many minor variables, even from the samples obtained as test pieces, that after a few false starts, the No1/L60 project was cancelled. And the L60 designation handed over to the DP L1A1. There, another bit of useless Enfield info.........

[RobD]

Several of my friends own Winston Churchill's C96 Mauser Pistols, the one he lost near Colenso.

[owengun]

It seems this thread hasn't gone particularly well.

Owengun I don't think anyone here gets pleasure in trying to prove your rifle is not an authentic 1953 FTR. Some of us, including myself just like discussing these things out of our own interest/curiosities and its assumed I think, because you've posted photos, you'd be open to this.

So for my curiosity, to you if you care to comment, and the other contributors, I ask this. Were all the BSA 1953 FTR's engraved to indicate this on the action?

Honestly I have not been getting upset or embarrassed about the confusion that this particular rifle is generating, it has been more humorous if anything to me. The thing that amazes me is I never was asking about what this rifle was but only offering to show this new to me example of a nice SMLE and that they are still out there to find, but almost from the start everybody starting trying to make it out as a fake and or backyard put together rifle from gunshow acquired sporters/parts (that I can not understand completely why) which it to me is clearly not as I have now have 3 pristine post war BSA FTR example SMLE's and have seen quite a few more that I have not acquired to compare.

I should post pictures of some of my pristine No.4's and see if the same happens, especially the ones that came directly from a ex Canadian Weapons tech's collection and see how many can tell me how they were sporters restored from parts!

From my observations of these many post war BSA rebuilds I have noticed that all have been restocked to varying degrees, most have had their barrels replaced with a new BSA marked barrel (all so far around 1953), most also have had their bolts replaced with a brand new BSA bolt, same with nose cap and all have had all these parts re-stamped with the original rifles serial number.

Also while the majority have been painted black (Suncorited) some have been refinished in the oil blacken treatment common for wartime BSA rifles and so far only the ones that were painted black are marked FTR 1953 on the receiver.

While I never attempt to proscribe myself as an expert on anything, let alone Enfield Rifles it seems that this is not the case with all.

I am happy to answer questions about the observable facts about this rifle I will refrain from now on to replying to posters unproven assumption's.

So going forward, if posters have other statements to make about this rifles heritage please follow it up with some form of checkable proof of such rather than proclamations of their personal belief's or assumptions which only detract from what this site should be about, FACTS and not quesstimations! guesstimation - Wiktionary

[owengun]

Just to add here is a picture of some of the other SMLE in the Mk.III Enfield original sellers family collection, as you can see they have more than one nice SMLE, he must have a monopoly on the market of SMLE replacement wood -

[Ridolpho]

owengun: One of the negative aspects of the internet is the proliferation of un-refereed statements or assertions. What attracts many to Milsurps is the feedback and polite, informative debate that exists here. People wishing to learn about specific rifles can come here and find the next best thing to peer reviewed publications. You must admit you did make some assertions in the opening post which did prove to be somewhat less than accurate and which could be misleading to future users if unchallenged. You should, indeed, post some of your other rifles here and continue to take part in the process- both learning and contributing.

Ridolpho

[owengun]

owengun: One of the negative aspects of the internet is the proliferation of un-refereed statements or assertions. What attracts many to Milsurps is the feedback and polite, informative debate that exists here. People wishing to learn about specific rifles can come here and find the next best thing to peer reviewed publications. You must admit you did make some assertions in the opening post which did prove to be somewhat less than accurate and which could be misleading to future users if unchallenged. You should, indeed, post some of your other rifles here and continue to take part in the process- both learning and contributing.

Ridolpho

No problem, was I never polite (maybe not by Canadian standards)?

What did I state that is misleading or less than accurate? I thought I laid everything out as I saw it, I never asked for what it is,was or could be, I even backed everything I said with lots of pictures.

Is it not a 1918 made and manufactured by Enfield Mk.III* refitted to Mk.III status postwar FTR and then later determined to be done by BSA in 1953 after removal of top wood?

My feelings are not hurt, I'm an old school non-snag Aussie who doesn't get embarrassed, put off or pushed around easily with a good sense of dry humour.