Photos of the differences between the Trials No.4 Mk.I(T) vs No.4 Mk.I (T)

[rayg]

Bored today so thought I'd take photos of the differences between the Trials (T) and the later standard (T) for my own files and then thought maybe other folks might be interested in the photos also, so here they are.

Both of the rifles are totally as initially assembled by Enfield and H&H. Except the missing cutoff has been replaced with a altered earlier one on the Trials, Anyone have a spare original "T" cutoff? The scope and bracket do no match the rifle also. The other (T) is also all original and as initially assembled by Enfield having all components stamped and matching to the rifle including the scope, bracket, scope case and the chest. So they are good examples to use for the comparisons. Ray

Lots of photos..... MORE ON PAGE #2 Sorry I mixed them up where some times the Trial's is on top and sometimes it's on the bottom

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.

[rayg]

More photos

[rayg]

Quote: The other (T) is also all original and as initially assembled by Enfield having all components stamped and matching to the rifle including the scope, bracket, scope case and the chest. So they are good examples to use for the comparisons.

Meant to say initially assembled by H&H not Enfield as the Trials was and it's dated 1944.
Also the Trials has no mid length sling swivel nor an "s" on the receiver boss and the lens cover is dated 1944, Ray

[rayg]

I can't seem to get my S... together today. The lens cover on the Trials is dated 1941, not 44, Ray

[Seaforth72]

A very interesting magazine. It appears to be for the Trials No. 1 MK. VI as it is marked "VI" on the magazine follower and has the Enfield EFD combined letters logo stamp.
QUESTION: Was this the standard magazine used with the Trials No. 4 MK. I rifles?

My 1931 No. 4 MK. I (T) A 1989 went through FTR and has a later "B" marked magazine. The "B" mark was for fit, not maker as I recall. A 1943 BSA No. 4 MK. I (T) that I have came with what appears to be a Trials serial numbered magazine A 2512 (odd as only 2,500 Trials No. 4 MK. I were reported made) but it too is a later production magazine.

[rayg]

QUESTION: Was this the standard magazine used with the Trials No. 4 MK. I rifles?


I'm not sure if it was the standard magazine used in the no. 4, Mk I Trials but have been told that some of them were used in the rifle. Maybe someone who would know will post a reply, Ray

[Seaforth72]

Correction:

1,000 No. 1 MK. VI SN A 0001 and up.
2,479 Trials No. 4 MK. I Also SN A 001 and up.

My magazine A 2512 is therefore quite a puzzle.

re: THE LEE-ENFIELD (2007) by Ian Skennerton page 212

A very interesting magazine. It appears to be for the Trials No. 1 MK. VI as it is marked "VI" on the magazine follower and has the Enfield EFD combined letters logo stamp.
QUESTION: Was this the standard magazine used with the Trials No. 4 MK. I rifles?

My 1931 No. 4 MK. I (T) A 1989 went through FTR and has a later "B" marked magazine. The "B" mark was for fit, not maker as I recall. A 1943 BSA No. 4 MK. I (T) that I have came with what appears to be a Trials serial numbered magazine A 2512 (odd as only 2,500 Trials No. 4 MK. I were reported made) but it too is a later production magazine.

[Seaforth72]

Clarification on the "B" marked magazine on the rib at the back. THE LEE-ENFIELD (op.cit.) p. 221 states that a "B" marked magazine was certified for 10 rounds. Some earlier magazines could not hold all 10 rounds.

[henry r]

it is interesting to see different crowns on the rifles. does anyone know if the different styles of crowns used represent different "current" theories at the times they were made, different styles of the two manufactures or something else altogether?

[martin08]

Correction:

1,000 No. 1 MK. VI SN A 0001 and up.
2,479 Trials No. 4 MK. I Also SN A 001 and up.

My magazine A 2512 is therefore quite a puzzle.

re: THE LEE-ENFIELD (2007) by Ian Skennerton page 212

Not sure if this is applicable for the No. 4 Trials, but I have a prototype Mosin Nagant of which only 288 were accepted, yet its production number is 311. Approximately 100 prototypes were rejected, so it was possible to have a serial number higher than 288. If that makes sense.

Perhaps not all of the Trial Rifle production were accepted, as well? If so, a number higher than 2,478 could be possible.


Of course, if it is still bothering you to the point where you toss your hands in the air and give up, I will be tickled pink to buy it from you! My '33 Trials rifle desperately needs an EFD mag.