LE No5 Mk1 stock questions

[Surpmil]

Importer didn't bother to try matching up the bolts on these rifles? A foolish mistake if so. With a PF one would expect a post-WWII No.4 MkI or possibly Mk2.

[GeeRam]

Importer didn't bother to try matching up the bolts on these rifles? A foolish mistake if so. With a PF one would expect a post-WWII No.4 MkI or possibly Mk2.

That PF number will be from a Mk.2 probably made around late 1952. I've seen PF263301 on a 12/52 dated Mk.2.

[Surpmil]

Yes, we see quite a few of those out here too, but I was reluctant to be more precise than that in case the series was not confined to them.

[Bindi2]

be aware that P L has quoted No4 parts were used to repair and keep operational No5s in Malaya.

[Alan de Enfield]

be aware that P L has quoted No4 parts were used to repair and keep operational No5s in Malaya.

Totally correct - but he also said that they would be properly installed and numbered to match.

He would not have left a 'used' bolt with a No4 serial number 'sat laughing at us' from a No5 body.

[Bindi2]

you are very correct AdE. The bolts would have been renumbered even on the No4 bodies to match.

[rm31859]

Thanks to all of you for the great information that you have provided to me. Just a clarification on the butt stock. The butt stock is the correct stock for this rifle. The dimensions and contours are all correct and so is the metal end cap with a well worn rubber butt pad. Someone in the past has added a lower sling attachment. The vendor has made good on their promise to provide a correct bolt and I will be taking the rifle to my local gunsmith, who specializes in vintage milsurp rifles, to have the bolt properly fitted to the rifle.

[Alan de Enfield]

I will be taking the rifle to my local gunsmith, who specializes in vintage milsurp rifles, to have the bolt properly fitted to the rifle.

Just be aware that the Lee Enfield is not a 'typical milsurp' and unless your local gunsmith has knowledge and experience of Lee Enfields it'll probably be nothing like anything he has worked on before.

How many other rifles manufacturers have to have the bolt numbered to match the body because they have to be individually hand fitted ?

If you look in the Library under Peter Laidlers posts you will see a series of 'lectures' on fitting up Lee Enfields - there are one of two that cover 'how to fit and instal a breech bolt'

[rm31859]

Hello all, Sorry to have taken so long to reply. I work 12 hr night shifts. I printed out Peter's articles on fitting the bolt and took it to my gunsmith along with my rifle. He already had this article in his possession and knew all about properly fitting the bolt. I have another question though concerning the buttstock cap screws. I went to remove the buttstock cap to change out the worn buttstock pad and the top screw is unlike a normal wood screw. It is some type of small diameter machine screw with a larger shank. Has anyone seen this type of buttstock cap screw before? thanks

[Surpmil]

Why replace the original pad? If the "toe" is worn you could invert it. If shooting comfort is the issue a slip-on butt pad will be cheaper, easier and better. The purportedly softer repro pads make very little difference IMHO.

As for undoing the bolt, if you have the original "Chicago bolt" fastening in there, just unscrew a few turns and tap down gently to see if the long shank will move; it might be rusted in. No point trying to force it to rotate with a driver, you'll only b-----g up the slot.

Repeat the undo and tap process until the long shank is about 1/4" out at which point you should be able to pull it out by grabbing the head in soft jaws etc. The threads are fine so too much hammering will ruin them, especially if unscrewed too far. Likewise the counter-bore on the long shank is thin walled, and careless use of a drift/punch will potentially b-----r that up as well; use only a brass one if required.

As for which end of the bolt is which, logically the short end would be uppermost, but you'll only find out when you start to undo them.

My two cents.