Enfield 303


May 16, 2006, 02:19 PM
My Grandpa has one of these laying around. I believe he used it back in Korea. Anyway, it looks as if it hasn't been cleaned...in eons. Is there a good chance that the barrel is ruined for good if it hasn't been cleaned in a while?

If you enjoyed reading about "Enfield 303" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!
May 16, 2006, 05:05 PM
Run a patch wet with copper solvent, let set a few minutes, run a brass brush that is 375 cal or so, through the bore a half dozen times. Dry patch, wet patch, dry patch and look see what it looks like in there. It may just be dirty. The reason I use a bigger brush is that it gets down in the grooves better. Then, if the bore is fairly clean, take the gun out and shoot it, then clean again. Sometimes crud gets too hard to remove by regular cleaning but shooting works........enjoy. What model Enfield?....chris3

May 16, 2006, 05:50 PM
Numrich also had Enfield barrels for pretty cheap a few months ago. Check them and see...they still might.


May 16, 2006, 06:17 PM
Even if, worst case scenario, the bore is rusty and pitted, it doesn't mean the barrel is ruined. As a surplus rifle collector, I have my share of rifles with pitted, rusty bores. Some shoot fine. They are just harder to clean. The main thing is, if it is pitted, don't try over cleaing it. You can't remove pits from the bore. Just get it 'reasonably' clean and keep it well oiled.

May 16, 2006, 08:09 PM
Thanks for the info. I will clean it next time I see him. As for what model it is, I have no clue. I have only this picture attached below. It isn't clear, but maybe some of you can tell what model it is.

May 16, 2006, 08:24 PM
It has been so sporterized it is hard to tell...probably a No 4...who knows what Mk from the picture.

Did your grandfather fight for England or Canada in Korea?

May 16, 2006, 08:56 PM
Yeah, that picture sucks. It's the only one I have of it though. He was in the Navy stationed on the USS Toledo I believe. He mentioned the rifle in the midst of the Korean War conversation, and so I assumed he used it then. Since he wasn't Canadian or British, I guess that was an erroneous assumption.

What is sporterized, and is it bad for the rifle in terms of performance?

John G
May 16, 2006, 09:04 PM
"Sporterized" only means the rifle has been altered from it's original military configuration to a sport configuration. Your Enfield's stock is shorter than the original one would have been, and the rear sight has apparently been removed. Also, it's probably been drilled and tapped to allow for a scope mount. It should not affect performance negatively, other than making it lighter.

Here's the Lee-Enfield #1 mkIII in it's original stock

And here's the #4

May 16, 2006, 09:09 PM
Cool scope. I'd love to know what that is.

Although not in original condition, it looks like a really fun rifle.

I'll put a bet on it being a No4 too.

May 16, 2006, 09:20 PM
I'd call it a sporterized NoIMkIII. Why? Because the barrel ends right there at the front sight, instead of protruding an inch or so in front of it for bayonet mounting like the No4Mk1. (Unless the barrel's been bobbed) Also, I don't see the rear sight receiver contour as found on the No4Mk1, it's considerably cleaner, like the NoIMkIII which had no rear sight on the reciever. The rear sight sleeve on a NoIMkIII barrel is easily sweated off, leaving one with a clean barrel contour for sporterizing.

May 16, 2006, 09:20 PM
I will find out what model it is and what brand the scope is next time I see him. Also, the stock is longer than in the picture, because that blue line is the back of the truck he is shooting next to, so it cuts off what you can see of the stock.

May 17, 2006, 12:40 AM
It be on the reciever so you easily be able to tell which it is. From the reciever I can see I think it may actually be a No4 but its really hard to tell.

May 17, 2006, 01:15 AM
I strongly suspect it is a No. 4. The foresight is too close to the muzzle to be an unmodified SMLE, so it's been trimmed one way or another. The receiver looks to have the straight walls of a No. 4, and the foreend has the exposed strap for the stock bolt to lock into (which could mean it has an Ishapore SMLE foreend, but I doubt it). The charger guide's been removed, so as far as being restorable to military specs, not practical.

The barrel could be rusted out, it could just be dirty. Plenty of horrifying-looking bores clean up great. If he used corrosive ammo and cleaned properly, any damage would be from all those years of neglect...

John G - your SMLE is missing its rear handguard! :eek:

John G
May 17, 2006, 02:36 AM
John G - your SMLE is missing its rear handguard!

Not mine, but good eye! Those images are Oleg originals. The man can snap a picture. :cool:

May 17, 2006, 07:06 AM
Look on the left side of the reciever, or on the barrel right after the reciever. The model number should be stamped somewhere in that vicinity.

Now if it's an Ishapore...look on the wrist of the stock (under where the bolt handle is when it's in battery) and it'll be stamped something along the lines of "RFI 7.62 YEAR" if it's a 2a or 2a1, or it'll be stamped No.1MkIII, or something similar.

If you cant find either of these, try taking a picture of the knox form (the top of the rifle, specifically the barrel directly in front of the reciever) and get it as clear as possible and post it here, as that's where you'll normally find the ownership proof marks.

May 17, 2006, 11:41 AM
so it cuts off what you can see of the stock.

He was talking about the forend not the butt.

Picture of a No 4, lifted from surplusrifle.com.

May 20, 2006, 05:51 PM
It is a No4 MK1 with a J.C. Higgins 4x scope.

May 21, 2006, 07:03 PM
I figured it would be No.4 Mk2 or at least a Mk.1/2.

If you enjoyed reading about "Enfield 303" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!