Lee-Enfield No. 4 Experts

Status
Not open for further replies.

Riomouse911

Member
Joined
Jun 5, 2013
Messages
11,872
Location
Ca.
My FFL had this really clean, all-matching serial numbers No. 4 Mk 2,in their shop the other day. All of the various itinerations of the Lee-Enfield WW I and II era mil surps I’ve seen or touched have a walnut type or reddish stain on the stock and a steel buttplate.

Is this No. 4 a refinished rifle with an add on brass buttplate?

70B9AFF5-5BE4-48F3-9ABB-373BEDC832C6.jpeg 5DF0A7F3-4CEE-4FD2-9B1C-20ED987BD7BD.jpeg E154539D-B268-4F65-87E2-3FF13CFAE310.jpeg 0EF25DA8-B6F8-4A58-9298-E6961366FD45.jpeg 8DE2D7B3-2897-4497-AD30-B482CDCF7978.jpeg D6D93C28-41A6-46E9-AF3D-ED0C64490B91.jpeg 9EAC9F93-E500-4ABE-A385-65358A14A24A.jpeg 862DC77A-E051-45F4-9746-65E4CE19F600.jpeg

Just wondering if this looks refinished, it’s as nice a 75-odd year old battle rifle as I’ve ever seen.

Stay safe.
 
Very very nice. Best I have sever seen.

They have both steel and brass buttplates available over at Liberty Tree Collectors for the No4's.
 
Everything looks correct for that vintage of rifle!

I got mine in Jan/Feb 1994- my first 4473 after just turning 18. It was unissued and still in the mummy wrap.

Edit to add: somebody probably did polish the butt plate- they usually have a duller patina.
 
My FFL had this really clean, all-matching serial numbers No. 4 Mk 2,in their shop the other day. All of the various itinerations of the Lee-Enfield WW I and II era mil surps I’ve seen or touched have a walnut type or reddish stain on the stock and a steel buttplate.

Is this No. 4 a refinished rifle with an add on brass buttplate?

View attachment 1027647 View attachment 1027648 View attachment 1027649 View attachment 1027650 View attachment 1027651 View attachment 1027652 View attachment 1027653 View attachment 1027654

Just wondering if this looks refinished, it’s as nice a 75-odd year old battle rifle as I’ve ever seen.

Stay safe.
No it's not refinished. The 55 in the serial number is the year of manufacture, 1955 (the last year I believe)

Wood is beech.
UF in serial number indicates it was made at royal ordinance factory Fazakerly.

It will be a good shooter and worth about $1800 NZD, or about $1200 USD, At least in New Zealand anyway.

They were sold still in the grease paper, and they can still be found that way too.
 
Cool, thanks guys. I knew THR would have the answers if a question was posted. :thumbup:

My 1943-vintage Savage lend-lease No. 4 looks like it saw some combat, with all the bluing loss and character marks that come with it. This one was so clean I thought at first it was a full restoration job.

Thanks again for all the responses :).

Stay safe.
 
One thing I just noticed is that your rifle has a milled-out slot on the right side of the muzzle, opposite the bayonet lug (on the left side). My No. 4's have lugs on both sides. I believe that was standard, including the Mk. 2's.

Look at your 4th picture, above. It looks like some strange machine work was done there.

Perhaps the Irish Contract rifles were set up for a different bayonet?
 
One thing I just noticed is that your rifle has a milled-out slot on the right side of the muzzle, opposite the bayonet lug (on the left side). My No. 4's have lugs on both sides. I believe that was standard, including the Mk. 2's.

Look at your 4th picture, above. It looks like some strange machine work was done there.

Perhaps the Irish Contract rifles were set up for a different bayonet?
That is how all No 4 muzzles are milled. The extra piece is the stop for the bayonet, to keep it from just rotating around and a round.

img_2949-jpg.jpg

Also, the lugs extend back to form the alignment blocks for the front sight:

-UbLtaYcNmyYzFzhafCyqZZ8NHNsx358Ic0AK3gHSWeVu_r1BhxlntK41zlZqjHBcBsN87UBzaFdn0RhE2sqmW2RRdxeB3nw.jpg

IMG_6240.jpg
 
That's one of the unissued "Irish Contract" rifles. Some collectors never take them out of the mummy wrap -- the unopened wrap adds considerable value.

Personally, I would rather have a North American (Savage or Long Branch) Mk. 1. The fit and finish on these is better than the British-made guns.

I have one of those unwrapped Irish Contract rifles. At the local gun store where I paid what I thought was a ridiculous amount of money for my unwrapped MK2, someone had unwrapped one of the rifles and left it on the rack. The store owner was furious! That rifle was beautiful. The mummy wrap on these rifles had been opened to allow importer stamping and verification of serial numbers.

One of my MK2's

eIQ497L.jpg

eCxz5r1.jpg

It is my opinion, owning two new Long Branch Mk1's, one Savage, and several Mk2's, is that the MK2's show better machining and fitting than the war time rifles. Of the WW2 era rifles, the Long Branch MK1's are the best, but chamber finish on mine are not as precise, along with some little details compared to the non war production MK2's. Considering a war deciding the life and death of civilizations was going on, the Canadians built very nice rifles, but they had to pay attention to arming the troops, NOW! I am sure that getting the things out the door was upper most in everyone minds. Post war click elevation rear sights are better for shooting.

This is one of the better Long Branch rear sights.

0PbUtfr.jpg

My Savage, the foreend fell off when the trigger guard was removed. It was very inaccurate in that condition , would not hold on a 8 X 11 inch sheet of paper at 100 yards. However, I bedded the action and center bedded the barrel, and the best group was two inches, but it really is a 4 MOA thing. Which is perfectly acceptable for a battle rifle, and for troops who may have had only 20 rounds of familiarization before going into combat!

L5E4b4W.jpg

The gun clubs last WW2 veteran, Sammy, had a total of 20 rounds of familiarization before landing on Iwo Jima. He had two ten round sessions at 200 yards, took the first carbine back to the armorer's to get the sights adjusted, and once his ten round string was done, they took that carbine away from him!. That also happened for the next 10 round familiarization. New carbine, got it zero's, and it was taken away. He was issued a unknown carbine on entering the invasion ship, and he told me, he had to sight the thing in while under fire!. He asked his buds to spot for him, and he knocked the rear sight with the butt of a knife, to center the point of impact!.

Sammy believed that if his Dad had not taught him how to shoot before the war, he would have been an occupant of a grave in a National Cemetery. He called the men with him "cannon fodder".

You probably know that the Savage rear sight had two settings: 300 yards and 600 yards. And that, in theory, adding a bayonet brought the zero down to 200 yards.

ej5lMv2.jpg

oeY86w7.jpg

I added a taller front sight to get a 100 yard zero and that is good enough for me.
 
Those are beautiful rifles. I've wanted one for some time. I kick myself for not buying one 15 years ago. A small sporting goods store had a half dozen or so marked around $450.00 each. Silly me, I thought I could get a better deal if I shopped around.
 
I shot a friend’s some years back, was amazed at how smooth the bolt action was, and how little the perceived recoil.

Great rifles, especially in the condition of the OP.
 
This is one of the better Long Branch rear sights.
I think the best of the regular issue No. 4 sights is the Singer micrometer sight. These were all British made, and, when found on North American rifles, were probably retrofitted.

Even though the Singer sight is micrometer-adjustable, it's adjustable for elevation only. (Windage is adjustable by drifting the front sight blade.)

There is also an elaborate Parker-Hale target sight (adjustable for both windage and elevation), that's a drop-in fit. It had limited issue.
My Savage, the forend fell off when the trigger guard was removed. ..... However, I bedded the action and center bedded the barrel,
There's a whole art to fitting the stocks on Enfield rifles. For the No.4, the forend is supposed to be tight around the receiver (the "draws" area) and about 2" in front of the receiver ring, and then the barrel should rest on about 2" of wood under the front band. The entire remaining length of the barrel, between those two points, is supposed to be free floated.
http://photos.imageevent.com/badgerdog/generalstorage/peterlaidlerpostsleeenfieldforums/Fitting a fore end correctly.pdf
 
I think the best of the regular issue No. 4 sights is the Singer micrometer sight. These were all British made, and, when found on North American rifles, were probably retrofitted.
No.

According to Skennerton, both Savage and Long Branch No 4s were initially fitted with the Mk 1 Rear Sight. And like the UK production, the Canadian post war production reverted to the Mk 1 Rear Sight.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top