"Lee-Enfield" not "Enfield"

[daniel (australia)]

Pardon me for what may seem to be a rant but it seems to me that over the past couple of years or so there's emerged this sloppy habit of using "Enfield" to refer to Lee-Enfield rifles. I've seen it here and other sites, and quite frankly it sets my teeth on edge.

I say it is sloppy because among other things "Enfield rifle" can refer to a number of quite different firearms. For example the several variants of this one have commonly been referred to as Enfield rifles:

Then of course there's the Enfield rifle produced in large numbers from 1917 to 1919:


It of course was based on the Pattern 13, designed by Enfield's engineers and modified hastily to P14 specification when the Great War broke out. Both of these predecessors of the M17 have also been known as Enfields too - and with some justification.


Then of course there's more recent "Enfield rifles" like this one:


And lets not forget that other Enfield, the .38 revolver whose design owes so much to the designers at Webley.

As well, there's also several hyphenated Enfields, including the Snider-Enfield and the Martini-Enfield. These of course aren't referred to as "Enfields", so why refer to the Lee-Enfield that way?

As well, it is sloppy because these rifles weren't designated as "Enfields" - they were "Lee-Enfields", whether "Magazine Lee-Enfield", "Charger Loading Lee-Enfield" or "Short, Magazine, Lee Enfield", all in various numbers and marks, until the naming scheme was changed in 1926 and they became "Rifle No 1 Mk III*", "Rifle No 4 Mk 1" and so on.

The Lee-Enfield is, at its heart, based on James Lee's action. Indeed Lee rifles were produced for some years before the British adopted the Lee action in combination with, originally, the Metford Segmented Rifling design to make the Lee-Metford. When that rifling design proved unable to stand up to cordite the rifling was changed to a pattern developed by RSA Enfield, ironically also based on a Metford design.

That was all though, and Enfield doesn't deserve all the credit. In fact as well as being sloppy it seems, well, disrespectful to the original designer to ignore Lee's role by dropping his name in describing these rifles.

Please don't do it:banghead:

 

[DMK]

Folks refer to the M1903 as a Springfield too. The US Springfield armory also made a lot of fine issue weapons just like Enfield did.

The one that gets me is when folks refer to a Mosin-Nagant as a "Nagant". Mr. Nagant only contributed the feed mechanism. The rest of the rifle was Mr. Mosin's design. Not even to mention the fact that it's confusing because there's a Russian revolver with that name.

 

[Ash]

Hey DMK, ever look at a Berdan II? Mosin relied heavily on the Berdan II to create his rifle. Indeed, he really just added a bolt-head to the Berdan II, stuck a tube magazine in the butt-stock, and called it his rifle. That is simplifying things a bit, but not by a whole lot. Therefore, one can very safely argue that the Mosin-Nagant rifle is really nothing more than an evolved American rifle. Ironic, eh?

But you are right. Calling it a Nagant bugs me, too. It's a Mosin. A Nagant is a revolver.

And Lee-Enfield is the more correct term, but Enfield doesn't bug me as much as Nagant.

Ash

 

[daniel (australia)]

Folks refer to the M1903 as a Springfield too.

At least in that case the rifle was designed by the Springfield Armory's engineers (though there was that patent infringment business with Mauser...)as well as being put into production there. It was quite properly a Springfield rifle.

I agree with you about calling Mosin-Nagants "Nagants", though in fairness Leon Nagant's magazine mechanism was an important part of the design. The irony is that Nagant's rifle actually won the Russian selection trials, but Mosin's, with the Nagant magazine, was adopted for nationalism's sake.

 

[DMK]

The Lee-Enfield is, at its heart, based on James Lee's action.

It's ironic that you brought this up because I was just this weekend reading a American Rifleman article about James Paris Lee's early US Navy and Army rifles (the Remington and Sharps colaborations). They had a line diagram of the action and I was amazed at how much it looked like the SMLE No.1 and LE No.4 rifles.

 

[kartoffel]

Daniel, I feel your pain. As a collector of Mosin-Nagant rifles, I cringe every time someone calls them "Nagants"--especially if they pronounce the t on the end.

When I hear "Enfield", I think of a musket.
When I hear "Nagant", I think of a revolver.
When I hear "Short Magazine Lee-Enfield", I think "smelly"

 

[Limeyfellow]

It of course was based on the Pattern 13, designed by Enfield's engineers and modified hastily to P14 specification when the Great War broke out. Both of these predecessors of the M17 have also been known as Enfields too - and with some justification.

The Enfield part of the name is tied to the rifling design. British naming schemes for rifles use the name of the inventor who created the action and the second part after the place were the barrel action was designed, so any rifle with that same barrel rifling is in effect an Enfield.

The Pattern 13, 14 and M1917 doesn't have the Enfield rifling barrel design at all. Therefore it is incorrect to call it an Enfield.

 

[Big Az Al]

calling any rifle right

I get frustrated when I am in a shop and ask:

May I see the 1903A3 Springfield,

and I am told on no uncertain terms, "That is not! a Springfield it's a ........"

I know that Remington made a lot of 03a3's, but they are still Springfields, are they not? I would think I have the same reaction that someone that treasures the Mosin Nagant would have if they wanted to look at one and the same type of clerk behind the counter having seen the Remington name on one said I, "I don't know what you want to look at that's a Remington!"

And I was taught while it is a Springfield, so are U S Kraigs, or the Garands, even several muskets, and of coarse the venerable TRAP DOOR(ingeneral not trying to specify it's numerous verisoins!), preface that Springfield with the right model please!

So while I could walk into a room full of people of the firearms growd and say '03 and almost everybody in the will know I am talking about a 1903 Springfield, that same room full of people will at me like wich one if I just say, Springfield.

 

[DMK]

May I see the 1903A3 Springfield,

and I am told on no uncertain terms, "That is not! a Springfield it's a ........"

I know that Remington made a lot of 03a3's, but they are still Springfields, are they not?

Actually, it's not. It's a '1903' an 'M1903' or even more appropriately "Rifle, Model of 1903" regardless of whether Springfield, Rock Island, Smith Corona or Remington made it.

The Springfield moniker is a merely a slang nickname. That's why most would know what you mean. However, calling it a '1903' or "Model 1903" is even less confusing, Since 'Springfield' could be referring to a Trapdoor, M1 Garand, or even a new production M1A or 1911.

Then again, Colt made a Model 1903 handgun so you might get a classic little 32ACP handed to you.

 

[Gewehr98]

For our Ozzie friend...

My 1917 NoIMkIII SMLE was made at the Royal Small Arms Factory in Enfield Lock during WWI. It says so right on the buttstock socket.

If I cannot call it an Enfield, what can I call it?

 

[STAGE 2]

The beauty about owning several is that I get to call them anything I want.

Enfield Enfield Enfield.

 

[Vern Humphrey]

I get frustrated when I am in a shop and ask:

May I see the 1903A3 Springfield,

and I am told on no uncertain terms, "That is not! a Springfield it's a ........"

This reminds me of the Arkansaw boy who went to Harvard. He was wandering around campus and spotted an undergraduate. "'Scuse me. Can you tell me where the Registration Office is at?"

And the undergraduate said, "At Harvard, we never end a sentence with a preposition."

The Arkansawyer digested that and said, "'Scuse me. Can you tell me where the Registration Office is at, A**hole?"

 

[MechAg94]

This sort of historical trivia is what makes gun collecting so interesting.

I usually call it a 1903A3 and stop there. I will refer to the 1903 as 1903 Springfield much of the time.
The M1917 is either that or a P17 maybe. The funny part is when my Dad was shooting is 03A3 at the range and some guys walked by saying "Hey, that's a P17." They walked off before I could correct them.

 

[Cosmoline]

It's actually a term of honor. There are many other firearms with the name "Enfield" attached to them in some respect, but when you say "Enfield" you generally mean the famous smokeless war rifles. Not the less famous handguns or musket rifles.

 

[jame]

...then there's my Smith and Wesson Model 16 4" Harrington and Richardson .32 Magnum.

And once I had a Winchester 9422M XTR owned by Winchester-Western, or UMC or whoever.........BUT designed by Henry (?)

AND a Browning Hi-Power by Fabrique Nationale, also known as a P35....

But I do like my Enfield.

 

[Gordon Fink]

The Pattern 13, 14 and M1917 doesn’t have the Enfield rifling barrel design at all. Therefore it is incorrect to call it an Enfield.

But wasn’t it designed at RSAF Enfield?

~G. Fink

 

[Mk VII]

It's a minor irritant, but there are worse things to worry about.
Don't get me started on the P17 Police.

 

[daniel (australia)]

The Pattern 13, 14 and M1917 doesn't have the Enfield rifling barrel design at all. Therefore it is incorrect to call it an Enfield.

Nonsense. The British designation for the P '13 was "Rifle, Enfield, Calibre .276", Pattern of 1913"; the P '14 was "Rifle, Enfield, Calibre .303" Pattern of 1914" or sometimes "Enfield Pattern 1914 .303-inch Magazine Rifle" (see for example the Addendum to Musketry Regulations Part I 1909, dated 1st July 1916). Not only that, but these rifles did indeed use Enfield-pattern riflling, as well as being developed as a complete rifle in-house at RSAF Enfield.

The "US Rifle Calibre .30 Model of 1917" (to give it its full name) also used Enfield-pattern rifling, though of slightly lesser bore and groove dimensions to suit the .30-06 (and of course the action was also modified to suit this cartridge)

 

[daniel (australia)]

My 1917 NoIMkIII SMLE was made at the Royal Small Arms Factory in Enfield Lock during WWI. It says so right on the buttstock socket.

If I cannot call it an Enfield, what can I call it?

Why not call it a Lee-Enfield No. 1 Mk III? It is a precise enough term for that model and avoids confusion. After all the same model was made at many other factories, and if we look at all the locations Lee-Enfield rifles were made we'd have a plethora of names - LSAs, Shirleys, Ishapores, Lithgows, the later Maltbys, Fazakerleys, Long Branches and Chicopee Falls rifles, the old Sparkbrooks, etc etc. Who'd know what you were talking about?

In any case, doesn't your rifle actually have "Sht L.E No. 1 Mk III" on the butt socket?

BTW do you always leave your rifle cocked?

 

[Gewehr98]

Yup.

If the striker spring hasn't given out after nearly 100 years, I seriously doubt it's gonna have problems for the remaining time before I take my dirt nap. After that, it's not my problem.

Most of my 200+ firearms are stored uncocked. For the photo shoots, I'm not too worried.

 

[hank327]

Gewehr98, that is one magnificent "smelly" you have there. I'd love to have one like it. You don't often see them in that condition any more.

 

[Spiggy]

So what do I call this thing? I've been refering to it as "the savage"



It's an Enfield, but I call mine a "the not-a-webley"

 

[daniel (australia)]

I eject a spent shell,

a tang of brass, a seed that will not grow

except in solitude. My Lee Enfield goes home

slung athwart my shoulder, heavy as talent.

Neither a musket, the weapon of masses by rank,

nor a machine-gun, guardian of statistics,

it points at a country where it is roughly at home

in obsolescence.

......

Bayonet-lug to butt plate,

impassive as the true touchstone, you gleam, old rifle,

tall as my hip. I almost followed you once.

I have new masters now, though. They are rewriting the world...

From "SMLE", by Les Murray

 

[MJ]

Who cares?

 

[DMK]

What exactly is Enfield-pattern rifling?