coppertales Posted 30 November , 2009 Share Posted 30 November , 2009 I scored a nice 1917 dated Australian Lithgow Enfield today at the gun show in Dallas, TX. All the metal numbers match and the bore cleaned up real nice. It was just dirty. I can't wait to hit the range next weekend to try it out. I will post a pic as soon as I figure out how to reduce the size of the photo....I never thought I would come across a Great War dated Australian Enfield.......chris3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Rumiton Posted 30 November , 2009 Share Posted 30 November , 2009 I scored a nice 1917 dated Australian Lithgow Enfield today at the gun show in Dallas, TX. All the metal numbers match and the bore cleaned up real nice. It was just dirty. I can't wait to hit the range next weekend to try it out. I will post a pic as soon as I figure out how to reduce the size of the photo....I never thought I would come across a Great War dated Australian Enfield.......chris3 They are not that rare over here (in Australia.) But yours must have a pretty interesting history. How is the timber? Usually they are made a bit rough compared with the Brit-made Enfields and BSAs. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Anzac16 Posted 30 November , 2009 Share Posted 30 November , 2009 They are not that rare over here (in Australia.) But yours must have a pretty interesting history. How is the timber? Usually they are made a bit rough compared with the Brit-made Enfields and BSAs. Wow congrats with your Lee, its a little dream of mine to get a Australian Lee Enfield from WW1 i owen a Canaidian Lee Enfield from 1916 but a Australian Lee!!!!!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
coppertales Posted 30 November , 2009 Author Share Posted 30 November , 2009 The wood is very nice on this rifle. I am very happy with it and can't wait to try it out at the range this coming weekend. Now, for that Canadian Great War rifle.....chris3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Anzac16 Posted 30 November , 2009 Share Posted 30 November , 2009 Next weekend i am going to the range again. The Lee Enfield is a lovely gun to shoot! Have fun on the range and post some photo of your rifle Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
4thGordons Posted 1 December , 2009 Share Posted 1 December , 2009 (edited) Is the rifle a MkIII or a MkIII*? It "should" be a MkIII (milled for the cutoff which may or may not be installed) as IIRC Lithgow did not switch production until 1918. Estimate of MkIII/III* production at Lithgow for 1913-18 is about 112, 454 (cf Skennerton / Stratton) so Lithgow WWI dated rifles are comparatively rarer than other makers in the same time period. They appear with some frequency but an unaltered/non FTR one with all original parts would be quite a nice find. There are lots and lots of WWII dated Lithgow SMLEs on the US market. Many of the WWI rifles were FTR'd and rebarrelled during WWII (is yours the original barrel?) {edit} something else just ocurred to me - many of the WWII and later refinishes had a distinctive greenish-grey "phosphate" type finish applied to all the metal parts - 1917/18 produced rifles would originally have had blued metal parts as with the other manufacturers {edit} My 1917 Lithgow was my first SMLE - and although it is missing part of the upper handguard I have left it as is in comemmoration of the start of my addiction! Mine is also marked to the 2nd Military District. Chris Edited 1 December , 2009 by 4thGordons Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
coppertales Posted 1 December , 2009 Author Share Posted 1 December , 2009 Greetings....My rifle is a Mk III. It has the cutoff slot and, I just happened to have a cutoff and screw which I installed last night. I beleive the barrel is the original but I will have to check. I picked up a bottle of Sweets last night and gave the bore a good scrubbing and the bore cleaned up very nice. This rifle has not been refinished in phosphate. It has very thin worn bluing on the exposed metal parts. I will have to pull the wood and look underneath to see what is there. I did not look at that last night when I installed the cutoff. I don't see an FTR mark anywhere but there is a 5/55 stamped on the right side of the butt stock. I will look again tonight and double check your comments to see what is actually there. I tried to post a photo last night but the internet was so slow I gave up. Must be all the holiday shoppers slowing things down. It has been a very good month with the two P14s and the Lithgow added to the collection....chris3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
coppertales Posted 2 December , 2009 Author Share Posted 2 December , 2009 The top rifle is a 1916 Remington P14, the second rifle is a 1917 Eddystone P14, and the bottom rifle is a 1917 Lithgow...chris3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
4thGordons Posted 2 December , 2009 Share Posted 2 December , 2009 The top rifle is a 1916 Remington P14, the second rifle is a 1917 Eddystone P14, and the bottom rifle is a 1917 Lithgow...chris3 SMLE Looks good! (others too!) Is it my eyes/the angle of the picture? but....- it looks like the rear sight protector might be on backwards? The offset (if one exists) should be on the right (to allow access to the windage adjustable rear sight when fitted), rear edge vertical - front edge sloping. Is the front sight protector drilled for a piling swivel - I can't see? Furniture looks to be in great shape - any markngs on it apart from 5/55 stamp? Chris Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
findabetterole Posted 2 December , 2009 Share Posted 2 December , 2009 Here's my beauties! This is just to illustrate that there are some nice Aussie SMLE's out there.. just waiting for a good home! Seph Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
findabetterole Posted 2 December , 2009 Share Posted 2 December , 2009 ...Chris3.... Hope you don't mind.. I've played around with the exposure button. Now we can see your lovellies! Seph Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
coppertales Posted 2 December , 2009 Author Share Posted 2 December , 2009 You are right, the rear sight protector is on backwards. I should have seen that. I will pull the handguard and fix that. I can then check to see if the barrel is original or a replacement. It might be a replacement because the rifling is so good. Thanks for cleaning up the photo. I am not too good with that. The nosecap does have the hole for a stacking swivel. Too bad my rear sight is not windage adjustable. The serial number is 68xxx. I will get to try it out Sunday when I go to the range. I might try to post a "before" photo of the two P14s. They sure were rough but at the price I paid I could not turn them down, 250 bucks for the both. I have 470 bucks in them now...chris3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
4thGordons Posted 2 December , 2009 Share Posted 2 December , 2009 You are right, the rear sight protector is on backwards. I should have seen that. I will pull the handguard and fix that. I can then check to see if the barrel is original or a replacement. It might be a replacement because the rifling is so good. Actually you will have to completely remove the action from the fore-end to do this as the sight-protector is under the barrel. (so essentially everything apart from the butt has to come off! ) Usually the barrel will be dated somewhere on the left side (but sometimes underside, so when you have it all to bits have a look) in the form "apostrophe / year" like P1907 bayonets (so '18 is 1918 and '55 is 1955). One other thing you might check for while you have it in bits is whether or not you have the metal insert ("recoil block") in the end of the forend. The only reason I mention this is that if it is later furniture and was installed in the civillian market (by a previous owner rather than at Lithgow) - they are sometimes omitted (replacement stock sets do not always come with them installed) and the absence of these can lead to cracking of the forend when the rifle is fired - and it would be a shame to damage it. I would like to see the before shot of the p14s. If you restocked them both for the price you quoted you did very well! Chris Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
coppertales Posted 2 December , 2009 Author Share Posted 2 December , 2009 Thanks for the tips. If I recall, there are two brass rivets on either side of the rear of the lower handguard. I will check when I pull the stock to fix the sight protector. I have had some of these rifles for 10 years or so, so I know the ins and outs of them. I did not see a date on the bottom of the barrel when I installed the mag cutoff. I will check the top of the barrel to see if there is a date when I remove the rear handguard. I only had to restock the Remington P14. The Eddystone still had it's original stock which is serial numbered to the receiver. It had a small crack near the muzzle which was an easy fix. The handguards and lower bands were missing on both rifles along with the triggerguard and mag well and floorplate. I got some of the parts from a local gun parts guy and the rest from Numrich. The complete stock I got at the next gun show for 100 bucks. Talk about luck. It has the volley sight plate. I am very pleased how these rifles turned out. The bore on the Eddystone is perfect and excellent on the Remington. The Remington is the more accurate shooter, though not by much......chris3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
David B Posted 2 December , 2009 Share Posted 2 December , 2009 There was an Aussie Lee offered on another forum last week for 290 bucks,(equiv to about 265 US or 160 GBP) in working condition. Didn't take too long to go. No, it wasn't me. David Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
coppertales Posted 3 December , 2009 Author Share Posted 3 December , 2009 Here is the before photo of the P14s. The Lithgow has a replacement barrel dated 8/44.. I don't know what happened to the photo. I will check when I get home. I can't access photobucket from work. To answer an above question, the forstock has two rivets at the rear like the rifle posted by machodr. I assume this means the metal inserts are installed. I will check that also. The barrel is marked 8/44 along with the receiver serial number so it is a replacement barrel. That is why the bore looks rather new. chris3 The photo is there now. My company computer must not allow me to see the photo but I can here at home.....chris3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
coppertales Posted 5 December , 2009 Author Share Posted 5 December , 2009 I pulled the forestock off and corrected the rear sight protector. I also noted the metal reinforcement on the end of the stock. In addition, when I reassembled the rifle and picked it up, I felt a rattle in the buttstock. I looked in the trapdoor and the brass oiler was in there. It had must have been stuck as I did not feel that before and when I looked for the cleaning rope, I failed to notice the oil bottle. I can't make out the maker's mark because the bottom of the oiler was pretty beat up from banging against the stock bolt. It is off to the range in the morning to try it out........chris3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
philtaylor Posted 5 December , 2009 Share Posted 5 December , 2009 The only correct sling configuration appears to be lower example. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
coppertales Posted 7 December , 2009 Author Share Posted 7 December , 2009 Yeah, I know about the slings. Have you priced the proper leather sling lately. My 1917 has an original No-Buckle sling. I don't know if they are proper for a P14. Shot the Austrailian today. It shoots nice and has a nice tight chamber. No headspace problems. Now, on to the next search to fill that empty slot in the collection.....Thanks, guys, for all your input......chris3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
4thGordons Posted 7 December , 2009 Share Posted 7 December , 2009 Chris3, The pattern 08 web sling is correct for the SMLE and p14, the Pattern 14 leather equipment sling and the earlier leather sling from the long enfield are alternative standards. No Buckl slings were not used by the British in the great war (although IIRC they may have been on Thompsons in WWII) I think perhaps what Phil1964 is somewhat obliquely referring to, is not the type of sling but the manner in which the slings are attached. The regulation manner of attaching them is with the wire "claws" facing outwards (and short end on the inside) on both ends (like on Seph's rifles, pictured above) On your P14s the muzzle end of the sling is attached "claws" in, formally they should be unhooked and passed through the swivel from the front so they mirror the attachment at the butt end, if such things are of concern to you. Chris Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
coppertales Posted 7 December , 2009 Author Share Posted 7 December , 2009 Thanks for the sling info. I believe I was on my second martini when I put the slings on. I was never sure which way they went anyway. I scored a P14 bayonet off ebay last night. Only one more to go.....chris3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Borden Battery Posted 12 October , 2010 Share Posted 12 October , 2010 Here are some websites related to the action of the Lee Enfield rifle. Borden Battery Lee Enfield 1915 Lithgow SMLE Rifle - YouTube Video A closer look at my Lithgow-built Lee Enfield No1 Mike SMLE. It retains the original features, including volley sights and a magazine cutoff. It was army rebarreled in 1935 with a heavy barrel for marksman use. An 8 minute video with details on the rifle. [CEF Study Group - Oct 2010] Lee-Enfield 1917 SMLE Shoot - YouTube Video 1917 BSA Lee-Enfield No1 MkIII* has ten rounds put through it [CEF Study Group - Oct 2010] http://www.youtube.com/watch#!v=tfulvd2EwVw&feature=related Lee Enfield SMLE Rifle - YouTube Video The Lee-Enfield was, in various marks and models, the British Army's standard bolt-action, magazine-fed, repeating rifle for over 60 years from (officially) 1895[3] until 1957,[4] although it remained in British service well into the early 1960s and is still found in service in the armed forces of some Commonwealth nations.[5] In its many versions, it was the standard army service rifle for the first half of the 20th century, and was adopted by Britain's colonies and Commonwealth allies, including India, Australia, New Zealand, and Canada. [CEF Study Group - Oct 2010] http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=p5_x1cpfjwY&p=2D99367D1763700A&playnext=1&index=6 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now