wainfleet Posted 14 July , 2010 Share Posted 14 July , 2010 I got these .303 rounds, at least I presume that's what they are, at a car boot the other day. They look to have been reused, but at 40p each I didn't feel robbed. They seem to be Mark VI cases dated 1908, but are the bullet heads right for them? This is not my area so would be grateful for an ID from the ammunition specialists. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gunner Bailey Posted 14 July , 2010 Share Posted 14 July , 2010 You got a bargain. These bullets are for the 'Long Lee Enfield'. Well spotted. John Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TonyE Posted 14 July , 2010 Share Posted 14 July , 2010 Living up to my reputation for pedantry, may I make a small point regarding the date of these rounds. In 1908 these rounds would have been made for one of the early marks of the SMLE, before the introduction of the Mark VII ball round in 1910. Whilst the Territorial Force still had plenty of L-E Mark Is, the regular army had either newly made SMLE Mark I and I*, or Mark II conversions from older long rifles. Of course they could also be used in the long rifle as you say. The rounds in question were made by Greenwood & Batley of Leeds and the two Broad Arrows indicate that they have been accepted by Government inspectors. This feature was introduced for ammunition made by contractors in 1907 and continued until the end of 1913. ...and yes, they are the correct 215 grn bullet. Heads, heads, who said heads? Regards TonyE Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wainfleet Posted 14 July , 2010 Author Share Posted 14 July , 2010 Excellent stuff, thank you both very much. Tony, "pedantry" of this sort is most welcome! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TonyE Posted 14 July , 2010 Share Posted 14 July , 2010 I should have added that the Mark VI was introduced by List of Changes Para. 12411 of October 1904. Although succeeded by the Mark VII in 1910, production of the Mark VI continued at both Woolwich and contractors until at least 1916. Production in Australia did not change over to the Mark VII until February 1918 and India changed around the same time. Canada had produced both the Mark VI and Mark VII starting in 1915. The last military contract for Mark VI that I know was by Kynoch in the 1950s for the Rhodesian Territorial Forces. Regards TonyE Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
4thGordons Posted 14 July , 2010 Share Posted 14 July , 2010 I should have added that the Mark VI was introduced by List of Changes Para. 12411 of October 1904. Although succeeded by the Mark VII in 1910, production of the Mark VI continued at both Woolwich and contractors until at least 1916. Production in Australia did not change over to the Mark VII until February 1918 and India changed around the same time. Canada had produced both the Mark VI and Mark VII starting in 1915. The last military contract for Mark VI that I know was by Kynoch in the 1950s for the Rhodesian Territorial Forces. Regards TonyE Tony Does that mean that RTF still had Enfield's sighted for MkVI rounds in the 1950s? What on earth would those have been? Chris Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
4thGordons Posted 14 July , 2010 Share Posted 14 July , 2010 Living up to my reputation for pedantry, may I make a small point regarding the date of these rounds. In 1908 these rounds would have been made for one of the early marks of the SMLE, before the introduction of the Mark VII ball round in 1910. Whilst the Territorial Force still had plenty of L-E Mark Is, the regular army had either newly made SMLE Mark I and I*, or Mark II conversions from older long rifles. Of course they could also be used in the long rifle as you say. TonyE Or.... the earliest made MkIII rifles....... Chris Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TonyE Posted 14 July , 2010 Share Posted 14 July , 2010 Quite right, but nobody likes a smartypants, Christopher! ......Probably why I'm so popular. Cheers TonyE Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MikB Posted 14 July , 2010 Share Posted 14 July , 2010 Maybe I'm gonna be popular too... I would just comment that there's no sign of pressure in the primers - they're still domed rather than partially-flattened around the firing-pin indentation as they would be if fired live. Most likely the primers were fired in empty cases before reinserting the bullets, but there remains a far-outside possibility that these are misfired live rounds. Regards, MikB Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TonyE Posted 14 July , 2010 Share Posted 14 July , 2010 Tony Does that mean that RTF still had Enfield's sighted for MkVI rounds in the 1950s? What on earth would those have been? Chris I don't know, but the rounds were ordered by Southern Rhodesia, as it was then, and are headstamped "K57" at 12 o'c, "6" at 6 o'c and "T" and "F" at 9 and 3 o'c. I have searched through the Kynoch order book for any later orders but did not find any. There were a couple of orders for 215 grn soft point rounds from the Crown Agents for the colonies, but these appear to have been for game control. Regards TonyE 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