stephen p nunn Posted 26 March , 2011 Share Posted 26 March , 2011 Just had a bit of a shock tonight. A rich mate of mine (who needs to remain nameless!) has just given me an SMLE!!! He knows how interested I am in the Great War and knew that I had a 1907 pattern bayonet (with a 1916 issue date) but wanted an SMLE to go with it. Anyway I have been searching for a decent de-activated version but he got there before me!. So I am looking for some kind experts to tell me about this or point me in the right direction if you don't mind. This is what I can see on it so far: G.R. B.S.A.Co. 1918 SHT.L.E. III* and elsewhere: I 11091 There is no brass disc but carved into one side is: FR and on the other side: BO X I am particularlly interested in these latter marks so that I might identify a regiment? Thanks for all your help. Sorry if this post is bit basic but I am still learning about the SMLE and, quite frankly, am a bit stunned by receiving this fantastic gift (complete with certificate of de-activation which reads "Rifle, Enfield. .303" x 2.75" Barrel length 24" Thanks all. SPN Maldon Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
depaor01 Posted 26 March , 2011 Share Posted 26 March , 2011 Well Done Maldon and congratulations on your new baby... I'm no expert (there should be one along shortly ) but I posted a similar query to yours some time ago about my .22 version and I was advised to gently prise off upwards (carefully please!) the wooden hand guard in front of the bolt and behind the sight and examine the marks on the barrel proper which is revealed when you remove it. Enjoy. Dave Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
4thGordons Posted 26 March , 2011 Share Posted 26 March , 2011 (edited) This might help get you started: The markings on the right of the wrist indicate it is a 1918 made SMLE MkIII* produced by Brimingham Small Arms (who made SMLEs up until 1944) the MkIII* was a wartime production variant with several simplifications (no magazine cut-off, non windage adjustable rear sights etc) the standard infantry rifle of the British Army after 1916. I 11091 is probably the serial number - I'll check in a moment - you can have a look at the link above for other locations The FR probably indicates a Factory Rebuild/Refinish - and may indicate INDIAN usage - as in Britian it was usually stamped FTR (Factory Thorough Refinish). Is there a large transverse screw through the forend? As Dave mentioned, under the upper handguard you will probably find lots of stamps - that may give more clue to its history Pictures?? BO X has me puzzled for the moment! I do not think it likely that this is a unit mark as it was not usual British practice to mark the wood in this fashion. Cheers Chris Edited 26 March , 2011 by 4thGordons Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tinhat47 Posted 26 March , 2011 Share Posted 26 March , 2011 Very nice! Yours is not far off from mine, a 1918 BSA Mk. III* with number "I 9380" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
4thGordons Posted 27 March , 2011 Share Posted 27 March , 2011 A little bit more information: BSA Co produced approximately 345,732 MkIII* rifles in 1918, and about 1.2 million MkIII/III* during the entire war (14-18) (Skennerton/Stratton) The changeover to MkIII* happened in late 1915 - between serial numbers x81971 and y40723 (Stratton- observed data) BSA used H, I , J, K as serial number prefixes in 1918 (L was used for all interwar production)(Stratton - observed data) Chris Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stephen p nunn Posted 27 March , 2011 Author Share Posted 27 March , 2011 Thank you very much for these responses so far. I feel like I am beginning to build up a picture about its production. Am now very keen to fing out about its service by way of those initials on the stock? Any help in that respect please pals? SPN Maldon Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stephen p nunn Posted 27 March , 2011 Author Share Posted 27 March , 2011 Just been looking at my SMLE. The bayonet seems a very tight fit and doesn't quite click into place. Is that because of age do you think or are there differences in the fitting - given the rifle is 1918 and the bayonet 1916? Also noticed the following on the muzzle: V 54300 Regards. SPN Maldon Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TonyE Posted 27 March , 2011 Share Posted 27 March , 2011 It is not unusual to find a bayonet and rifle combination that do not fit. One of my P.'07 bayonets will just not seat quite home on my SMLE yet fits a friend's SMLE perfectly. Another of my bayonets will fit both rifles happily. I have seen a WWI photograph of a soldier sitting with a pile of rifles on one side and a crate of bayonets in front of him matching those that fitted. With regards to the markings on your rifle, it seems that yours is a rebuild judging by the different serial numbers, including the one you have just noticed on the nosecap. I agree with Chris that this may be an Indian Factory Repair as it was not normal British practice to stamp the woodwork like that. Are there any stamps such as "RFI" or similar on the left hand side of the wrist? Does it have the so called "Ishapore" woodscrew through the forward woodwork? As for the "BO X" stamp, I do not know what it is, but am confident it is not a British unit mark. One possibility is that "BO A" was the unit mark of the Bombay Volunteer Artillery and this could be a poor stamping. An outside chance, but the only thing I can think of. Regards TonyE Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stephen p nunn Posted 27 March , 2011 Author Share Posted 27 March , 2011 It is not unusual to find a bayonet and rifle combination that do not fit. One of my P.'07 bayonets will just not seat quite home on my SMLE yet fits a friend's SMLE perfectly. Another of my bayonets will fit both rifles happily. I have seen a WWI photograph of a soldier sitting with a pile of rifles on one side and a crate of bayonets in front of him matching those that fitted. With regards to the markings on your rifle, it seems that yours is a rebuild judging by the different serial numbers, including the one you have just noticed on the nosecap. I agree with Chris that this may be an Indian Factory Repair as it was not normal British practice to stamp the woodwork like that. Are there any stamps such as "RFI" or similar on the left hand side of the wrist? Does it have the so called "Ishapore" woodscrew through the forward woodwork? As for the "BO X" stamp, I do not know what it is, but am confident it is not a British unit mark. One possibility is that "BO A" was the unit mark of the Bombay Volunteer Artillery and this could be a poor stamping. An outside chance, but the only thing I can think of. Regards TonyE Thanks Tony. There is a screw countersunk on the underside underneath the sight area. That "X" or is it and "A" seems to have a "1" one side of it and a "3" or "5" the other. I can't see any "RFI" type markings on the lefy side of the "wrist" but perhaps I am not looking in the right place? Many thanks Tony. SPN Maldon Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shippingsteel Posted 27 March , 2011 Share Posted 27 March , 2011 That "X" or is it and "A" seems to have a "1" one side of it and a "3" or "5" the other. From the description I am thinking the mystery marking may be an Indian inspection mark, and possibly Ishapore in particular, eg. I^S The partial X may indeed be the Indian broad arrow and the possible numerals be the letters I and S. Hard to be sure without clear photos. Cheers, S>S Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stephen p nunn Posted 27 March , 2011 Author Share Posted 27 March , 2011 From the description I am thinking the mystery marking may be an Indian inspection mark, and possibly Ishapore in particular. The partial X may indeed be the Indian broad arrow and the possible numerals be the letters I and S. Hard to be sure without clear photos. Cheers, S>S That's great. Thank you very much. SPN Maldon Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
4thGordons Posted 27 March , 2011 Share Posted 27 March , 2011 (edited) I think S>S is probably correct - I can post pictures of this mark if it would be useful - there are a number of different inspection/armoury marks used by the Indians in this location as far as I know no-one has really catalogued them definitively. The "Ishapore screw" through the forend was used to provide additional stiffening and became almost universal on rifles in Indian service post WWII. Does the forend also have a metal strap around the back? (This would be visible as a small metal plate just forward of the butt-socket - where the GR/BSA/1918/ShtLE is stamped. If so this would indicate a replacement forend) Are the rear sight protector ears symetrical or is one side (the right) off set? As the rifle is mismatched in terms of serial numbers - it would not change much, nor be difficult or expensive, to replace the nose-cap with another that fits your bayonet better. [the alternative is to keep buying bayonets until you get one that fits - which sounds like a good excuse to me right S>S>? ) The nosecaps are available unissued(and unnumbered for about $25.00 here, used and numbered for a bit less) Did you prise the rear handguard off (held in place by two spring clips - just be careful of the wooden fingers either side of the rear sight as they are fragile) and look at the stampings underneath as Dave suggested? This could give you some idea of when or if the barrel was replaced. Under here you will typically find proof and inspection marks, another serial, sometimes some interesing armourers marks or production information and maybe a barrel date (although if Ishapore rebarreled it - the did not usually date their barrels) Chris EDIT: Here is one of the most common Indian marks: Here is what I meant by the forend back-strap (this is a pretty ugly one!) Here is the rear-sight protector offset. This was the original design with lightening cuts in it, on later examples these circle/oval machinings were omitted and later still India produced a simplified flat symmetrical design. The offset was to allow access to the windage adjustment on the rear sight - which became unnecessary when the this was no longer possible. Edited 27 March , 2011 by 4thGordons Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stephen p nunn Posted 27 March , 2011 Author Share Posted 27 March , 2011 Thanks Chris. I just don't think this is matching up to the description now. Where is that screw supposed to be because my one is right under the sight. There is no metal band but I have now noticed the following underneath the end between the two forward strap fixings: SLAZ 46 L (broad arrow) 2 E 34 Regards SPN Maldon Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
4thGordons Posted 27 March , 2011 Share Posted 27 March , 2011 The screw runs transversely through the forend (countersunk head usually on the left) and is, as you say, positioned under the rear sight. I did not picture the ishapore screw above. There is a picture in the guide I linked to at the top. The markings (Slaz 46) indicate it is an AUSTRALIAN fore-end produced by Slazenger (as in tennis and squash raquets) in 1946. This combination of bits is not uncommon on deactivated rifles. Chris Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stephen p nunn Posted 27 March , 2011 Author Share Posted 27 March , 2011 The screw runs transversely through the forend (countersunk head usually on the left) and is, as you say, positioned under the rear sight. I did not picture the ishapore screw above. There is a picture in the guide I linked to at the top. The markings (Slaz 46) indicate it is an AUSTRALIAN fore-end produced by Slazenger (as in tennis and squash raquets) in 1946. This combination of bits is not uncommon on deactivated rifles. Chris Thanks Chris. Quite a story of parts in one rifle! My mate has just given me another little treat to go with it all - an original SMLE musketry handbook of c.1913. Thanks for all you help today - really kind of you. I can't believe I have my own example. Just put a clip of 5 rounds DP through it in the garden. You suddenly realise the horrors of it all with hot rounds ejecting out towards other soldiers standing near you and cases and clips on the ground all around. SPN Maldon Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Andrew Upton Posted 28 March , 2011 Share Posted 28 March , 2011 Just put a clip of 5 rounds DP through it in the garden. You suddenly realise the horrors of it all with hot rounds ejecting out towards other soldiers standing near you and cases and clips on the ground all around. Maldon, if it's a deactivated rifle and you're able to put rounds through it something is seriously wrong! The usual deactivation process includes a bar being put across the breech so rounds cannot be chambered and the face of the bolt being ground flat so that rounds cannot be gripped. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
4thGordons Posted 28 March , 2011 Share Posted 28 March , 2011 Maldon, if it's a deactivated rifle and you're able to put rounds through it something is seriously wrong! The usual deactivation process includes a bar being put across the breech so rounds cannot be chambered and the face of the bolt being ground flat so that rounds cannot be gripped. Andrew, while I cannot comment on the current deactivating standards in the UK - the SMLE bolt face is always flat! Perhaps something is done to the extractor? Chris Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
auchonvillerssomme Posted 28 March , 2011 Share Posted 28 March , 2011 If it has a deactivation certificate there should be no problem surely the older deactivations allowed the chambering of a round. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
herbie4798 Posted 28 March , 2011 Share Posted 28 March , 2011 Nearly all weapons deacivated pre 1995 have fully moving parts, Therefore weapon can be cocked, Stripped Dry fired etc. Most weapons after 1995 have very limited moving parts. I think Maldon was referring to the "DP" Drill practice rounds which can chamber and be ejected without the fear of going off! Just my pennys worth Cheers James Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TonyE Posted 28 March , 2011 Share Posted 28 March , 2011 I think Andrew's concern was that the rifle could chamber any round, not the type of round, since post 1995 de-acts should have the chamber blocked. As you say though, pre-1995 weapons had functioning actions. On a minor point of pedantry, the correct terminology is "Drill rounds", not "DP" rounds. "DP" was normally used for weapons, often fully functional, that had been sentenced for drill purposes only. Regards TonyE Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Garron Posted 28 March , 2011 Share Posted 28 March , 2011 Andrew, the bolt faces on post '95 are ground to a 45 degree angle with the firing pin cut or removed. I don't know much about pre '95 de-acts so cant comment on them. Gaz Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shippingsteel Posted 28 March , 2011 Share Posted 28 March , 2011 On a minor point of pedantry, the correct terminology is "Drill rounds", not "DP" rounds. Regards TonyE Aww Come ON TonyE, give the lads a break.!! I think you must have been spending far too much time cloistered up doin' that dang Reserchin' agin .... Do you get the "you need to get out more" line MUCH.? Cheers, S>S Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TonyE Posted 28 March , 2011 Share Posted 28 March , 2011 Read the post dear boy! I did say it was a minor point and that it was pedantic. However, I maintain my point. If you are going to give something a name, give it the correct name. You are quick enough to point out th ricassos and chapes of your pointy things! Cheers TonyE Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
auchonvillerssomme Posted 28 March , 2011 Share Posted 28 March , 2011 I will stick up for Tony on this, it isn't being pedantic it is the correct terminology and part of the extended knowledge base. Much better to be corrected here than by some wannabe wearing full combats (neatly pressed for the occassion) while stood in a crowd at a table at a militaria fair. Mick Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TonyE Posted 28 March , 2011 Share Posted 28 March , 2011 Thank you , Mick. ....but I stil think you have been peeking in my wardrobe! Regards Tony 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