tinnerjohn Posted 3 August , 2014 Share Posted 3 August , 2014 This is my first post, but over the past few months I've spent quite a bit of time here google searching info on my rifle. I took a 1904 Sht. L.E in trade for some work and have been trying to find more info. This rifle is stamped with 1***, making it a Mark 3 (I think). It still has the volley sights, but the cutoff has been removed. The rear sight has no windage adjustment, is graduated to 2000 yds. The stacking and sling swivels are there (just need two more so I can stack it). The barrel is stamped HV under the leaf sight, so I assume it was tested for modern ammo. The left side has so many date stamps. its hard to separate them, but I can read 04, 05, 07 and I believe 40. Now to my questions: Was there a field manual for this rifle? The US had manuals for theirs, and if I could find one for this it would be very helpful. If not, can someone recommend a book I could get dealing with field-stripping, etc.? I'd like to find a bayonet, but the posts about the repops aren't promising. Any suggestions? Lastly for now, what is the hole in front of the magazine for? Thanks for any help or advice you can give. Don't give up the fight, we'll be "over there" to help in 3 years when we wake up and get off our bums. John Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Khaki Posted 3 August , 2014 Share Posted 3 August , 2014 Hello John You could try "British Enfield Rifles" Vol1,. Stratton, published by North Cape, very good book dealing with the No1, Mk1 and Mk 3 series, also covers bayonets and accessories with a lot of historical information and productions data. I have a number of these books and refer to them quite often. khaki Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
4thGordons Posted 3 August , 2014 Share Posted 3 August , 2014 (edited) I would second the suggestion that Skip Stratton's book sounds like it would cover what you need. In the mean-time -- this might give you some basic information: and a few pictures Pictures would be good! Does it have the original rear handguard with integral sight protectors or is has that been replaced with a standard upper handguard and separate (inletted) sight protectors? Does the bolt head have its original sliding charger guide?Is the nosepiece (foresight protector/bayonet boss) the original? Out of interest: does the rifle have a CR serial number prefix? Getting an original bayonet (P 1903) should not be a problem, not so many repro.s of those, The only place you would need to worry really is if looking for a hooked quillon P1907. There are repro standard 1907s but they are so terrible no one who can actually examine the bayonet is likely to be fooled and originals are not expensive (as such things go) Chris Edit: Is the hole in front of the magazine? If so what it is at hole IN/THROUGH or is the hole in the front of the magazine (ie in the magazine body itself) in which case it probably means it is an early body (perhaps original to the rifle) that has lost its stop-clip. Have a look on the rear "spine" of the magazine (where it clips into place) - it should be numbered indicating which variation of body type it is. Edited 3 August , 2014 by 4thGordons Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tinnerjohn Posted 4 August , 2014 Author Share Posted 4 August , 2014 Thanks for your help. I'm going to get the book ASAP. The hole I referred to is forward of the magazine and part of what I would call the trigger guard assembly. The handguard is removable (and still has its ears) and the sight protectors are inletted. SN is CR2942. Sliding charger guide is intact. I'll try to post some pictures.The bayonet and sling aren't a big issue, but it seems a battle rifle should have all its pieces! Another question is what the ER under the crown is? I found reference to GR (King George) and VR (Queen Victoria), but not ER. Is this Edward? Also, the butt disk is intact, but has no regimental markings. Is this common? Sorry for all the questions, but the info on the internet can be conflicting and most people around here are more familiar with '03 Springfields and M1 Garands. Thanks again. John Just found and purchased the book of EBay. When I think of the battles this rifle could of seen (but probably didn"t), I get chills holding it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Khaki Posted 4 August , 2014 Share Posted 4 August , 2014 Not too sure of what the hole is without seeing it, you may want to refer on line to a schematic drawing to get a better idea, it may be for a sling mount or staple or perhaps just something someone has done, regarding ER, yes that is for King Edward. The butt discs are often unstamped but you should not take too much notice of that as they often get replaced. regards khaki Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
4thGordons Posted 4 August , 2014 Share Posted 4 August , 2014 It sounds like you are describing the hole in the front of the trigger-guard where the "King" screw (front trigger guard screw) goes upwards into the bottom of the reciever. If this is missing do not fire the rifle until it is replaced. Yes ER is Edward VII (1901-1910) I think CR prefix rifles (and ER) were supplied to Ireland in the 1920s from British stores. I have a couple of examples of these rifles. They seem to have been sold as surplus on the US market in the 1960s by interarms (advertised as "shamrock rifles!"). Unfortunately lots of them got chopped up (sporterized) for "deer rifles" so a complete example is a nice find Chris Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tinnerjohn Posted 4 August , 2014 Author Share Posted 4 August , 2014 Thamks for your reply. The hole I referenced is the horizontal one between the King screw and magazine. I know what you mean about sporterizing. I have 7.7 Jap Ariska my Dad got me in the late 60's and he thought we needed to have it shortened, chop up the stock and bend the bolt. I wish it was still in one piece. But according to him (WW2 vet) and my uncle (Korea), the only military rifle ever made that was any good was the 03! Its nice to know there might be a connection to the Emerald Isle, my Great Grandparents came across the sea in the 1870's or 80's. As a side note, I'd like to thank everyone responsible for this forum. I've learned much from here that is overlooked or ignored in the US. But then our history books would have us believe we won WW 1, 2 and Korea singlehanded! I already knew better, but I wonder if other countries are the same. John Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Beerhunter Posted 4 August , 2014 Share Posted 4 August , 2014 You have a Short Lee-Enfield Mk.I that was later converted to Mk.III standard. (Hence I*** - rather than III.) The "correct" bayonet would be a 1907 Pattern. It is a a highly desirable rifle. The Crowned ER is Edwardus Rex - King Edward and refers to Edward the VII because the rifle was made during his reign. ("shamrock rifles"? another USA marketing ploy - like "Jungle Carbine".) The fitting between the front trigger guard screw (I have no idea where "king screw" comes from but it is not part of British Empire and Commonwealth nomenclature.) and the magazine is a third position for a sling swivel. The rifles were designed for use by both infantry and cavalry and the cavalry (and some rifle regiments) liked to mount their slings from the upper sling swivel and the mid sling swivel. (As a opposed to the normal infantry method of between the upper sling swivel and the lower sling swivel.) BTW I am afraid that that I have found that Stratton is often erroneous. The top author on Lee-Enfields (but still not infallible) is Skennerton. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
4thGordons Posted 4 August , 2014 Share Posted 4 August , 2014 Hi John OK -- that is for mounting an additional sling swivel so the rifle could be slung from forward of the magazine to the muzzle as had previously been the practice on long rifles such as the MLE/MLN and Martini (and earlier muzzle loaders like the Pattern 53). It was often used in WWI to attach a leather thong holding a canvas/webbing action cover and on later production rifles MkIII* and WWII No4 rifles it was replaced with a wire loop for that purpose. Chris Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tinnerjohn Posted 4 August , 2014 Author Share Posted 4 August , 2014 Thank you for the info. From my limited research I thought the hole was for the sling, wasn't sure. The internet is great but research can be annoying when you have to check several sites, then can't remember where you read what. John don't know why the last sentence is bold, must have hit the wrong key!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Beerhunter Posted 5 August , 2014 Share Posted 5 August , 2014 Just quick clarification, That mid mounting point is not for "an additional sling swivel" but rather for mounting the lower sling swivel mid-way. That is to say the rifle still only has two sling swivels not three. If you see any SMLEs with three sling swivels (which I have) then the extra one has been erroneously fitted after the rifle left service.) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
4thGordons Posted 5 August , 2014 Share Posted 5 August , 2014 Thanks for the correction. I should have been more careful in my expression. It is an additional mounting point for a sling swivel, not as you say for an additional swivel. The exception to this might be later No1 MkIII H or HT or No4(T) rifles, where three sling swivels might legitimately be found. Chris Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
5thBatt Posted 5 August , 2014 Share Posted 5 August , 2014 The 3 stars after the Mk1 means the rifle has been converted to fire MkVII ammo & has been fitted with a blade front sight & U notch rear sight as opposed to the original barleycorn & V notch, it has nothing to do with a Mk1 being upgraded to MkIII spec though some are. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Beerhunter Posted 6 August , 2014 Share Posted 6 August , 2014 The 3 stars after the Mk1 means the rifle has been converted to fire MkVII ammo & has been fitted with a blade front sight & U notch rear sight as opposed to the original barleycorn & V notch, it has nothing to do with a Mk1 being upgraded to MkIII spec though some are. Good point. Perhaps I should have said "converted with SOME Mk.III features" (That is to say the important ones - the sights.) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Welch Regiment Posted 6 August , 2014 Share Posted 6 August , 2014 The additional dates, 05, 07 etc are the dates of major upgrades of one sort or another. The early Mk 1 SMLEs were constantly in development from the accepance of the design in 1903 to the introdction the new Mk III in 1907. Even then various /Mk 1 types continued in production for commercial sale and various colonial forces until about 1912. 1903 models are almost never encountered, and 1904 was the first full year of production so as others have said, your receiver and possibly the bolt started off as a very early Sht LE indeed. Possibly one of the first 150,000 for the 17 million Lee Enfields eventually manufactured during the 20th cent. (Oh and just to make life even more complicated, some Long Lees were also converted to various Mk 1 specs.) I don't know what you intend to do with your rifle, but I can tell you that almost every original Mk 1 part is subtly different from it's Mk III equivalent and will require infinte patience to locate. Generally, it's best to accept these rifles as they are - the 'knife with three new blades and four new handles'! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Welch Regiment Posted 6 August , 2014 Share Posted 6 August , 2014 When you say hole in front of the magazine, do you mean on the magazine itself? Mk 1 and 1* mags had a sheet steel 'stop clip' riveted to the left face of the mag (the side opposite the bolt handle). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
5thBatt Posted 6 August , 2014 Share Posted 6 August , 2014 Is this (top left mag) the hole you are talking about ? If so its to help with assembly of the mag's right hand rotating feed lip. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tinnerjohn Posted 7 August , 2014 Author Share Posted 7 August , 2014 Thanks for all the replies. The hole was identified as an optional lower attaching point for a sling swivel. I believe I read somewhere on the internet mounted troops used this. My hopes are to pick up a box of ammo and crank some rounds through this after I've finished going over it. Theres just something about holding a piece of equipment that represents Great Britains military in the first half of the 20th century that can give me chills. All the date stamps make me think this one spent more time in the shop than in service! Just curious as to how common the retention of the volley sights was/is given the other modifications. John Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Beerhunter Posted 7 August , 2014 Share Posted 7 August , 2014 The hole was identified as an optional lower attaching point for a sling swivel. I believe I read somewhere on the internet mounted troops used this. And some "rifle" regiments. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Welch Regiment Posted 10 August , 2014 Share Posted 10 August , 2014 Oops, right-hand side of the mag ! I should learn to check the rifle before offering an opinion... 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