5thBatt Posted 7 December , 2017 Share Posted 7 December , 2017 Well i finally got a NZ MkIII in .303 to go with one of my 1910 NZ P1907s, all ready have one in .22 so suppose i need to find another Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
4thGordons Posted 7 December , 2017 Share Posted 7 December , 2017 Super nice example as always! Congrats. Decent (affordable) examples appear to have been thin on the ground in my neighbourhood over the last 6 months. Chris Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
trajan Posted 8 December , 2017 Share Posted 8 December , 2017 Very nice set up! Is it a shooter as well? And those bayonets are - choice specimens! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
5thBatt Posted 8 December , 2017 Author Share Posted 8 December , 2017 Other than a renumbered bolt & a unreadable forend s/n she is original matching numbers with a good bore, i will be shooting it after a check over Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
17107BM Posted 8 December , 2017 Share Posted 8 December , 2017 15 hours ago, 5thBatt said: Other than a renumbered bolt & a unreadable forend s/n she is original matching numbers with a good bore, i will be shooting it after a check over May I freely admit to a tinge of jealousy Enjoy Sir , which I'm sure you will!! Cheers Gary. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
5thBatt Posted 9 December , 2017 Author Share Posted 9 December , 2017 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
free1954 Posted 9 December , 2017 Share Posted 9 December , 2017 nice. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
4thGordons Posted 9 December , 2017 Share Posted 9 December , 2017 5thBatt, Did NZ use any MkI (MkI*** etc) ShtLEs? If so that would look like a good partner for your remaining lonely hookie. I have a NZ marked MLE and Martini Enf. but don't recall seeing ShtLE MkI with NZ marks. Chris Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
5thBatt Posted 9 December , 2017 Author Share Posted 9 December , 2017 (edited) 4 hours ago, 4thGordons said: 5thBatt, Did NZ use any MkI (MkI*** etc) ShtLEs? If so that would look like a good partner for your remaining lonely hookie. I have a NZ marked MLE and Martini Enf. but don't recall seeing ShtLE MkI with NZ marks. Chris Yep, plenty of NZ marked Mk1s & P1903s in NZ, the only markings on the P1903s is the number on the cross guard, just like the early P1907s Edited 9 December , 2017 by 5thBatt Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shippingsteel Posted 9 December , 2017 Share Posted 9 December , 2017 A beautiful collection of items (of course) and also very interesting to see all the accessories displayed. Well done.! Seeing those hookies attached makes me think it must have been a pain shooting over the parapet with bayonets fixed.! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shippingsteel Posted 14 December , 2017 Share Posted 14 December , 2017 I thought I would add these photos here for reference. In case someone wants to see what a NZ marked bayonet looks like.! These N^Z stamped P1907's are quite scarce and this one I found came with its original (very dark) brown leather scabbard. There's a batch of 1918 dated bayonets that are marked like this. It's believed they came back with troops at the end of the war. Before departing England they handed in all their battle-worn weapons and were subsequently reissued with brand new gear. That is why virtually all the wartime SMLE rifles found in New Zealand are 1918 dated. The ones they used stayed in England. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MikB Posted 14 December , 2017 Share Posted 14 December , 2017 On 12/8/2017 at 02:53, 5thBatt said: Other than a renumbered bolt & a unreadable forend s/n she is original matching numbers with a good bore, i will be shooting it after a check over I'm thinking it'll be regulated for Mk.VI ammunition. Magazine looks that way. IIRC there'll be 'HV' stamped on the Knox-form or receiver ring if it's been converted for Mk.VII. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
5thBatt Posted 14 December , 2017 Author Share Posted 14 December , 2017 5 hours ago, MikB said: I'm thinking it'll be regulated for Mk.VI ammunition. Magazine looks that way. IIRC there'll be 'HV' stamped on the Knox-form or receiver ring if it's been converted for Mk.VII. MikB, yes it is still sighted for MkVI but the Mag is a type 4 & not a type 2, the .22 trainer (bottom one in photo) does have a type 2 mag with .22 stamped on it LHS. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MikB Posted 15 December , 2017 Share Posted 15 December , 2017 (edited) 12 hours ago, 5thBatt said: MikB, yes it is still sighted for MkVI but the Mag is a type 4 & not a type 2, the .22 trainer (bottom one in photo) does have a type 2 mag with .22 stamped on it LHS. Ah, yes - sorry, I was looking at the wrong pic. Can you source Mk.VI, will you load to reproduce the trajectory, or just use available 303 and live with any mismatch ? I shot a Mk.III* for about 20 years. Nominally an Enfield but with non-matching bits, it had a windage-adjustable rearsight. Trajectory puzzled me for years as to why I was setting it to around 500 yards to get in the black at 600. Never did twig till after I sold it... Edited 15 December , 2017 by MikB Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
4thGordons Posted 15 December , 2017 Share Posted 15 December , 2017 6 hours ago, MikB said: Ah, yes - sorry, I was looking at the wrong pic. Can you source Mk.VI, will you load to reproduce the trajectory, or just use available 303 and live with any mismatch ? I shot a Mk.III* for about 20 years. Nominally an Enfield but with non-matching bits, it had a windage-adjustable rearsight. Trajectory puzzled me for years as to why I was setting it to around 500 yards to get in the black at 600. Never did twig till after I sold it... If it was a MkIII* (ie post 1915) it would have been made for MkVII originally wouldn't it? I have a couple of rifles that are nominally still set for MkVI (ie show no markings) and I have to say any mismatch in sighting/trajectory is completely obscured by my [lack of] skills as a marksman! Chris Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MikB Posted 15 December , 2017 Share Posted 15 December , 2017 (edited) 2 hours ago, 4thGordons said: If it was a MkIII* (ie post 1915) it would have been made for MkVII originally wouldn't it? I have a couple of rifles that are nominally still set for MkVI (ie show no markings) and I have to say any mismatch in sighting/trajectory is completely obscured by my [lack of] skills as a marksman! Chris Yeah, but it had a windage-adjustable rearsight, and that must've come from and earlier SMLE mark, dontcha think? I've not been a top-class competitive rifleman any time recently, but when I shot my Mk.III* at 600 for the first time, the butt-markers kept waving for a miss, then leaping in the air pointing their paddles up at the top of the board - until I dropped the sights to around 500. For a long time, I just thought it was 'cos I had a casually-assembled bitsa. Which I probably did, but I now think there was a sight mismatch too. Still, it was good enough to shred a fag-packet with 10 rounds offhand at 100... Edited 15 December , 2017 by MikB Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
4thGordons Posted 15 December , 2017 Share Posted 15 December , 2017 1 hour ago, MikB said: Yeah, but it had a windage-adjustable rearsight, and that must've come from and earlier SMLE mark, dontcha think? Maybe, but these seem to have been refitted on quite a few in the 30s and its easier to change the sight leaf than the barrel! I am not certain, but I was under the impression it was the curve of the sight base (ie the amount that the sight is raised by moving the slider) that was modified to reflect the new round, not the markings on the leaf.....now I will have to go and look! 1 hour ago, MikB said: Still, it was good enough to shred a fag-packet with 10 rounds offhand at 100... which is of course all that matters! Chris Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
5thBatt Posted 15 December , 2017 Author Share Posted 15 December , 2017 The graduations on the sight leaf did not change, as 4th said it was the sight bed that was altered Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
5thBatt Posted 15 December , 2017 Author Share Posted 15 December , 2017 The differences between MkVI & MkVII sights, first up, no difference in graduations. Second, different height in sight beds. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
5thBatt Posted 15 December , 2017 Author Share Posted 15 December , 2017 Thirdly, due to the reduced height, the head of the spring retaining screw is left proud of the sight bed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
5thBatt Posted 15 December , 2017 Author Share Posted 15 December , 2017 So to deal with the screw head a groove was cut in the bottom of the slider to clear it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MikB Posted 15 December , 2017 Share Posted 15 December , 2017 Well, thanks for that! I can remember that my slider had the groove, but not whether the screw protruded. I guess it's still possible that my Mk.III* bitsa had the earlier sight base - it had a new barrel when I bought it, but the rest could have been put together from a slew of miscellaneous parts. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dave G Posted 16 December , 2017 Share Posted 16 December , 2017 Well done 5thBatt. An excellent and most useful comparison. Thanks, Dave Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
5thBatt Posted 30 June , 2019 Author Share Posted 30 June , 2019 A photo of NZMR circa 1914, note the scabbards in a pile at the bottom. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steve1871 Posted 1 July , 2019 Share Posted 1 July , 2019 I can't help but be jealous of such a display as your's! Exelent I have 2 N.Z. Carbine's , one missing hand guard ,1 hookie, with scabbard, but no frog.I have no N.Z. Rifle, I got a long way to go, compared to you!! On N.Z. Rifles and carbine's,The P03' is correct, but is the P1888 also correct! I got a few of those bayonet's. Also, are the large numbers New Zealand re-numbers? 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