Enfield Magazine Question

[Canadian J]

Hey Pals, I have a firearms facebook group confused about the enfield magazine. I knew just the people to ask! The question is what is the thing in the top right corner of the magazine? Some sort of switch? There is also a hole on the opposite side, what is it for? Thanks so much in advance everyone

- Jordan

 

[ShtLE303]

Held the follower in place..also moved it allows it to be removed. Early mag.

Edited 26 November , 2018 by ShtLE303

[Canadian J]

23 minutes ago, ShtLE303 said:

Held the follower in place..also moved it allows it to be removed. Early mag.

Thanks ShtLE303, I am not sure what the follower is. Also, if the switch is moved, it allows the switch to be removed? Hoping for some clarification on that, thanks a bunch

[MikB]

1 hour ago, Canadian J said:

Thanks ShtLE303, I am not sure what the follower is. Also, if the switch is moved, it allows the switch to be removed? Hoping for some clarification on that, thanks a bunch

 

The spring-loaded platform that holds the rounds up against the lips, so that the bolt can push the top one forward into the chamber. I'm not familiar with the design using the catch at the front, but suspect it had to be disengaged in order to remove the follower and spring from the mag box. On later variants you could tilt the follower to get it out from under the lips by pressing down on the tail. You might want to do this if the mag got full of trench-mud or other muck.

Edited 26 November , 2018 by MikB

[303man]

Long Lee Enfield Magazine the front loop had a small chain and the mag was originally chained to the Gun dropping down if you released the magazine.  initially these fired MkVI 215gn round nosed .303.  It should have a number on the back strap of the magazine. the attached shews the chain in plaice.

 

[Canadian J]

Thanks a bunch everyone!

[5thBatt]

That is the 1st type SMLE mag for the Mk1 SMLE, not for a MLE, stick that mag in a MLE & you'll regret it, that i can tell you from experience 🙁

Edited 27 November , 2018 by 5thBatt

[muz303]

G'day,

 

These were attached to early mags that were originally made for the Mk VI 215gn rounds to accommodate the Mk VII 174gn Spitzer round that came out in about 1910.

[5thBatt]

14 hours ago, muz303 said:

G'day,

 

These were attached to early mags that were originally made for the Mk VI 215gn rounds to accommodate the Mk VII 174gn Spitzer round that came out in about 1910.

Not quite right, the rotating right hand feed  lip was on both the type 1 & type 2 SMLE mags for the MkVI ammo, after the introduction of MkVII ammo some of the type 1 & 2 mags were converted to accept MkVII ammo, one of the things they did was to cut off the left feed lip & attach a new spring steel lip & the mag became the type 3, all three types of the early SMLE mag have the rotating right hand lip

Edited 5 December , 2018 by 5thBatt

[MrEd]

lovely, i hanker after a WW1 dated SMLE

[Guest]

Ive had one of these mags in a 1942 dated no4 mk1 since I bought it for 50 dollars YEARS ago. Wear is even on parkerizing, even on the mag, so it must have been with the rifle for some time. Rifle is in original condition. Thoughts? No filing marks of modification. Should not interchange with no 1 smle. But here it is. Haha

[Chasemuseum]

For all Lee Enfields & Lee Metfords, the magazine is treated as an un-serialed component of the rifle. It nominally lives with the rifle for the service life of the rifle.

 

During annual armourer's inspections, if found damaged or otherwise unserviceable it is replaced.

 

When rifles are overhauled for a factory thorough refurbish (FTR), rifles are broken down to components, damaged, excessively worn and obsolete components are discarded. Components to be re-used have serial numbers cancelled. For many components this is grinding off.  Components are re-blued or re-polished as appropriate and the rifle is rebuilt. Salvaged components not being used to immediately rebuild rifles go to the spares inventory. There they can be used for future rifle rebuilds or be supplied to armourers to use as replacement parts during annual inspections of unit armouries.

 

Hence in service and through it's service life, a rifle can acquire a variety of nominally mismatched parts, not consistent with the configuration of the day it left the factory. Very large numbers of SMLE were refurbished (FTR) in the early 20s and again in the late 30s prior to WW2 and in the year after Dunkirk. Relatively few rifles remained untouched in the form that they left the factory prior to November 1918. This makes it much harder to locate an example "as it was used in the trenches" rather than having had a genuine service life. Surplus rifles were often sold or gifted between governments. You cannot expect an armourer for the TNI of Indonesia to follow the same protocols as an armourer in the British Army.

 

The next confusion is obviously civilian ownership. Sold by the ultimate government user to the civilian market (many dozens of nations have ultimately used SMLE in some role with their armed forces), ultimately firearm retailers have tried to assemble saleable product from what they have obtained. Bolts and magazines were often handled separately. So parts often became mismatched in ways that had not occurred in service. The civilian retailer's objectives have been to provide a shooting rifle to market sectors or a wall hanger for collectors. Again this is likely to lead to a wide variety of mismatch.

 

My point is that a No4 (ww2) may be found with an early magazine from a No1. That magazine was not in that rifle when it left the factory. They may have been legitimately matched together during the initial service life of the rifle during WW2, or possibly during British service after WW2, or service in a third country after WW2, or after it moved into the civilian market - it is just impossible to tell. It is not necessarily a "bodge" but it was not like that the day in first entered military service.

Cheers

Ross