Unknown age LEE ENFIELD .410 smoothbore sporterised.

[jimmy9fingers1]

Hi All,

 

 

Please could anyone tell me the approx date of the sporterised  lee Enfield, serial no.  27457, my friend recently purchased it. It has been converted to a .410 shotgun

 

It has the round cocking piece, but no charger bridge at the rear, possibly removed during the conversion. It doesn't appear to have any evidence of volley sights or front loader. So at a guess could it be late WW1 or inter wars.

 

It also has a 26" barrels. I believe it can be difficult to age a lee enfield from the serial number, however hopefully I'm wrong.

 

Any help would be appreciated.

 

Best wishes,

 

Jim 

[Andy A]

A  local gunsmith from me has one converted to a very high quality .410 conversion  and its actually dated n the same place all SMLE's are dated which is just under the bolt which shows the maker as well, His is dated 1902 so being one of the first once was a very rare rifle indeed being the year of introduction  of the rifle. This is one of mine made by BSA in 1920 for the King of Siam's personal bodyguard.

 

Andy

[jimmy9fingers1]

Nice no3 you got there, sounds like great provenance, sadly the date is absent from the .410 conversion SMLE in the place where you would usually find it. There is no date on the receive, just a serial number to go on. I'm guessing a 1902 No1 * SMLE would be rare indeed. I have a 1907 no1 *** which is the year the no.3 was introduced. As I'm sure you are aware. Sadly my example is in a later WW1 no3 * configuration so minus the volley sights and magazine cut-off. It has also a rear charger bridge fitted, but it's has all the original timber that shows where the volley sights once were.   

   

[jimmy9fingers1]

Also the wood work on the sportierised .410 does not look original to me (I could be wrong though) and it has a steel butt plated as opposed to brass. The rifle has certainly picked up some modifications along the way, but at least it has survived.

 

 

[Chasemuseum]

The first rifle started life as a long lee enfield , rather than a SMLE No3. It does not have a charger bridge and the bolt still retains the remains of the metal clips for the dust cover, which was dispensed with in the SMLE series of rifles.  Accordingly the action was probably manufactured between 1892 and 1902. This is not an absolute as the factories were still completing some orders for long lees as late as 1910. (A very long story - does not make any sense, but the Australian Government was still placing a few very small orders that late). Civilian conversions to 410 shotguns were very popular and unless the gunsmith has date marked the weapon, they are very difficult to date.

Cheers

Ross

[jimmy9fingers1]

Thanks Chasemuseum,

 

excellent knowledge, I thought it was an SMLE that had the charger bridge removed, my mistake. I have been informed by the chap who owns it that it has Victorian/British proof marks on the barrel top, so that further strengthens the fact it's a Long Lee.  And therefore produced between 1892 and 1892 as you say.

 

Regards,

 

Jim

 

 

 

 

  

[Radlad]

I used to have (many years ago) a Lee-Speed sporting rifle in .303 that I think, was the spitting image of that rifle apart from mine having sights. Could we have more detailed photos of the proof marks please?

[RGJDEE]

My Deactivated SMLE Mk III*

was converted to a.410 in the Nineties and then later Deactivated post 2000.

though how it would have performed as a shotgun beats me.

 

[MikB]

21 hours ago, Radlad said:

I used to have (many years ago) a Lee-Speed sporting rifle in .303 that I think, was the spitting image of that rifle apart from mine having sights. Could we have more detailed photos of the proof marks please?

Yes, I'd thunk the Lee-Speed question too. The OP's piece has a mag that looks like for Mk.VII ammunition. The photos don't show us any wrist markings, and I don't know what to expect from a Lee-Speed if it did. Did the Lee-Speed have an exhaustive spec., were there a clear number of identifiable variants, or was it a generic term for almost any pre-No.4 sporterised LE?

[jimmy9fingers1]

Thanks for the replies, Radlad I will try and get some better photo's of it (including wrist and proof mark close-ups). There have been three suggestion as to the type of rifle this is. 1) A Long Lee, 2) A Lee Metford (not suggested from a GWF member), 3) Possibly a Speed Lee.

Hopefully If i can obtain some clearer photo's it should help aid the identification of this rifle.

I know absolutely nothing about Lee-Speeds. Time for a quick google.

[jimmy9fingers1]

On ‎22‎/‎07‎/‎2019 at 18:17, RGJDEE said:

My Deactivated SMLE Mk III*

was converted to a.410 in the Nineties and then later Deactivated post 2000.

though how it would have performed as a shotgun beats me.

 

Nice looking SMLE you got there. A .410 SMLE is quite a quirky item, I would imagine it would just be a bit of fun in.410 configuration, I have lever action rifle converted to .410, but the conversion was clumsy and shot pattern is not uniform. I could imagine the weight of a .410 SMLE could also hinder the performance of the gun. And many only seem to be single shot.

 

Regards

 

Jim   

[593jones]

Many years ago, when firearms laws were very different I had several military rifles that had been converted to .410.  Didn't have a SMLE, but did have a Mauser K98az and a No. 4.  They were quite fun to shoot, good at knocking over cans as short range, but that's about all.  All of them were single shot, the magazines would accept any .410 cartridge; I think the examples I had were chambered for the 2 1/2" cartridge.  Of course in those days you could have as many shotguns as you wished if you possessed a shotgun certificate as, unlike a Firearm Certificate, they were not recorded on the certificate.

 

[T8HANTS]

Years ago I had a .22" SMLE, smoothbore, it might have been built from bits, but had new woodwork.

It was great fun creeping round my mates farm on a rat hunt with the thing.

I was saving for a Martini-Henry 14 bore conversion, but life got in the way.

Another mate had a Snyder shotgun cavalry carbine.

[jimmy9fingers1]

Some more photo's of the Long Lee Enfield sporter or Speed Lee/ possible Lee Metford

 

Any help or further suggestions in identification would be appreciated.

 

The serial numbers don't match so the gun is maybe a hybrid. It has the dust cover clips and no rear charger like an early Magazine Lee Enfield. And difficult to  tell if the magazine is 8 or 10 shot as it has been welded in place for legal reasons. 

 

I believe the Lee Speed had a 26" barrel like this example, the barrel itself has a possible Sold out of service mark on it?.

 

Interestingly there are two marks on the wrist, presumably to signify a mark of model, there is an absence of makers mark or date of manufacture.

 

Behind the bolt there is a 17, maybe a date.  

 

And agreed the .410's are fun to shoot at cans or close range clays my ratting days are over.

 

best wishes,

 

Jim 

[jimmy9fingers1]

Also the brass screw through the rear of the would work loos fairly consistent with a Speed Lee, not an Ishapore screw.

 

I'm slightly more puzzled as to model of this rifle than when I started. 

 

Best wishes,

 

Jim 

[RGJDEE]

On 25/07/2019 at 13:39, jimmy9fingers1 said:

Nice looking SMLE you got there. A .410 SMLE is quite a quirky item, I would imagine it would just be a bit of fun in.410 configuration, I have lever action rifle converted to .410, but the conversion was clumsy and shot pattern is not uniform. I could imagine the weight of a .410 SMLE could also hinder the performance of the gun. And many only seem to be single shot.

 

Regards

 

Jim   

Thanks Jim very kind of you to say so. But you are right, it is a nice looking SMLE and I’m glad I be got it.

[docchippy]

 The 410 ex MLE Mk1 / Metford, has a barrel manufactured by London Small Arms Co. (Crown X8) inspection mark.   Barrel inside also identified as being slightly rusted or cut, shown by the star on top of the knox form, which maybe why it ended up as a 410 (maybe the Metford rifling was shot out with the intro of smokeless powder and this was when it was released to commercial conversion?) .  Only other areas which may help ID are to check for  any roundel/stamps evident underneath the sheen on the butt stock, or the material and shape of the butt plate and any signs of a sling swivel having been on the butt?  Obviously Victorian Proofs etc so whatever latest 1901ish. 

[AlanD]

The P over N over 3 marking on the barrel is a Royal Naval marking.

The 7.05 being a date marking.

Edited 28 July , 2019 by AlanD

[MikeyH]

When I was a small boy in rural Lancashire in the 1950's, someone who lived nearby had a

Lee-Enfield conversion to single shot .410, fairly sure it was a Mk 111, he used it for ratting.

 

Mike.

[jimmy9fingers1]

Thanks for the information docchippy, interesting to find out the rifle (or at least the barrel) was manufactured by LSA from that crown X 8 inspection mark you mention.

And I was confused by the star, believing it to be a sold out of service mark. If the rifle is a metford from what I hear about the quick wearing rifling It would be consistent with a need for conversion or barrel replacement, thus it would indeed make an ideal candidate for a commercial conversion. Also it appears to have had the barrel reduced in length from 30 to 26". Sadly there is no roundel or evidence of sling  swivel marks. I wonder by the way the wood is slightly loose fitting if this is a replacement stock/fore-end. 

 

Thanks Alan D for notifying me as to the Royal Navy markings and the date marking. As the barrel appears to dated for May 1907 would this surely be a re-issue mark as the gun has Victorian proof marks?.  It's probably worth noting this is not the original barrel. 

 

And Mikey H There seemed to be quite a few SMLE conversions in years past, occasionally turning up at auctions and provincial gunsmiths, but there seems to be less and less about nowadays.

 

Regards,

 

Jim