Gun of the Month
Posted: Fri Oct 31, 2008 5:43 am
Just for fun I’ve decided to do a post each month titled Gun of the Month. What’s it for ? A mix of showing off something I like, a little bit of education, giving my connection with the firearm, maybe learning something I didn’t know about the firearm and contributing something to the forum, hopefully to inspire others.
First cab off the rank is my MkI***, manufactured at RSAF Enfield in 1911.
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v33/w ... G_0514.jpg[/pic]
What is a MkI*** ?
OK let’s get the naming issues out of the way first. The Rifle, Short, Magazine, Lee-Enfield (Mark I) is the designation used in the LoC in 1902 when the rifle was introduced and again in 1903 when minor changes led to the pattern being re-sealed. Following practice at the time minor modifications/upgrades (which did not result in a new Mark) led to the addition of an asterix to the designation. Thus the various changes resulted in the SMLE MkI, SMLE MkI*, SMLE MkI**, SMLE MkI*** and the SMLE MkI** I.P..
In 1926 the British changed the nomenclature applicable to small arms in an effort to simplify the system. The current service rifle the Rifle, Short, MLE III* became the Rifle No.1 MkIII . The Rifle SMLE MkI and its brethren were simply “omitted from the Vocabulary but retained in store”. Subsequently there arises periodically the debate as to whether the rifles are a No1 MkI or simply a MkI. The more pedantic state as they were omitted then they should retain their initial designation and insist MkI be used. The less pedantic insist that No1 MkI is close enough. Personally I think if one wants to be pedantic then one should go the whole way and the proper designation is Rifle, Short, Magazine, Lee-Enfield (Mark I). If NoI MkI is used and the context is there (which it usually is) then it is a fairly safe assumption it is an SMLE MkI. If just MkI (or MkIII for that matter) is used and the context is not clear then it could be a Webley, a Lee-Enfield or a bayonet scabbard for the P1907.
The SMLE MkI series was the service weapon from its introduction until superseded by the MkIII from 1907 onwards. It was the first time in British Military history that there would be a standard arm for all branches of the armed services. They were produced at Enfield, Sparkbrook, BSA, LSA and Ishapore. Exact numbers are sketchy but Skennerton proposes a figure of somewhere around 445,500 (including Trials models and conversions).
They are not uncommon, many have been found converted to a grenade launching role. Probably the most noted ones are the MkI series showing up in the USA with CE and ER serial numbers, some retaining most of their MkI features and others more MkIII features. They were also used by entities other than the armed forces – in Australia they were used by the Queensland and NSW Police Forces. The British Navy also used the MkI series with the MkI** being a purely Naval model.
What makes a MkI*** different from a MkIII ?
Visually there are some easily spotted differences. Starting from the front and working back the first difference is the front sight ears. Unlike the MkIII the MkI*** sight ears curve inward. The initial trials models had a sight hood but the it was felt that quick target acquisition was not the best, hence the hood was “slotted”.
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v33/w ... G_0521.jpg[/pic]
A pin is inserted across the forearm just in front of the outer band. The front handguard is also much more obviously stepped at the point it meets the outer band.
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v33/w ... G_0518.jpg[/pic]
The rear sight is a much more complex affair than that found on the MkIII being adjustable for windage, as well as coarse and fine elevation. The buttons for the coarse elevation have bone inserts.
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v33/w ... G_0519.jpg[/pic]
The knob for fine elevation can just been seen behind the bone insert in this photo.
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v33/w ... G_0520.jpg[/pic]
The rear sight protector ears are set into the rear handguard as opposed to under it like the MkIII.
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v33/w ... G_0522.jpg[/pic]
The rear handguard has two rivets to hold the spring clip. Initially it was one.
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v33/w ... G_0523.jpg[/pic]
The MkI series had no charger bridge as does the later MkIII series. The charger loading system consisted of a sliding guide attached to the bolt head
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v33/w ... G_0525.jpg[/pic]
and a charger guide machined into the side of the receiver wall.
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v33/w ... G_0526.jpg[/pic]
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v33/w ... G_0527.jpg[/pic]
The left and right rear receiver walls were initially left sharp but later rounded down after problems with snagging and damaging bandoliers and clothing.
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v33/w ... G_0528.jpg[/pic]
The Trials MkI’s were not fitted with a magazine cut-off nor were the first production SMLE MkI’s, although provision was made for it. The cut-off was approved for Naval service in 1903 but not for Land forces until 1906. So we have a 3 year period where the cut-off was not fitted to British (Land) Service rifles. Why make provision for the cut-off but not have it in use ? Was the re-introduction of the magazine cut-off after 3 years absence simply the inertia of British military mindset overcoming some enlightened thinking ? What, if anything, happened to tactics in the intervening period especially in relation to fire control ?
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v33/w ... G_0524.jpg[/pic]
The right side of the butt socket should be appropriately marked with a I and the requisite number of *. Most, like mine, will not have the * neatly lines up as they were added at different times.
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v33/w ... G_0532.jpg[/pic]
Unfortunately the brass disc on mine is unmarked but it does carry a couple of other markings. The faint remains of what looks to be a crown is present in a couple of places. The butt carries a P340, possibly related to NSW Police use. Interestingly the MkI*** in Skennerton ‘The Lee-Enfield’ (attributed to Brian Labudda) has a P810 in the same place. This page also mentions the NSW Police connection.
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v33/w ... G_0534.jpg[/pic]
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v33/w ... G_0530.jpg[/pic]
Personally my MkI*** is, if not my favourite, definitely in the top 3. Part of that is the story of its acquisition. I’d dropped into my favourite gun shop to have a yarn with Fred (sadly now deceased) and he said he had a rifle I might be interested in. Turns out that a Police big shot (area commander or something) was being promoted and transferred to Sydney. Fred, being an ex-sergeant of NSW finest, the big shot naturally had come to Fred to sell his firearms as he didn’t plan on taking them to the bigsmoke. By the time Fred had it out of the gunbag and onto the counter I’d already managed to tell him 3 times I’d take. After haggling, not too hard, over the price (it’s hard to argue over a 2 figure sum) I suggested to Fred it was lucky it was coming from a copper as there should be no problems with transfer paperwork. At this point Fred became a little coy and when I asked point-blank if it was in fact registered he basically said “ask me no questions …..”
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v33/w ... G_0536.jpg[/pic]
What do I like about the MkI*** ?
Well the short butt I find a very good fit. Also I find it more visually appealing than the MkIII/III*. Historically I like the fact that it was the first standard rifle in British service. From a personal perspective the fact that Fred thought enough of me to keep it until I came by and give me a bargain on the deal gives me a connection. Also its not a perfect specimen, it shows signs of use but not abuse.
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v33/w ... G_0529.jpg[/pic]
What don’t I like about it ? About the only real complaint is the fiddling required to get the bolt into the receiver due to the sliding charger bridge.
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v33/w ... G_0539.jpg[/pic]
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v33/w ... G_0540.jpg[/pic]
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v33/w ... G_0541.jpg[/pic]
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v33/w ... G_0542.jpg[/pic]
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v33/w ... G_0543.jpg[/pic]
Well, there it is, the Gun of the Month for November. Hope it was of interest. You have 3 choices now gents.
A) Greet the posting with howls of derision – in which case it will die a quiet death.
B) Offer encouragement – in which case there will be a repeat dose in December.
C) Join in.
Cheers
Graeme
First cab off the rank is my MkI***, manufactured at RSAF Enfield in 1911.
What is a MkI*** ?
OK let’s get the naming issues out of the way first. The Rifle, Short, Magazine, Lee-Enfield (Mark I) is the designation used in the LoC in 1902 when the rifle was introduced and again in 1903 when minor changes led to the pattern being re-sealed. Following practice at the time minor modifications/upgrades (which did not result in a new Mark) led to the addition of an asterix to the designation. Thus the various changes resulted in the SMLE MkI, SMLE MkI*, SMLE MkI**, SMLE MkI*** and the SMLE MkI** I.P..
In 1926 the British changed the nomenclature applicable to small arms in an effort to simplify the system. The current service rifle the Rifle, Short, MLE III* became the Rifle No.1 MkIII . The Rifle SMLE MkI and its brethren were simply “omitted from the Vocabulary but retained in store”. Subsequently there arises periodically the debate as to whether the rifles are a No1 MkI or simply a MkI. The more pedantic state as they were omitted then they should retain their initial designation and insist MkI be used. The less pedantic insist that No1 MkI is close enough. Personally I think if one wants to be pedantic then one should go the whole way and the proper designation is Rifle, Short, Magazine, Lee-Enfield (Mark I). If NoI MkI is used and the context is there (which it usually is) then it is a fairly safe assumption it is an SMLE MkI. If just MkI (or MkIII for that matter) is used and the context is not clear then it could be a Webley, a Lee-Enfield or a bayonet scabbard for the P1907.
The SMLE MkI series was the service weapon from its introduction until superseded by the MkIII from 1907 onwards. It was the first time in British Military history that there would be a standard arm for all branches of the armed services. They were produced at Enfield, Sparkbrook, BSA, LSA and Ishapore. Exact numbers are sketchy but Skennerton proposes a figure of somewhere around 445,500 (including Trials models and conversions).
They are not uncommon, many have been found converted to a grenade launching role. Probably the most noted ones are the MkI series showing up in the USA with CE and ER serial numbers, some retaining most of their MkI features and others more MkIII features. They were also used by entities other than the armed forces – in Australia they were used by the Queensland and NSW Police Forces. The British Navy also used the MkI series with the MkI** being a purely Naval model.
What makes a MkI*** different from a MkIII ?
Visually there are some easily spotted differences. Starting from the front and working back the first difference is the front sight ears. Unlike the MkIII the MkI*** sight ears curve inward. The initial trials models had a sight hood but the it was felt that quick target acquisition was not the best, hence the hood was “slotted”.
A pin is inserted across the forearm just in front of the outer band. The front handguard is also much more obviously stepped at the point it meets the outer band.
The rear sight is a much more complex affair than that found on the MkIII being adjustable for windage, as well as coarse and fine elevation. The buttons for the coarse elevation have bone inserts.
The knob for fine elevation can just been seen behind the bone insert in this photo.
The rear sight protector ears are set into the rear handguard as opposed to under it like the MkIII.
The rear handguard has two rivets to hold the spring clip. Initially it was one.
The MkI series had no charger bridge as does the later MkIII series. The charger loading system consisted of a sliding guide attached to the bolt head
and a charger guide machined into the side of the receiver wall.
The left and right rear receiver walls were initially left sharp but later rounded down after problems with snagging and damaging bandoliers and clothing.
The Trials MkI’s were not fitted with a magazine cut-off nor were the first production SMLE MkI’s, although provision was made for it. The cut-off was approved for Naval service in 1903 but not for Land forces until 1906. So we have a 3 year period where the cut-off was not fitted to British (Land) Service rifles. Why make provision for the cut-off but not have it in use ? Was the re-introduction of the magazine cut-off after 3 years absence simply the inertia of British military mindset overcoming some enlightened thinking ? What, if anything, happened to tactics in the intervening period especially in relation to fire control ?
The right side of the butt socket should be appropriately marked with a I and the requisite number of *. Most, like mine, will not have the * neatly lines up as they were added at different times.
Unfortunately the brass disc on mine is unmarked but it does carry a couple of other markings. The faint remains of what looks to be a crown is present in a couple of places. The butt carries a P340, possibly related to NSW Police use. Interestingly the MkI*** in Skennerton ‘The Lee-Enfield’ (attributed to Brian Labudda) has a P810 in the same place. This page also mentions the NSW Police connection.
Personally my MkI*** is, if not my favourite, definitely in the top 3. Part of that is the story of its acquisition. I’d dropped into my favourite gun shop to have a yarn with Fred (sadly now deceased) and he said he had a rifle I might be interested in. Turns out that a Police big shot (area commander or something) was being promoted and transferred to Sydney. Fred, being an ex-sergeant of NSW finest, the big shot naturally had come to Fred to sell his firearms as he didn’t plan on taking them to the bigsmoke. By the time Fred had it out of the gunbag and onto the counter I’d already managed to tell him 3 times I’d take. After haggling, not too hard, over the price (it’s hard to argue over a 2 figure sum) I suggested to Fred it was lucky it was coming from a copper as there should be no problems with transfer paperwork. At this point Fred became a little coy and when I asked point-blank if it was in fact registered he basically said “ask me no questions …..”
What do I like about the MkI*** ?
Well the short butt I find a very good fit. Also I find it more visually appealing than the MkIII/III*. Historically I like the fact that it was the first standard rifle in British service. From a personal perspective the fact that Fred thought enough of me to keep it until I came by and give me a bargain on the deal gives me a connection. Also its not a perfect specimen, it shows signs of use but not abuse.
What don’t I like about it ? About the only real complaint is the fiddling required to get the bolt into the receiver due to the sliding charger bridge.
Well, there it is, the Gun of the Month for November. Hope it was of interest. You have 3 choices now gents.
A) Greet the posting with howls of derision – in which case it will die a quiet death.
B) Offer encouragement – in which case there will be a repeat dose in December.
C) Join in.
Cheers
Graeme
I thought you said Gum of the Month!!
