Milsurp After Hours

Here are two Enfields that were submerged in salt water when the Gulf of Mexico was pushed several miles inland during Hurricane Katrina in the summer of 2005.
The rifle & carbine were sad sights indeed with the rust, mold, cracks & fungus all over these two. Magazines & other small parts were missing.
The bores & chamber looked good, so they came home with me.
Both of these were made at the Fazakerley facility during the war.
The No1 MkV1 shows a barrel date of 1941, while the carbine was born in January of 1945.












While the carbine shoots well, the rifle is much more accurate.
Shooting was from a rest with the rifle from 75 yards away.
The 100 yard targets were surrounded by mud & water, so I limited myself to the 75 yd marker.
Shooting was offhand from 50 yards out with the carbine.
That carbine is so light & easy to shoulder!
I love shooting that carbine.
The day was sunny, with the temperature of 25 degrees F. with a slight wind.
If you have any knowlege of this No1 MkV1, please share. It was converted to No4 Mk1 specs in 1941.

I enlisted the help of two U.S. Marines in the restoration of the carbine.
Lee, aka candyman spent several hours repairing & reinforcing the stock, while Tony, my gunsmith neighbor put the barreled action in his bluing tank after I removed the rust.

Very nice. I can imagine the before state after some time in salt water. They both look great now though. Don't know a great deal about the No1 MkVI I'll have to dig up some info. Well done.

Oops!]

While cleaning the carbine, I found the action screw had loosened.
I'll take her out in the morning to see if my shooting improves.

Hey Clay. The Carbine looks really good. I'm glad that I was able to help you with the stock.
Here are a few of the pic's we took when you brought it over to work on it.

Makes you feel good all over being able to save pieces of history like this. Well done guys - 10/10

Good Job Marines!!!

Semper Fi!!!
USMC 1966-1973

Been looking at the No1 MkVI just out of curiousity. A very short life it would seem.
Dating back to the decision not to proceed with the MkV the MkVI was proposed as early as 1926 and almost ready for trial in 1930. Trialled in 1931 and again in 1932-33 the MkVI morphed into the No4 MkI during the trials and the rest, as they say, is history.

Where the MkVI became the No4 appears to have been mid trial with 6 A Pattern No 1 MkVI produced in 1926, 1025 B Pattern No 1 MkVI produced 1929-1930 (although assembled in 1930-31) and then approximately 2,500 B Pattern No 4 MkI in mid 1931. A further 56 No 4 MkI C Pattern rifles were produced up to 1935 and a proposed D Pattern abandoned.

Given the original model markings are missing from yours I'd pick it as a B Pattern MkVI. The major difference between the MkVI and No4 being the heightened left receiver wall on the no4.
Does the left buttsocket look like it's been ground at all ? My understanding is the original markings should look like the following photo rather than just a hand stamp of the model designation. Possibly yours was scrubbed, remarked and reserialled when it was upgraded to No 4 specification in 1941 ?

The No4 was marked as below

Below is a couple of pictures of (I believe) a complete MkVI. Yours appears only to be missing the narrow piling swivel, cut-off (which I believe was a pressed rather than machined version), chequered furniture, rounded cocking piece and butt inletted for the brass disc. Most of these probably went when it was upgraded in 1941 I'd imagine.


Given the numbers made made and the desperate need in 1941 that drove the upgrades I don't imagine there are too many completely original ones out there. YOu have a very interesting piece of Enfield history there. Colour me green

Thanks Woftam!
The rifle sure is a mystery to me.
There is very little information online about this line of SMLE.
I traded an Indian Ishapore No1 Mk3 for it.
Of course, the Ishapore needed no work, as it had not been affected by the floodwaters & was a great shooter.

I know it's a little bit of a side point, but of the two I have seen one had had a very confused life, as it had the plunger bolt catch of the Mk.1 and the cut in the bolt-head rail of the Mk.1*. Not sure why you'd need to be able to get the bolt out in two ways, unless they were trialling the idea on an existing receiver.

Somewhere on this forum, possibly in a previous existence, are/were photos of my Whitaker Special target rifle, a conversion based around No.4 actions. He was at Enfield, and so would nick receivers, removing the wrists (and so all information), but thankfully recorded the original details in a ledger which the NRA now has. However, as he was appropriating old stock, some are T receivers, and some are earlier Mk.VI examples. The language that the dealer I got mine from when I told him he'd sold me the latter was really quite creative... :-p

Nick

Nick, Is the action body with the Mk.I and Mk.I* bolt head release style a Long Branch? Fairly recently I've seen a couple of pics, which I now can't find, and both were early (I think 1942) Long Branchs...perhaps caught in the middle of the conversion?

Brad