I decided to take some detailed photos of my Enfields; here are the results, along with some comments about the rifles.
Thanks for reading. As mentioned previously, I wish that new production Enfield pattern rifles in various calibers were available.
Beautiful photos, Andrew!
Forgot to mention–new Enfields in various calibers are available, they just haven’t been imported into the US. I believe Ishapore (or another Indian company) still makes .308 Enfields, and two other companies (Australian International Arms and Armalon Ltd.) make Enfields in .308, .223 and 7.62×39 last I checked.
Excellent photographs, you have a good eye. You’ve really brought out the character of the well-worn steel and wood. The pics of Beirut are also quite good.
Excellent. Guys get into such a hot mess over detachable mag bolt guns these days yet they have no appreciation or even knowledge of the original. Thanks for the great pics.
I would remind you that silver-tipped bullets are effective against werewolves, not vampires.
My kids and I wrapped my SMLE in ACU patterned cloth as a family project because the jerk who previoulsy owned carved a deer head in the stock (poorly). After firing just a few rounds from it, I have to wonder how any British soldiers left the war with the ability to hear.
So you’re saying I should use ammo like this instead?
http://www.samcoglobal.com/Ammo-swedish.html
What are wooden bullets for….. except shooting vampires?
Blanks for machineguns and autoloading rifles. They also feed better in a lot of bolt action guns.
You’re supposed to mount a shredder attachment to the muzzle to fragment the bullet (I’ve also seen a “blank” barrel for an LMG that had a slight “squeezebore” effect to break up the bullet just before the muzzle but after the gas port), but I know a Title II manufacturer (buddy of mine) who tested .303 woodtip blanks out of Brens, Vickers MGs, and No4MkI rifles, shooting at butcher paper, and he failed to get penetration of teh paper after about 10 yards.
Should add — the paper test was conducted WITHOUT shredders mounted.
These are great photographs and commentary. I am a fan of the history of firearms. Thanks for sharing.
The old Remington 788s are fairly close in concept to a “made for sport” Enfield. They’re a stronger action, but probably just as fast, and they’re supposed to be very accurate. They have a few things I don’t like, though, like stamped steel trigger guards.
I used to own a No. 4, and they’re wonderful “business” rifles, with smooth, reliable actions. Someday, I’ll go for a No 4 Mk II and be done with it. Currently, my only Lee-Enfield is a 1944/45 Lithgow in excellent shape. It’s a tackdriver, but it’s not as slick as my old No. 4.
Always cool to see something different. I feel like I have tunnel vision with all the modern rifles. Own anything old school western?
1. The Remington Model 30 was basically a commercial M1917.
2. After experiencing “Mosin-Nagant sticky bolt syndrome,” I think cock-on-closing is an excellent idea.
3. Would the No.4 Mk.1 lend itself to a .35 Whelen build?
The M1917 wasn’t a true Enfield in the sense that “Enfield” usually refers to the rifles designed by or based on the designs of James Paris Lee. The P14 and M1917 are in no way related to the various Lee-Enfields.
Actually, “Enfield” refers to arms built (or designed) at the Royal Small Arms Factory at Enfield.
Including the Lee-Enfield family (Lee designed the bolt, and IIRC, the magazine; the “Enfield” part of the name comes from the Enfiled developed rifling, which replaced the earlier Metford rifling, changing the Lee-Metford into the Lee-Enfield).
In fact the P13 (.276 Enfield)/P14 (.303 British)/M1917 (.30-06 for US use) family, is more completely a “TRUE” Enfield rifle, being designed from the ground up by Enfield. The Lee-Enfield family of rifles are only called “Enfields” because of the rifling. . .
Other “Enfields” include the Enfield revolvers (both the early Enfield designed revolvers, and the later .380-200 revolver that was a rip off of the Webley design built at RSAF Enfield when the government didn’t want to pay Webley), the Enfield musket (used by both sides in large numbers during the American Civil War), and even the Bren LMG (the name Bren comes from the origin of the design – BRno, Czechoslavakia and place of manufacture – ENfield, England).
Great rifles! I have only one Enfield currently, a No.4 Mk 1 that was in a wax/cloth/paper “mummy wrap” when I bought it at a gun show years ago. The “mummy” itself was in gorgeous shape when unwrapped, arsenal re-furbished in 1951, I think, and committed to long term storage soon after.
It shoots just fine with its issue sights, has a truly butter-smooth action, and soft felt recoil. Smaller persons think it’s too heavy but it balances the cartridge nicely.
Wouldn’t even think about changing caliber, and I “wooden” recommend that Swedish ammo above — cleanup would be like cleaning your BBQ grill, I’d think!
Cheers,
Rutger
Gorgeous images. Nice use of lighting.
These pictures are downright beautiful! I love the way the detailed photography captures the soul of the wood in combination with the steel. Keep up this great work!
Philip
The Netherlands (and the fact that you have a connection to my beloved homeland makes the site even more special to me 🙂 )
Dank u!
I’ve never understood why more rifles don’t use the Enfield’s cock-when-closing system. It just seems to make sense to cock the striker directly on a forward push (the arm is stronger pushing), rather than on a spiral ramp when lifting the bolt.