In Post No. 25 the dumber, found only surprisingly in my pics, should illustrate only that he has had already his bad luck, Ruprecht. Just in case

So many bayonets in this pic... Bierce: The bayonet serves to ***** the bubble of conceit of a nation. Well watched.. .

 

The rot sets in when you start looking for unit markings you don't already have.

 

Hi,
Still on the subject of Enfields, is there a database somewhere where I can find the year of manufacture of a Jungel No. 5?

 

If it is a 'real' one both manufacturers (BSA & Fazakerley) marked the date of manufacture on the rifle.

If you post the serial number I'll see where it fits into the lists.

 

Post pictures here and we should be able to help you out.....

Date should be marked on side rail or socket as well....

 

An example..
assumed the readability... Therefore several pics.

... He even should help against evil mothers-in-law..

A rumour ??!
Somebody knows probably the truth.. ?

 

An example..
assumed the readability... Therefore several pics.

... He even should help against evil mothers-in-law..

A rumour ??!
Somebody knows probably the truth.. ?

View attachment 4352023

That one was manufactured for the shooter with short arms.

 

It had a Small / Short butt to fit soldiers of the 'smaller dimensions'

A 'bantam' size butt was introduced for the No1 MkIII to suit the small teenagers that signed up during WW1

 

Thanks for this information, Alan. I hardly coud read this letter as an S until now.. .

First I supposed you "tried to pull my legs a bit", saying that i use an unusual short buttstock.. So my No.5 is too short for me, in the end. The contrary here in the pic, no fitting pic found.

But no.. . I didn't have the impression that the buttstock on it is "too short". I could not choose then between different stock-lengths, only the general quality was electable. I consider the different buttstock lengths to be a clever and practically unique characteristic of the Lee-Enfield rifles IMHO.

 

Off to a auction in NZ this weekend, looking at a couple of MkII MLMs a LSA & a Sparkbrook & if either good enough, hopefully get one, there are a few Long Lees in this auction so will record price realized

 

That sounds well. I'll keep my fingers crossed for you, therefore

Here in CH I can't remember the offer of an only Long-Lee, all the years backwards. It seems to be completely "uninteresting", for whatever reason. But some would like to compare them with a Swiss Long-Rifle.. . Yes !.. .

 

5th
No comp from me this year. 😢 Have a 🍻 or two with the usual suspects.

 

Unfortunately auction was no good so didn't stick around, drove over 2hrs in poor weather to view a rifle that was incorrectly described, rust & overly sanded woodwork with only a Sparkbrook receiver & possibly barrel as the rear sight did match, roundel on butt was gone, E14 butt tang markings that had been polished, overall fair condition at best!
Auction description

 

5th
Driving for 2hrs is only the next door suburb. Just down the road. But i do feel your pain for incorrectly described items.

 

Thanks, Alan !

I received your answer

And will response to it soon

Best regards
Winchester M70 Sharpshooter

 

Good morning,
In order to complete my modest collection of Enfields, I have been offered this No. 5.
There is no electric pen marking indicating its conversion; the weapon should matching, but I have never seen this marking on the top.
The proof was done in Germany.
Can anyone provide me with any information?
Thanks.

 

There is no electric pen marking indicating its conversion;

I'm not sure what you mean.

No5 rifles were not 'conversions' they were built by the factory as No5 rifles using No5 parts.

It is a very frequently copied rifle (fake) built using No4 as the base.

Can you post more pictures ?

Some of the things to look for to check if is a No5 or a civilian fake.

 

A d E
We know that No4 actions were used in Malaya when no No5 actions were available ,same with forends.
Cpt P L has explained this and the reasons why.
Good photos will give clues.

 

The weapon is sold, I will not have any other photos.
Thanks for the technical details between #4 and #5.

 

Ooopss, donki1967.. Just in case:
I checked my proof-book for Germany this evening, to be sure.

This two letters - possibly BS - could not be found, unfortunately.



But there exists some german proof for the Enfield No.5'. Mine has for example the proof-stamp of München.

 

Hello, following my search for a No. 5, I was offered this one with a star-shaped marking.
What does that correspond to?
It has German Proof marks.
Regards

 

Rust was found inside around that area. A note to future armourers so that they know work was done to address it, as it inevitably removed some material.

 

Thank you for your reply, but was the restoration work completed after the marking was done, or does the star indicate that the work still needs to be done?

 

Yes - the work was done, it would leave a 'mark' (not a nice shiney barrel/chamber) and when the Sergeant was doing his inpections it was a 'notice' to him, from the Armourers, that it was not a 'dirty' rifle requiring soldier punishment, it was all OK as the mark inside the barrel was done by the armourers.

 

Thank you Alan de Enfield, that confirms the opinion of the professional seller who told me that the barrel was in good condition.