Gunboards Forums banner
1 - 16 of 16 Posts

·
Silver Bullet Member
Joined
·
2,489 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
Hey Guys,
I was looking at a No. 1 Mk.III and the rear sight seems different than usual. However, I am not very fluent in Enfield. Is this an original sight that would have been used on a 1917 production rifle?
Regards,
Brian
 

Attachments

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,352 Posts
The original windage adjustable rear sight was used on the SMLE Mk III. It was dropped as part of the changes made to the Mk III* specification. It would be pretty late to see one on a 1917 as that was after the Mk III* was adopted, but it could be original. Usually the sight leaf is serialized on the underside on a matching rifle, so that would be one way to confirm.

On second look, I didn't look close enough to see that the elevation slide is different, and it appears to have multiple notches on the cap, so I'm not sure exactly what that sight is. Looks like it could be some kind of aftermarket adjustable target sight
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
18,170 Posts
Very strange, it seems to have 3 rear sight notches!
If it's windage adjustable that seems superfluous?
Also be gentle with the windage adjustment it was replaced because it was very fragile & so easily broken & some were pinned fixed as well.
 

·
Silver Bullet Member
Joined
·
2,489 Posts
Discussion Starter · #5 ·
The rear sight is not numbered to the rifle.
 

·
Silver Bullet Member
Joined
·
2,489 Posts
Discussion Starter · #7 ·
So a rear sight would have to be found to make the rifle 1917 correct. I appreciate it guys.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,970 Posts
So a rear sight would have to be found to make the rifle 1917 correct. I appreciate it guys.

The whole thing is very, very different to a 'windage' adjustable No1 Enfield rear sight leaf.

The Windage rear sight leaf would have either been 'pinned' into position or replaced by a non-adjustable rear sight in 1916. (Item B on the modification list)
 

Attachments

·
Silver Bullet Member
Joined
·
2,489 Posts
Discussion Starter · #10 ·
Yeah, the cutoff is what got my attention initially.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
13,944 Posts
The rear sight elevation and windage assembly looks very much like the Model 1898 Krag unit, slightly modified and adapted to the Enfield base.

PRD1 - mhb - MIke
+1. That sight has Krag written all over it.

The range score marks going all the way across the leaf is a dead giveaway.

Model 1898, if I am not mistaken. My 1896 Krag wears a 1902 rear sight, which varies only slightly from the 1898 sight.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,834 Posts
If the rifle shoots to the short range elevation with the front blade fitted, you might be surprised how well the Krag (graduated for 220 grn cartridge from memory) would suit a heavy bullet 180 gr load in the .303

No doubt the three sight notches were veeeery confusing for a new recruit, and the reason why they soon altered that sight to grind the corners off just far enough to make the side notches dissappear. I can just see that recruit saying "I see three of everything" on the firing line and being told to keep shooting. The soldier with a Smelly saying the same thing would be sent straight off as a casualty (suspected concussion or head wound)
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
810 Posts
I'd not have thought of adapting the 1898 Krag sight to the SMLE, but it's obviously a workable solution to the windage correction problem, and I'll file it away in memory for future reference. It also looks good, and not very different from the correct SMLE sight assembly. Hats off to the guy to whom the inspiration came.

PRD1 - mhb - MIke
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
810 Posts
Plonker:

IIRC, the additional windage notches in the 1898 Krag rear sight are for lead-off on crossing cavalry. They were an added feature, not found on the original 1898 sight, or on all of them still in existence. The 1902 sight is essentially the same, with a pop-up peep plate added, and no additional windage notches in the blade.
My curiosity having been piqued by this thread, I got out a Krag sight and a SMLE sight leaf. They are mechanically interchangeable with little, if any, mechanical alteration. The width of the sight leaves are nominally .450", and the ones I measured are within .001" of that figure. The radius between the pivot hole and the sight blade is .080" longer on the SMLE leaf, which is probably not significant in this application. The elevation graduations may or may not be close to the actual range achieved, due to the different form of the elevation ramps and the different geometry of the elevation slides. The pivot pin may be slightly larger in the SMLE assembly, but that would be the only alteration possibly needed in adapting the Krag assembly to the SMLE base. Altogether a serendipitous pairing.

PRD-1 - mhb - MIke
 
1 - 16 of 16 Posts
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top