Random Resources

[Inarus]

Good evening gents.

I'm going to post up a few of the random resources I have accumlated through my internet trolling and Google-Fu.

Some of it came from this forum prior to the "reset" of this summer. Some of it comes from elsewhere. Hopefully you can find something that is useful to you.

Most of this will be stuff that is found in random places online. However I'd like to start a thread that complies all of this in hopes of having a single source for all the random Enfield bits of info.

Also, I gotta get my post count up. Those are rookie numbers.

[Inarus]

Also for you reloaders:

Disclaimer: This is not my verified data but complied data from various internet sources. ALWAYS CHECK YOUR LOAD VERSUS PUBLISHED DATA. I am not responsible if you fail to verify data and destroy property or yourself.

[Tidewater_Kid]

Here are some of mine collected from many places over the years.

[Tidewater_Kid]

Some more.

[Tommy Atkins]

Very nice, thanks.

[Alan De Enfield]

Interesting - I wonder if you could tell me the source for this document?

[Tidewater_Kid]

Years ago it came from Jay Currah's site. The site is gone now, but preserved here. https://www.milsurps.com/enfield.php

[Tidewater_Kid]

A few more.

IMG_0088_zps1c5f43f6.jpg (86.04 KiB) Viewed 2429 times

[Alan De Enfield]

Years ago it came from Jay Currah's site. The site is gone now, but preserved here. https://www.milsurps.com/enfield.php

Thank you.
No chance of getting the errors corrected them.
There are a number on that page alone.

eg :-
B for Bantam is NOT 1/2" shorter than N length (Normal), the S (short) is 1/2" shorter than the N length, and the B length is 1/2" shorter than the S length.

There are several other errors on the same page - competition time - lets see who can spot them all.

[Tidewater_Kid]

Alan,

Since you're a member of the milsurps forum, maybe you can get Badger to let you correct the misinformation.

[Tommy Atkins]

Easy enough to do. copy the pages a .TIF or .JPG drop a white box with a white outline over the errors & drop correct type into it. Any basic photo editing program including "PAINT" which is free with windows shroud do it.
Like this I changed the 1/2" butt stock error to 1".

[Tidewater_Kid]

The one thing I have learned in my 15 years of collecting Lee-Enfields is that there is a exception to every rule. I have always appreciated Jay's information. It was a great site when there were very few sites around. Perfect it is not and that's the fun of continuing to observe and learn. I feel sure they "observed" a Bantam length butt stock that was only 1/2" shorter than normal. Or maybe it was simply a typo. I have found many in books.

[Alan De Enfield]

The one thing I have learned in my 15 years of collecting Lee-Enfields is that there is a exception to every rule. I have always appreciated Jay's information. It was a great site when there were very few sites around. Perfect it is not and that's the fun of continuing to observe and learn. I feel sure they "observed" a Bantam length butt stock that was only 1/2" shorter than normal. Or maybe it was simply a typo. I have found many in books.

Agreed – and even the ‘greats’ such as Peter Laidler & Ian Skennerton have been known to have published ‘incorrect’ information.
As more and more research is undertaken, and the internet grows, more documentation ‘of the time’ is uncovered and folks generally become more educated on the nuances and variations, more and more errors & omissions are being & will continue to be uncovered.
This is why I have been building a library of documents, pamphlets, amourers instructions and books of the period - you never know when the information will be useful / interesting**.

As Peter Laidler says “if I teach you all I know, you will know more than me – what I have taught you, and, the little you knew previously”


Let’s assume that the ‘Bantam Butt’ length error is a typo as the correct information is clearly available in a number of documents from both WW1 & WW2.

Going back to the original question : with todays knowledge, who can identify other errors on the same page (there are several)


**Example of 'useful' from the 1931 "Instructions to Armourers"

To fit new bolt-head to Rifles No. l.—(Spare part bolt- heads, marked “S” on the top, are longer at the front.)
Assemble the bolt-head to the bolt, insert it in the body, and test with .064-inch No. 1 gauge; should the bolt not close over the gauge, remove the bolt-head from the bolt, and having placed a piece of emery cloth (No. F) on a flat surface, rub the face of the bolt-head on the emery cloth, maintaining a circular motion in order to preserve a flat surface, until sufficient metal has been removed to enable the assembled bolt to close over the gauge.
The bolt should not close over the .074inch No. 1 gauge. Care should be taken to keep the-face of the bolt-head flat and square. After fitting and adjusting, the top front edge of the face of the bolt-head is to be rounded to a radius not exceeding .02-inch.

Note.—When it is found that the bolts of several rifles turn over the 074-inch No. 1 gauge, the boltheads should be ex- changed among such rifles, as, owing to the varying lengths of bodies and bolts, bolt-heads which are too short in one rifle may be serviceable in another. Bolt-heads that have been replaced in rifles by longer ones, should be kept by the armourer and used whenever possible in rifles requiring the bolt-head replaced, so as to avoid unnecessary use of new spare part bolt-heads. Partworn bolt-heads held as required by armourers in accordance with the foregoing need not be accounted for as part of the annual allowance of new spare parts.

[Alan De Enfield]

Guide to Distance :

List of Changes for the replacement of the No1 Mk3 with the No1 Mk3*

[Demo]

The page in question is from one of Skennertons I think.