Well, the board is either fixed, or it's going to run terribly. Cross your fingers and hope for the best. I'm at my technical limit right now.

Lee Enfield No 5

Message
Author
PhilRich
Registered User
Registered User
Posts: 13
Joined: Tue Jan 23, 2018 10:48 pm
Age: 99
Location: Pacific Northwest
United States of America

Re: Lee Enfield No 5

#16 Post by PhilRich » Thu Jan 25, 2018 9:18 pm

Any evidence of this on that rifle: "identified by a letter “P” marking and two- or three-digit serial on the buttstock"

No, there isn't. Both the forestock and buttstock are marked 7520.

However, I just noticed another clear "46" stamped on the left side of the receiver. Seems like everytime I take a close look, there is something else to notice. I think this goes a long ways to support the legitimacy of the configuration of the rifle, and it's not being done by "Bubba" This stamp can be seen in the first set of pictures I posted.

72 usmc
Gun Nut
Gun Nut
Posts: 844
Joined: Fri Jun 02, 2017 10:28 pm
Age: 67
Location: Menomonee Falls, Wi
United States of America

Re: Lee Enfield No 5

#17 Post by 72 usmc » Fri Jan 26, 2018 12:17 am

On the Few Enfield rifles I have, both the JCs and number 4s, the actual font for a number four is like what is printed here 4 with a closed top on British rifles. I will have to look at some of my machine stamp sets. I believe they generally have an closed top four font. The stamp 46 is not a normal British font- the 4 is wrong.
added: My USA vintage 1920s stamp sets all have a closed top 4 :Youngs, Miller Falls, Ber co Chicago. In addition the new Impress art stamps are similar. However my Tiwan Menards set has an open top four. So that 4 could be an Asian stamped four. Also German stamp machine sets Made by Gravurem (common) in Germany have your type of open top slanted four. It also appears a larger size than British numbers on enfields. Not sure what this all means other than the font stamp is not common in the US, most common sets have a closed top 4. So a faker would not generally have that style font in the US. If the paint has an aged look, that could be a possible Malaysian JC.
The faker German K98 font sets have open slanted fours on some of the sets depending on the factory repros . These are very expensive sets. I do not want to show the link so people do not buy all the fake stamps, but that is also possible that a German k98 number stamp was used if the rifle is faked. But I never saw numbers stamped like that on any JC, its not normal behavior. Its an odd ball location and font. It all makes me think its a real Mc coy. I just wish we could see more Malaysian examples and I could remember the source about green paint used on tropical JCs in that area ???
To old to fight and to old to run, a Jar head will just shoot and be done with you.

Alan De Enfield
Member
Member
Posts: 93
Joined: Sat Jun 10, 2017 11:28 am
Age: 60
Location: Wales
Wales

Re: Lee Enfield No 5

#18 Post by Alan De Enfield » Fri Jan 26, 2018 4:33 am

When military firearms were sold off after the war, many European countries had legislation that civilians could not own 'military firearms', and having a rifle with a bayonet was 'military' having one without a bayonet was 'hunting'.
Germany in particular is well known for the number of 'bayonet less' ex-military rifles.

On the subject of the paint - yes it was applied in the field by local armourers and was used to replace the 'mineral jelly' previously used as a protector. It was specifically mentioned in the EMERs for 'Jungle Use' but other areas did it as well.

The colour and coverage doesn't look 'right' but when I get an hour or two I'll look thru' my documents and try and find the full details.
"When a well-packaged web of lies has been sold gradually to the masses over many years,

the truth will seem utterly preposterous and its speaker a raving lunatic". Dresden James

Alan De Enfield
Member
Member
Posts: 93
Joined: Sat Jun 10, 2017 11:28 am
Age: 60
Location: Wales
Wales

Re: Lee Enfield No 5

#19 Post by Alan De Enfield » Fri Jan 26, 2018 4:58 am

Here are the 1940 instructions for the No1, No2 and No3 rifles - not yet found the No4 instructions.
Reading thru' this, and assuming the same instructions applied to the No4 and No5 It looks to me as if the OPs No5 was not done by the UK military.
Can anyone identify the 'colour' (note correct spelling !!!) of the Hadfield's paint, the OPs rifle would certainly not normally be considered to be Khaki

I will keep looking for No4 / No5 details.
Attachments
Painting Barrels.docx
(3.05 MiB) Downloaded 27 times
Last edited by Alan De Enfield on Fri Jan 26, 2018 5:24 am, edited 1 time in total.
"When a well-packaged web of lies has been sold gradually to the masses over many years,

the truth will seem utterly preposterous and its speaker a raving lunatic". Dresden James

Alan De Enfield
Member
Member
Posts: 93
Joined: Sat Jun 10, 2017 11:28 am
Age: 60
Location: Wales
Wales

Re: Lee Enfield No 5

#20 Post by Alan De Enfield » Fri Jan 26, 2018 5:22 am

This maybe easier to read than the scan I attached earlier :

Painting Barrels of Rifles Nos 1, 2, and 3
A.C.I. No1444 dated 27/11/40

Approval has been given for the painting of rifle barrels and associated components, as a protection against rust, in lieu of the annual application of mineral jelly as laid down in Instructions for Armourers.
The painting will be carried out in all stations at home and abroad.
Paint, prepared for use, Khaki green, No3 or, as an alternative, Hadfield’s paint specification No1M.1013(B), will be applied by armourers as soon as conditions permit, the following procedure being adopted :-

1) Completely strip the rifle and thoroughly clean, removing all grease from the components to be painted by immersing in strong soda water (not caustic), followed by thorough rinsing in clean hot water to eliminate all traces of soda.

2) Apply one cost of paint to the metal parts normally in contact with the wood, ie:
Rifles No1 and 2
Barrel – The whole of the exterior
Block band foresight – The cylindrical portion only
Band inner – External face
Bed, back sight – Sides and undersides, care being taken to keep the ramps free from paint
Body – The underside and side portions normally in contact with the fore-end stock and the interior, and rear faces of the butt socket
Cap, nose – The interior faces with the exception of fore-sight protector wings
Stud , fore-end – Completely cover
Protector – All over except the protruding wings, which are to be left browned
Bolt, stock – Completely cover with the exception of the screw threads.

Rifle No3
Barrel – The whole of the exterior with the exception of the portion forward of the stock
Body – Underside and side portions normally in contact with the stock
Magazine – Sides and ends, externally
Cap, nose – Internally
Ring, Hand guard – The lever half

3) Allow the paint on the components to dry, standing the barrel muzzle downward.
4) After drying, examine and ensure that no metal shows through the paint, and, if necessary, apply a second coat, endeavouring to keep the film as thin as possible
5) When the paint is finally dry, remove all paint from the screw threads and any surplus paint from the magazine openings, etc.
6) Re-assemble the rifle, omitting the insertion of the mineral jelly between the fore-end, hand guards and painted components.
7) When in use, fore-ends need not be removed from the rifles having painted barrels until this is necessary for re-browning, or when other repairs make removal essential.
8) When re-browning is necessary, the paint should be removed with any suitable paint solvent, components being re-browned and repainted as in para 2
9) Paint, Prepared for use, Khaki green, No3 is obtainable from Section H.I of V.A.O.S on demand.

57/S.A./654 (A3)
"When a well-packaged web of lies has been sold gradually to the masses over many years,

the truth will seem utterly preposterous and its speaker a raving lunatic". Dresden James

Tommy Atkins
Global Moderator
Global Moderator
Posts: 438
Joined: Sat Jun 03, 2017 4:47 pm
Age: 66
Location: Hagerstown, MD
Canada

Re: Lee Enfield No 5

#21 Post by Tommy Atkins » Fri Jan 26, 2018 9:03 am

Now THAT's interesting! I'd always assumed my N05's bayo lug was ground away after sale to a civilian to make it more a "hunting rifle". Maybe those Malay rifles are the source of many more of the de-lugged rifles as well!

PhilRich
Registered User
Registered User
Posts: 13
Joined: Tue Jan 23, 2018 10:48 pm
Age: 99
Location: Pacific Northwest
United States of America

Re: Lee Enfield No 5

#22 Post by PhilRich » Fri Jan 26, 2018 3:41 pm

Alan,
What is your opinion concerning the "46" that is stamped in 3 places on the rifle? I do not see an FTR anywhere. So far I've not broke this rifle down to see what else would be found.

As to the colour - the flash brings out the olive shade more than appears in natural light. The camera white balance setting makes somewhat of a difference.

I've only had this rifle out to shoot once, will have to get it out again. So far it's been worth the price paid to investigate it's history!

Alan De Enfield
Member
Member
Posts: 93
Joined: Sat Jun 10, 2017 11:28 am
Age: 60
Location: Wales
Wales

Re: Lee Enfield No 5

#23 Post by Alan De Enfield » Fri Jan 26, 2018 4:51 pm

PhilRich wrote:
Fri Jan 26, 2018 3:41 pm
Alan,
What is your opinion concerning the "46" that is stamped in 3 places on the rifle? I do not see an FTR anywhere. So far I've not broke this rifle down to see what else would be found.

As to the colour - the flash brings out the olive shade more than appears in natural light. The camera white balance setting makes somewhat of a difference.

I've only had this rifle out to shoot once, will have to get it out again. So far it's been worth the price paid to investigate it's history!
I really don't know, seeing photos of a 'few inches' at a time make the context difficult
The 'green' looks 'wrong' and too shiny (but maybe is all down to flash)
I don't think the paint should be on the exposed metal / barrel / front site 'wings' etc
The 46 looks 'odd' and, as has been mentioned, looks more 'European' than British
The lack of bayonet lug screams 'Germany' to me

If, on the pain of death, I had to speculate on its history, I'd suggest that it was sold off in 1946 to the civilian market in Germany, to comply with the law the dealer ground off the bayonet lugs, he dissasembled the whole rifle and to give it a 'camo look' he painted everything green, marked up the major componets with the year (46), reassembled the rifle and sold it to a member of the German nobility who used it for many years as his 'go-to' boar hunting rifle.

Just for example : A typical German car plate, and a Stencil set for WW2 German Heavy Tanks
Attachments
Germanic No4.jpg
Germanic No4.jpg (13.54 KiB) Viewed 1562 times
Last edited by Alan De Enfield on Fri Jan 26, 2018 5:05 pm, edited 1 time in total.
"When a well-packaged web of lies has been sold gradually to the masses over many years,

the truth will seem utterly preposterous and its speaker a raving lunatic". Dresden James

Alan De Enfield
Member
Member
Posts: 93
Joined: Sat Jun 10, 2017 11:28 am
Age: 60
Location: Wales
Wales

Re: Lee Enfield No 5

#24 Post by Alan De Enfield » Fri Jan 26, 2018 5:12 pm

Stencil Set For WW2 German Heavy Tanks
Attachments
Germanic Numbers.jpg
"When a well-packaged web of lies has been sold gradually to the masses over many years,

the truth will seem utterly preposterous and its speaker a raving lunatic". Dresden James

72 usmc
Gun Nut
Gun Nut
Posts: 844
Joined: Fri Jun 02, 2017 10:28 pm
Age: 67
Location: Menomonee Falls, Wi
United States of America

Re: Lee Enfield No 5

#25 Post by 72 usmc » Sat Jan 27, 2018 3:11 pm

Since you do not have any FMP stamp (Federal Malaysian Police), no thick laquered finish on the stock, No P , no CAI (Century Arms import mark) on the bottom of the barrel, and no rack number on the stock, I do not see it having common traits as a rifle from the Malaysian batch of JCs that Aim sold off in the 1980s.
It also lacks the attributes of and Indian referb marked RFI with an Isshy screw. see an example of an Indian JC here (note the style of the 4 in the serial #):
https://www.tapatalk.com/groups/paralla ... 35921.html

Consequently I like the German import, JC hunting rifle hypotheses. Especially with the evidence of the typical open slanted 4 found on German numbers. And the new fact I did not know, that German imported military rifles had to have the bayonet stud removed. :doh: :clap: It is also odd too see a year stamped in that odd fashion and the fact that the paint is off coloured . We never did find out if it has traits of brush marks of a spray painted job??? If the bore is like new, I would tend to think it's a hunting rifle well taken care of because most of the CAI imported JCs that AIM sold had bores in poor condition to sewer pipes. Most sporters/hunting JCs that I have seen have a one nice, key attribute- the bore is pristine. This has been an interesting discussion and certainly an interesting specimen of a JC. A lot of good information in this post and a great learning experience. Thanks to the experts for the info.
To old to fight and to old to run, a Jar head will just shoot and be done with you.

Alan De Enfield
Member
Member
Posts: 93
Joined: Sat Jun 10, 2017 11:28 am
Age: 60
Location: Wales
Wales

Re: Lee Enfield No 5

#26 Post by Alan De Enfield » Sat Jan 27, 2018 4:44 pm

72 usmc wrote:
Sat Jan 27, 2018 3:11 pm
. And the new fact I did not know, that German imported military rifles had to have the bayonet stud removed.
If I can just clarify - In Germany, for a Private citizen to own an ex-military rifle it must no longer be classed as 'military' and the acceptable way of proving that was to remove the bayonet lugs.
I am not sure if you meant 'imported' into Germany, or, exported from Germany and 'imported' elsewhere.
Apologies if I misunderstood.
"When a well-packaged web of lies has been sold gradually to the masses over many years,

the truth will seem utterly preposterous and its speaker a raving lunatic". Dresden James

PhilRich
Registered User
Registered User
Posts: 13
Joined: Tue Jan 23, 2018 10:48 pm
Age: 99
Location: Pacific Northwest
United States of America

Re: Lee Enfield No 5

#27 Post by PhilRich » Sat Jan 27, 2018 6:12 pm

Consequently I like the German import, JC hunting rifle hypotheses. Especially with the evidence of the typical open slanted 4 found on German numbers. And the new fact I did not know, that German imported military rifles had to have the bayonet stud removed. :doh: :clap: It is also odd too see a year stamped in that odd fashion and the fact that the paint is off coloured . We never did find out if it has traits of brush marks of a spray painted job??? If the bore is like new, I would tend to think it's a hunting rifle well taken care of because most of the CAI imported JCs that AIM sold had bores in poor condition to sewer pipes. Most sporters/hunting JCs that I have seen have a one nice, key attribute- the bore is pristine. This has been an interesting discussion and certainly an interesting specimen of a JC. A lot of good information in this post and a great learning experience. Thanks to the experts for the info.
In response, the paint does show brush strokes, some of which can been seen in the posted pictures. I some places the paint job is very smooth. I'm reluctant to totally disassemble the rifle but did remove the upper hand guard. Also, the bore is very good showing strong rifling and no pitting. This is consistent with the overall condition of the rifle. The barrel paint only goes as far as the upper hand guard.

If the "46" indicates the year 1946, I have a hard time believing that this rifle would be sold to German private citizens that soon after the war. Also, the 4 and 6 aren't consistent with each other in relation to the above font sets.

The word England is stamped on the right side butt stock "yoke" (not sure what I should call it). twice. Once in small letters and once is large letters. There is no import mark however the barrel is stamped with the British proof marks and value. There is also a 2.222 - I don't know what this means.

I do not consider myself anywhere near an authority on the history of these rifles but am intrigued concerning this one. I could remove the paint but since it's part of it's history I'll leave it as is.

72 usmc
Gun Nut
Gun Nut
Posts: 844
Joined: Fri Jun 02, 2017 10:28 pm
Age: 67
Location: Menomonee Falls, Wi
United States of America

Re: Lee Enfield No 5

#28 Post by 72 usmc » Sat Jan 27, 2018 6:31 pm

So you are thinking the 46 is a rack # stamped on the barrel so it could be seen on a rack of stored rifles and it's not a year? No painted rack number on the stock, rather tit is a stamped rack number? Interesting idea? :think: I have rifles with painted rack numbers, but I have never seen one with a stamped rack number on the receiver or barrel. Also interesting is the fact that the paint does not extend under the wood were it would do the most good as a preservative? I think, more evidence of a non military application. On the few pictures I can find on line, the screws were never painted except on the rear of the bolt. Another crazy thought is it is or could be an inventory Museum number stamped on the rifle. But any Museum worth its salt would not modify/restamp a rifle or artifact. Our rifles or special objects had copper tags with an inventory control # stamped onto the tag which was attached by a copper wire or black India ink was used to write on an object its inventory number. This was an unique ID number for its provenience. But a Police station or small armory keep inventory and track of its rifles, well.... maybe a control number?? :snooty: :think:
To old to fight and to old to run, a Jar head will just shoot and be done with you.

PhilRich
Registered User
Registered User
Posts: 13
Joined: Tue Jan 23, 2018 10:48 pm
Age: 99
Location: Pacific Northwest
United States of America

Re: Lee Enfield No 5

#29 Post by PhilRich » Sat Jan 27, 2018 7:21 pm

72 usmc wrote:
Sat Jan 27, 2018 6:31 pm
So you are thinking the 46 is a rack # stamped on the barrel so it could be seen on a rack of stored rifles and it's not a year? No painted rack number on the stock, rather tit is a stamped rack number? Interesting idea? :think: I have rifles with painted rack numbers, but I have never seen one with a stamped rack number on the receiver or barrel. Also interesting is the fact that the paint does not extend under the wood were it would do the most good as a preservative? I think, more evidence of a non military application. On the few pictures I can find on line, the screws were never painted except on the rear of the bolt. Another crazy thought is it is or could be an inventory Museum number stamped on the rifle. But any Museum worth its salt would not modify/restamp a rifle or artifact. Our rifles or special objects had copper tags with an inventory control # stamped onto the tag which was attached by a copper wire or black India ink was used to write on an object its inventory number. This was an unique ID number for its provenience. But a Police station or small armory keep inventory and track of its rifles, well.... maybe a control number?? :snooty: :think:
No, I think it has to do with the modification of the rifle since it is stamped directly where the bayonet lug was removed. To my way of thinking it doesn't make sense that a private citizen would so mark a rifle and the fact that it is so marked in three places. It seems to me that the 46 is stamped as some sort of record so the logical conclusion (??) would be the year.

I'm aware that the US furnished the German police with M1 carbines. These can be identified by their markings. But have never heard of their being provided British rifles.

How far the paint goes will require breaking down the rifle. I may have to end up doing this.

I've had the idea that the country of origin was stamped on British rifles prior to being exported. But, why stamped twice in different fonts??

Until additional info is available, it appears that we are left to assumptions concerning this rifle.

PhilRich
Registered User
Registered User
Posts: 13
Joined: Tue Jan 23, 2018 10:48 pm
Age: 99
Location: Pacific Northwest
United States of America

Re: Lee Enfield No 5

#30 Post by PhilRich » Sat Jan 27, 2018 7:34 pm

PhilRich wrote:
Sat Jan 27, 2018 7:21 pm
72 usmc wrote:
Sat Jan 27, 2018 6:31 pm
So you are thinking the 46 is a rack # stamped on the barrel so it could be seen on a rack of stored rifles and it's not a year? No painted rack number on the stock, rather tit is a stamped rack number? Interesting idea? :think: I have rifles with painted rack numbers, but I have never seen one with a stamped rack number on the receiver or barrel. Also interesting is the fact that the paint does not extend under the wood were it would do the most good as a preservative? I think, more evidence of a non military application. On the few pictures I can find on line, the screws were never painted except on the rear of the bolt. Another crazy thought is it is or could be an inventory Museum number stamped on the rifle. But any Museum worth its salt would not modify/restamp a rifle or artifact. Our rifles or special objects had copper tags with an inventory control # stamped onto the tag which was attached by a copper wire or black India ink was used to write on an object its inventory number. This was an unique ID number for its provenience. But a Police station or small armory keep inventory and track of its rifles, well.... maybe a control number?? :snooty: :think:
No, I think it has to do with the modification of the rifle since it is stamped directly where the bayonet lug was removed. To my way of thinking it doesn't make sense that a private citizen would so mark a rifle and the fact that it is so marked in three places. It seems to me that the 46 is stamped as some sort of record so the logical conclusion (??) would be the year.

The pictures show that the green paint was applied after the 46 and other stamps were applied.

I'm aware that the US furnished the German police with M1 carbines. These can be identified by their markings. But have never heard of their being provided British rifles.

How far the paint goes will require breaking down the rifle. I may have to end up doing this.

I've had the idea that the country of origin was stamped on British rifles prior to being exported. But, why stamped twice in different fonts??

Until additional info is available, it appears that we are left to assumptions concerning this rifle.

Post Reply

Return to “British Empire and Commonwealth”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest