This one popped up locally and I'm super happy with her. Everything matches except the bolt. The bore was dark with some obvious copper fouling but cleaned up really well and bright.

Nice one!

If I had to take a bolt action rifle into battle, the No. 4 Enfield would be a top contender for sure. Fast and slick action, 10 round magazine, and a good peep sight (especially on ones with the fancier ladder sight instead of the simpler flip peep like yours).

My No. 4 is an all-matching minty 1942 Maltby.

That is a nice one. Congrats.

I’m still looking for one here in TX. Last one I saw at a gun show had been sporterized, missing stock and bands.

Thanks guys. I've shot my buddies before but having one myself, there is definitely a unique appreciation for them. Rogue, you have a baller milsurp collection, love seeing all of them.

Thanks 357.

Mike, it took a lot of looking. I snagged this one on armslist. Pawn shops had enfields from $600+. This was a really clean savage I got for $540.

I just grabbed a 1944 Long Branch, I'll post pics when it gets here.

In the last month or so Ive picked up

K31
K11
Swedish M41B
Mosin 91/30
Caracano 91 TS x2
Arisaka Type 99

All started when I bought a Garand a couple months ago.

quote:

Originally posted by RogueJSK:
If I had to take a bolt action rifle into battle, the No. 4 Enfield would be a top contender for sure.

Agreed. I don't have your depth and breadth of knowledge on the subject, but that's what I would choose. I briefly owned a No. 4 that someone had "sporterized" and while I never did shoot it, I was impressed at how easily and quickly the bolt could be worked. The sights were nice as well, and yeah, 10 rounds is hard to argue with in that format.

quote:

Originally posted by WARPIG602:
I just grabbed a 1944 Long Branch, I'll post pics when it gets here.

In the last month or so Ive picked up

K31
K11
Swedish M41B
Mosin 91/30
Caracano 91 TS x2
Arisaka Type 99

All started when I bought a Garand a couple months ago.

Had a Canadian myself long ago. I am curious why the OPs #4 is marked US Property? Never seen that before. Any idea Rogue? That marking looks to be quite correct as applied to many US Service rifles.

The British were in dire need of additional rifles in late 1940/early 1941, so they contracted with some overseas arms factories to produce small arms, including with the Auto-Ordnance company for Thompsons and with Savage-Stevens for Enfield rifles. However, in addition to being short on guns, the British were also short on cash.

According to the Lend-Lease Act passed in March 1941, Congress allowed the US to lend US government property to the British, despite the US still being technically neutral at the time. So in mid-1941, early in the British contract with Savage for these Enfield rifles, the US took over the contract, and we began paying for the Enfield rifle contract ourselves "for US military use". We then "loaned" these "US Property" Enfields to the British.

So it was all a technicality. Technically, on paper, these were "loaned US military rifles", but they were never actually used by the US military, and they weren't actually loaned but were rather given to the British with no expectation of repayment or return.

Thank you sir for a lesson of History. It gives the rifle a little more meaning, IMO. I have seen #4s here in a Gun Shop which appeared to have never been issued.

Is the S stamp before its Model # for Savage?

Yes. A number of the parts will have such squared S marks.

quote:

Originally posted by RogueJSK:
Nice one!

If I had to take a bolt action rifle into battle, the No. 4 Enfield would be a top contender for sure. Fast and slick action, 10 round magazine, and a good peep sight (especially on ones with the fancier ladder sight instead of the simpler flip peep like yours).

My No. 4 is an all-matching minty 1942 Maltby.

Nice collection. Are both of these MKIII*? I have a few of them as well, but no decent SMLE Mk III with Cut-Off and volley sight. How difficult is it to find an unaltered MK III with cut-off and LR sight in your corner for a decent price? It was actually easier tu find an SMLE Mk V trials (not. No.5MkI)rifle or an SMLE Mk I*** then an original, complete and decent Mk III.

quote:

Originally posted by RogueJSK:
The British were in dire need of additional rifles in late 1940/early 1941, so they contracted with some overseas arms factories to produce small arms, including with the Auto-Ordnance company for Thompsons and with Savage-Stevens for Enfield rifles. However, in addition to being short on guns, the British were also short on cash.

According to the Lend-Lease Act passed in March 1941, Congress allowed the US to lend US government property to the British, despite the US still being technically neutral at the time. So in mid-1941, early in the British contract with Savage for these Enfield rifles, the US took over the contract, and we began paying for the Enfield rifle contract ourselves "for US military use". We then "loaned" these "US Property" Enfields to the British.

So it was all a technicality. Technically, on paper, these were "loaned US military rifles", but they were never actually used by the US military, and they weren't actually loaned but were rather given to the British with no expectation of repayment or return.

That is by far the kindest and gentlest of all reminders- as if any were necessary - of the huge dept that the people of the UK owed to the United States in very troubled times, when, in a statement of stark truth, Churchill said that 'We shall fight on the beaches, we shall fight on the landing grounds, we shall fight in the fields and in the streets, we shall fight in the hills; we shall never surrender.'
When he stood up in Parliament and proclaimed those words, units of the Wehrmacht were literally visible with a decent pair of binoculars from the cliffs of Dover. To Calais in nazi-occupied France was less than 24 miles away across the English Channel.

Nevertheless, although the financial part of the Lend/Lease Dept was fully paid back in 2006, the debt of gratitude can never be repaid.

However, there were a few 'little spin-offs' given to the USA resulting from British science and technology - 'Tacit repayment of Lend-Lease by the British was made in the form of several valuable technologies, including those related to radar, sonar, jet engines, antitank weaponry, rockets, superchargers, gyroscopic gunsights, submarine detection, self-sealing fuel tanks, and plastic explosives as well as the British contribution to the Manhattan Project. Many of these were transferred by the Tizard Mission. The official historian of the Office of Scientific Research and Development, James Phinney Baxter III, wrote: "When the members of the Tizard Mission brought the cavity magnetron to America in 1940, they carried the most valuable cargo ever brought to our shores.'

quote:

Originally posted by OTD:
Nice collection. Are both of these MKIII*?

The first one is a 1918 Enfield Mk. III. It was originally produced as a III*, then brought up to III standard during the interwar period by being converted to accept a magazine cutoff, and the "*" in the model designation was lined out.

The second one is a 1937 Birmingham Mk. III. (Never a III*.) It was initially produced as a commercial rifle, likely as part of an overrun from their contract with the Kingdom of Iraq from that same period, before being "taken up from trade" (in British parlance) and diverted into British military service. It has BSA commercial markings, but also the usual government acceptance marks.

quote:

I have a few of them as well, but no decent SMLE Mk III with Cut-Off and volley sight. How difficult is it to find an unaltered MK III with cut-off and LR sight in your corner for a decent price?

Very difficult to find early SMLEs with original cutoffs and volley sights, and pricey when you do.

The only official difference between the III and III* is the provision for the magazine cutoff. Some III*s, like mine, were converted at some point. But even then, on most IIIs and converted former III*s, the magazine cutoff plate itself was later removed at some point throughout its life.

On SMLEs, the volley sights were separately omitted starting in 1916-1920, along with simplifying the early windage-adjustable rear sight to a fixed rear sight, and these features were never brought back like the magazine cutoffs were. But that's separate from the III/III* designation. Even later production IIIs, like my 1937, still lacked volley sights and windage adjustable rear sights.

Though both of my SMLEs are IIIs with provisions for cutoffs, neither of them have the magazine cutoff plates installed any more (although I guess I could reinstall them myself if I had some and so desired). My 1918 has an original windage-adjustable rear sight that has been pinned in place to remove the adjustment capability, a common practice instead of totally replacing the rear sight. But both were produced after the volley sights were omitted, so never had them, and don't have the provision for them.

My Eddystone P14, the top rifle in the photo, does have the original fittings for volley sights, although the sights themselves have been removed as on most other examples.