Armory Sponsor
Posted: 6/5/2016 1:12:43 PM EDT
I helped a friend move into a new house yesterday, and when we were moving the stuff out of the safe he gave me one of his old enfields to clear up space and "pay" me for helping with the move. I don't really know much about these rifles other than they're British and chambered in .303. This one I believe is a No.1 mk III* and was made in 1918. It had been sporterized at some point in its nearly 100 year life and I would like to restore it to at least look like a proper enfield. Would this stock set and this hardware set get the job done?
|
Nice first SMLE. They breed, you know.
Re. magazine: even though they look the same at a quick glance, the magazines for the No. 1 Mk III and the later No. 4 rifles are different; be sure you're getting the right one. The grooves on the side of the magazine run all the way to the bottom of the No. 1 magazine; they stop just short of the bottom on the No. 4 magazines. The aftermarket ProMags are a waste of money, so don't bother. Expect your new (old) magazine to need a bit of tweaking to work flawlessly in your rifle; they were expected to stay in the rifle and be topped off with the 5-round chargers. Speaking of which, you'll probably want a few dozen chargers. |
|
Eh, it'll work, but Indian crapwood stock sets with obvious Ishapore screws aren't really the optimal wood for this rifle. You'd do better to watch eBay and see if you can't score actual British walnut forestock and handguards for this rifle.
ETA: That arrow-in-c mark on the receiver indicates this rifle has seen Canadian service. |
|
Quoted:
Eh, it'll work, but Indian crapwood stock sets with obvious Ishapore screws aren't really the optimal wood for this rifle. You'd do better to watch eBay and see if you can't score actual British walnut forestock and handguards for this rifle. ETA: That arrow-in-c mark on the receiver indicates this rifle has seen Canadian service. I wish I saw your post earlier, the Indian stock set just shipped 
Oh well, it will be good for now and I can make it more "proper" later. Pretty cool about that Canadian mark. |
|
Quoted:
Nice first SMLE. They breed, you know.
Re. magazine: even though they look the same at a quick glance, the magazines for the No. 1 Mk III and the later No. 4 rifles are different; be sure you're getting the right one. The grooves on the side of the magazine run all the way to the bottom of the No. 1 magazine; they stop just short of the bottom on the No. 4 magazines. The aftermarket ProMags are a waste of money, so don't bother. Expect your new (old) magazine to need a bit of tweaking to work flawlessly in your rifle; they were expected to stay in the rifle and be topped off with the 5-round chargers. Speaking of which, you'll probably want a few dozen chargers. Thanks. I did read that the mags are not interchangeable from the no 1 and no 4, and it's good to know to avoid the ProMags. |
|
Quoted:
Eh, it'll work, but Indian crapwood stock sets with obvious Ishapore screws aren't really the optimal wood for this rifle. You'd do better to watch eBay and see if you can't score actual British walnut forestock and handguards for this rifle. ETA: That arrow-in-c mark on the receiver indicates this rifle has seen Canadian service. I don't get the Ishapore stock hate.....It's just a screw. I know my trainer does not know the difference considering the way it shoots and IMHO it's a handsome piece of wood. Looks like mahogany to me.
|
|
Quoted:
I don't get the Ishapore stock hate.....It's just a screw. I know my trainer does not know the difference considering the way it shoots and IMHO it's a handsome piece of wood. Looks like mahogany to me.
Quoted:
Quoted:
Eh, it'll work, but Indian crapwood stock sets with obvious Ishapore screws aren't really the optimal wood for this rifle. You'd do better to watch eBay and see if you can't score actual British walnut forestock and handguards for this rifle. ETA: That arrow-in-c mark on the receiver indicates this rifle has seen Canadian service. I don't get the Ishapore stock hate.....It's just a screw. I know my trainer does not know the difference considering the way it shoots and IMHO it's a handsome piece of wood. Looks like mahogany to me.
It's not just the screw, it's the whole stock itself. It's tired, beat up Indian wood of questionable quality from a drill purpose rifle. It just seems wrong to put that on what was a pretty nice LSA that was sold out of service in the UK. It'll "suffice", and it'll be fine, but it's just not optimal. |
|
Quoted: It's not just the screw, it's the whole stock itself. It's tired, beat up Indian wood of questionable quality from a drill purpose rifle. It just seems wrong to put that on what was a pretty nice LSA that was sold out of service in the UK. It'll "suffice", and it'll be fine, but it's just not optimal. Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: Eh, it'll work, but Indian crapwood stock sets with obvious Ishapore screws aren't really the optimal wood for this rifle. You'd do better to watch eBay and see if you can't score actual British walnut forestock and handguar Kmds for this rifle. ETA: That arrow-in-c mark on the receiver indicates this rifle has seen Canadian service. I don't get the Ishapore stock hate.....It's just a screw. I know my trainer does not know the difference considering the way it shoots and IMHO it's a handsome piece of wood. Looks like mahogany to me. It's not just the screw, it's the whole stock itself. It's tired, beat up Indian wood of questionable quality from a drill purpose rifle. It just seems wrong to put that on what was a pretty nice LSA that was sold out of service in the UK. It'll "suffice", and it'll be fine, but it's just not optimal. Wood is easy to clean up as long as thiers no cracking. As for DP marked hardware that's where the future issue will arise. Many collectors will stay pretty far away from DP marked rifles, even if it's just on the miscellaneous hardware and not on the bolt or receiver. My Ishy has it on the bolt and iv shot it for years befor I knew anything about the DP debates, and since it's still possible to get hardware that isn't marked DP I'd suggest searching for those components way befor worrying about some silly screw. https://www.instagram.com/p/BEJhzF7QOyC/
|
|
Quoted: What did you use as a finish on the stock? I read that originally the wood was dipped in a hot, raw linseed oil bath which gave the stock a matte finish. It seems like a lot of people use boiled linseed oil or tung oil now. |
|
Quoted:
Wood is easy to clean up as long as thiers no cracking. As for DP marked hardware that's where the future issue will arise. Many collectors will stay pretty far away from DP marked rifles, even if it's just on the miscellaneous hardware and not on the bolt or receiver. My Ishy has it on the bolt and iv shot it for years befor I knew anything about the DP debates, and since it's still possible to get hardware that isn't marked DP I'd suggest searching for those components way befor worrying about some silly screw. I just used the wood, the hardware came from the original which was a pieced together (and ragged-out) replacement stock-set that was on the trainer. IMHO I came out way ahead.....Ishapore screw and all.
I bought three stock sets/hardware from SS years ago when they were around $70.00 a set. I just checked the one bag of hardware I have left and none of it was DP marked, just a mixed bag of used Brit marked parts. I remember one set came with a Ishapore made nose cap with the squared-off sight protector ears but I don't recall if it was DP marked or not as I sold it on eBay. ************* Once India got out from under the thumb of the Brits and having to make do with bits of Brit rifles they cobbled together they produced some decent rifles on their own hook. Easily equal in quality to the Commonwealth wartime # III* rifles. Here is a 1951 Ishapore No. 1 Mk 3* I own. 
|
|
Quoted:
Being that I resurrected a 1913 and a 1918 with Ishy wood I whole heartedly disagree .....its the "DP" marked hardware thats going to ruin the rifle. Wood is easy to clean up as long as thiers no cracking. As for DP marked hardware that's where the future issue will arise. Many collectors will stay pretty far away from DP marked rifles, even if it's just on the miscellaneous hardware and not on the bolt or receiver. My Ishy has it on the bolt and iv shot it for years befor I knew anything about the DP debates, and since it's still possible to get hardware that isn't marked DP I'd suggest searching for those components way befor worrying about some silly screw. https://www.instagram.com/p/BEJhzF7QOyC/ Oh, yeah. Don't ever use DP-marked parts, that's a given. Not only for the value hit things will take for using them, but also because DP rifles were generally built or assembled using parts that failed inspection. Ishapore build quality is perfectly fine. The rifles that were built under British supervision are generally nicer than the post-Independance ones, but they're all perfectly good rifles. The issue with Indian-service rifles (and this applies equally to British-made rifles in Indian service) is that neither the Indian climate nor the Indian conscript military are especially kind to rifles. |
Armory Sponsor