Okay Guys, what do I have here?

[Dipperman]

Bought an Enfield No.4 Mk 1 today which I hope to use as a cast boolit launcher. On the left side of the reciever it is marked: First line: No 4 Mk 1 (F) Second line: 9/48 PF455xx

The curious thing about the marking, is that it looks like it was put on with an electric pencil, very light, rather than being stamped into the metal. Same thing on the matching number on the bolt.

Is this the way they did these or is this possibly a rebuild?

Thanks much in advance.

Al (aka Dipperman)

[NVcurmudgeon]

Al, Your No. 4 was made at ROF (Royal Ordnance Factory) Fazakerly in September 1948. My 1943 Fazakerly also has faint markings. Check to see if your magazine is serial numbered to the rifle, mine is. Despite erroneous popular opinion the British did NOT issue multiple magazines. It would have been impossible to carry extra loaded magazines and keep the cartridges from falling out. Their rifles used stripper clips as did Springfields, Mausers, Arisakas, MAS, etc. Your 1948 production rifle enjoyed the blessings of peacetime production, so your barrel will probably slug close to standard.

[Frank46]

Al, my #4 MKII was made in 1949 and has the same electric stenciling with the PF prefix. I saw a few of those #4's that were brand new in the wrap and the few I saw also had the electric penciled serial numbers. Now I was one very dumb guy as I foolishly did not buy one at the time. The #4 I have now cost $125 with an almost mint bore and shoots south african 303 ball like match ammunition. Should have bought a case of that when it was available. Dumb, Dumb. Frank

[Four Fingers of Death]

Al, my #4 MKII was made in 1949 and has the same electric stenciling with the PF prefix. I saw a few of those #4's that were brand new in the wrap and the few I saw also had the electric penciled serial numbers. Now I was one very dumb guy as I foolishly did not buy one at the time. The #4 I have now cost $125 with an almost mint bore and shoots south african 303 ball like match ammunition. Should have bought a case of that when it was available. Dumb, Dumb. Frank


I am so old I actually carried a SMLE in school cadets.

We never removed the mags, except to clean them. I don't know about the No4, but the SMLE (called smelly in Australia) mags were fitted to each rifle.

Despit using them as a young un, I have never been overly keen on them, but currently have a rebuilt 1907 SMLE, a No4Mk2, and a No4 Mk1 which has been converted to 308. I also want to launch lead out of them and will get around to it one day.

If your rifle only has the double peep sight, try and buy a Singer style sight for it. There are some around at the moment, but they will dry up soon. they really transform the rifle. I'm gonna but a few for the future, no doubt I will pick up more of these over the years.

Welcome aboard. Search the net, there is lots of interesting stuff out there about No4s.

[Johnch]

I have a book on Brit battle rifles.
It states the troops were ordered to never remove the mag except for cleaning.
They were punished if caught.

I have a #4 Mk1 that is a great CB shooter .
I restocked it because it was oil soaked.

Johnch

[Four Fingers of Death]

I have a book on Brit battle rifles.
It states the troops were ordered to never remove the mag except for cleaning.
They were punished if caught.

I have a #4 Mk1 that is a great CB shooter .
I restocked it because it was oil soaked.

Johnch

We got a big issue of push ups if we ever took ethe mag out except when cleaning. They were not interchangable without armoury work and the rifle was a very slow single shot without it. Get some stripper clips and make sure you load them correctly. place the first rim against the clip, the next rim above that rim, the next under the rim, against the clip and so on. Doesn't look right, but works like a charm. When loading single rounds, ensure the rims are in front of the previous rim.

One os the slickest bolt actions ever, enjoy!

[Dipperman]

I want to thank everyone for their response to my question. I do have a couple of more questions, but as I am going to be off-line for a bit, they will have to wait.

Thanks again,
Al (aka Dipperman)

[Dipperman]

Thanks again fellows, I hope I can keep everyone straight so my reply makes sense.


NVcurmudgeon, thank you for the where and when. I checked the magazine and did not find a serial number on it. I did try feeding some loaded rounds, j-word soft points, from the magazine and except for some drag on the feed ramp they fed okay. I may have to try to smooth up the feed ramp a little. Right now I am trying to get the copper out of the bore so I can try to slug it. Slugging the barrel will be a new experience for me, just like trying to shoot cast boolits in a rifle. I hope it will slug close to standard, the only heavy use for this rifle, being made in 1948, would have been if it did time in Korea and I am hazy on how much the British were involved there.


Frank46, thank you for your input. I will not go into what I gave for this particular critter, but I bought it from a friend and did have a chance to shoot it before I bought it. If I can get it to shoot groups with cast close to what I shot with it using j-words (about an inch and a half at 100 yards) I will be a happy camper.


4fingermick, thank you for your input. When flipped up, the rear sight on my rifle has the peep with the elevation adjusting screw. Is that what you mean by a Singer style sight? Thanks for the directions on filling stripper clips and loading the magazine. I got two or three stripper clips with the rifle, I guess I will have to keep on the lookout for a few more.


Johnch, quote, "I have a #4 Mk 1 that is a great CB shooter." Thanks for the encouragement.


It looks like all I have to do is get the copper out, slug the bore, find a mould, figure out some loads, and have at it. I guess that is why I bought this one, didn't really have anything suitable for starting out with cast in a rifle and the j-words were getting boring and too darn expensive.

Thanks again guys.

Al

[BruceB]

I'm another one who has spent a LOT of time with a #4 in my hands. This rifle has always had my utmost respect, and I'm not gonna change my mind after about fifty years of living within reach of one!

If your barrel is a five-groove version, it's a bit of a trial to get an accurate measurement of the diameter. This is because the lands and grooves do not exactly oppose each other....instead of land being opposite to land across the bore, the odd number (five grooves) means that any land is directly opposite to a groove. Two-groove barrrels are easy to measure, of course.

Since your rifle is of post-war manufacture, it's probably got a five-groove barrel. However, it's also probable that it's closer to "nominal" dimensions than some of the made-in-haste wartime barrels, and I'd go right to .314" for sizing the boolits and see how that works.

For the very best of available sights, go to Ebay and search for "Parker Hale". The sight for the #4 is the PH5C, and it MUST, repeat MUST be the "5C", not the 5A, or 5B, any other combination of numbers and letters. Also, do NOT buy a sight unless it has BOTH mounting screws....this is critical, unless you want a useless sight until a $20.00 screw can be located months later! These are match-quality sights which are used to 1000 yards and beyond, and they're not cheap, often running to $150 or more. However, the money can be recouped if necessary in the future, and they really are an excellent sight.

My own Grandfather served in the 48th Highlanders of Canada from Toronto Ontario, during World War One. They were issued the Ross rifle before arriving in France in 1915, but quickly managed to "lose" those rifles and replace them with SMLEs from the battlefield. Accurate, yes, but the Ross didn't tolerate mud at ALL. He told me of carrying around "a bag" of extra magazines, but this is simply wrong, as Curmudgeon stated. The mags do not retain cartridges worth a hoot when out of the rifle, and I'm sure Grandpa Bannister was actually carrying a sack of loaded chargers. He thought the world of the SMLE rifle. The reason for frowning on magazine removal by soldiers is that the lips are rather easy to distort, and thus not very "soldier proof". Besides, loading the rifle with chargers was lightning-fast for a trained man. One of the standard "Tests of Training" for Army Cadets in Canada, teenagers of 14 years and up, was to go from standing "at ease" to prone with the rifle, load ten rounds (two chargers) and fire a minimum score to qualify....in 45 seconds. It wasn't all that difficult, even for kids. To see major "grins", just attend the firing line when these same teeners got to fire a few mags from the Bren light machinegun! They could strip or re-assemble the Bren in less than 30 seconds...blindfolded! Governments don't seem to teach kids this stuff any more. Too bad.