45/70 SMLE No4 from Navy Arms

[Ronnie Dale]

Tulsa gunshow score

I think the seller did a poor job of presenting the rifle as unless you were in the know like me it was just lying on a table looking like any of the other 1000 bubba 303's at the show. But their missed opportunity was my $450 gain.

These were much talked about 10-15 years ago but not much discussion recently. Anyone here have one of these? If so please share your experience with it.

My particular version is a Navy Arms with a checkered Monte Carlo stock and ladder sight. Since this rifle has no intrinsic Milsurp value I plan to drill and tap it for a scope mount as I've already got way too many iron sighted guns I cannot shoot especially well anymore.

More pics to follow I only have this slight teaser currently

[303Guy]

Teaser indeed!

There is that no drilling and tapping mount available that makes use of the clip charger bridge and rear sight ears. Needless to say the recoil calls for a longish eye relief scope.

[lancem]

Got one. Mine didn't have a ladder sight but I have since added a scope. From mild to wild loadings, always a favorite when I bring it out for friends to shoot.

[Ronnie Dale]

Teaser indeed!

There is that no drilling and tapping mount available that makes use of the clip charger bridge and rear sight ears. Needless to say the recoil calls for a longish eye relief scope.

This rifle has no intrinsic Milsurp value anymore. As such I've got no problem drilling and tapping it for the "indestructible scope mount." Mainly because it's lower.

http://www.303british.com/id32.html

[Ronnie Dale]

Got one. Mine didn't have a ladder sight but I have since added a scope. From mild to wild loadings, always a favorite when I bring it out for friends to shoot.

It looks just like mine.

Are there any caveats you've discovered loading for yours

[KLR]

This rifle has no intrinsic Milsurp value anymore. As such I've got no problem drilling and tapping it for the "indestructible scope mount." Mainly because it's lower.

http://www.303british.com/id32.html

If you attach your rings to the mount you can get it quite low. I also ground off the charger bridge and rear site mount but you may not want to go that far.

[Ronnie Dale]

Nice! What rings are those!

[JSnover]

Got one with a plain stock and a LimbSaver. Good shooter!

[KLR]

Nice! What rings are those!

Just cheap aluminum rings that come with a Savage package rifle. I cut off the bottom mount part, filed them flat, and then drilled and tapped for a 1/4-28 counter sunk head bolt.

They looked like this before I started:

http://www.amazon.com/Vortex-Optics-...0EZEFFDCD52YTC

To give yourself a little more clearance for loading and ejection with a low scope, offset the scope 1/16" to 1/8" towards the left side. You'll never notice it when shooting.

[Ronnie Dale]

Sounds neat.

I've already gone off on a different tangent. I ordered a section of steel weaver base that I plan to tig weld to the angle

[MakeMineLead]

Sounds neat.

I've already gone off on a different tangent. I ordered a section of steel weaver base that I plan to tig weld to the angle

If your angle is steel, get a 12' section of aluminum, multi-slot weaver-style base and D&T the base and angle from the top down. If the angle is aluminum, D&T from the bottom up. This is how I make them for CM-2's and MTs-12's

[W.R.Buchanan]

Ronnie: KLR's scope mount is one of the best I've seen for these guns other than the S&K mount that Clamps onto the charger bridge and uses the rear sight pivot holes. I still waiting for him to change out his hex head bolts for some nice button heads, and I just know he'll get to it soon.

Another way to go that doesn't require drilling and tapping of the receiver is to use a mount like this (see pics) which picks up the Rear Sight Pivot Hole and the Ejector Screw. It requires a longer Ejector Screw (8-36) which is easy to make by cutting a bolt down.

I make these for mounting Redfield or Lyman Receiver Sights to these guns, but have also designed one with a top piece for mounting a red dot or small scope. Personally with your gun a Red Dot would be my first choice, as the possible uses for the gun are all relatively Short Range situations (150 or less) where fast target acquisition would be more important than pin point bullet placement.

The first pic shows the mock up of a Bushnell TRS 25 sitting on top of the plate that would be attached to the side plate. There would be a 5 slot Piece of Pic Rail D&T'd to the top of the horizontal plate to mount the optic.

I am not big on permanent alterations to guns like drilling and tapping receivers unless it is common practice to do so on that particular gun for a standardized sight or scope mount. Enfields get Drilled all the time but there seldom is any standardized method for doing this so Bubba Reigns Supreme. However your gun in it's current state is worth a lot more than you paid for it and as such irreversibly altering it, badly, will have an affect on it's future value.

My way doesn't change anything and you can go right back if the new owner sees fit. You just give him all the parts with the gun when you sell it.

One thing to consider here is that all guns if taken care of will outlast their current owners. They are either passed down to younger members of the family or sold. The vast majority are in fact,,, "Sold!" So Future Value is a valid concern.

That gun you have is too nice to permanently alter.

Randy

[Ronnie Dale]

I've already a step ahead I've got a variation on KLR's mount using four 10-32 screws mounting it to the receiver. I'm waiting on some pretty button head socket screws to arrive in the mail.

Then I will play around with the orientation and attachment of the weaver base. After I get everything where I want it I will do some sculpting and edge softening to make it look nice and stylish.

As to value it's essentially already a bubba of a SMLE by a small mom n pop manufacturer there really is no "original configuration" as such. This isn't an original smelly nor is it a pre war sporting arm. It's simply not the kind of gun a scope mount changes the value of. The closest analog would be a parts kit AK build.

[W.R.Buchanan]

Ronnie: That gun is a Gibbs Summit Rifle and was a .45-70 conversion using #4 Mk1 action made for a few years by Gibbs and is a highly desirable rifle and easily worth a grand or more. They were sold by Navy Arms not made by them. Here's the whole story along with a picture that looks exactly like your gun. Read the description.

http://www.gibbsrifle.com/sport_speciality_.html

Note: they are no longer made. You got a Screamin' Deal on that one.

Randy

[rondog]

Wow, an Enfield in .45-70? Never heard of that before! I've got a 1917 SMLE with a toasted barrel that would make a good donor base for this.....

[W.R.Buchanan]

Rondog; it is entirely doable, I have seen several that were done on early Enfield actions as opposed to Ronnie's Gun which was built on a #4 action. Gibbs made both.

If you really wanted to go ape here's some pics of really nice ones which are probably worth a lot more than most would think.

The one on the Buffalo Below is a #4 in .45-70 don't know who made it. The other one is a #1 MkIII in .348 Winchester which was done by Lon Paul. His prices start at about $15K so that one might be a little on the high side.

These guns were built by American Gunsmiths to American Tastes but are simply extensions of the more extravagant English Gunmaker's ideas. The Lee Speed being the most common of those guns.

If you look up some of "Von Gruff's" work here in the Special Projects Forum you will see some work on Enfields that is very reminiscent of the Lee Speed makers guns.

These are Custom Guns and deserve just as much respect as any well executed Custom Rifle. Priced accordingly.


Randy

[303Guy]

My particular version is a Navy Arms with a checkered Monte Carlo stock and ladder sight. Since this rifle has no intrinsic Milsurp value I plan to drill and tap it for a scope mount as I've already got way too many iron sighted guns I cannot shoot especially well anymore.

More pics to follow I only have this slight teaser currently

By the way, that is not an SMLE. It's a No4.

The No4 has an ideal scope mount rail attachment, that being the clip charger bridge. I have a Parker hale rail on one of mine and it sits real low. I'm not sure these are available anymore but a weaver rail should be almost as low. These do require four holes drilled, two in the receiver ring and two in the charger bridge. This mount sets the rail in front of the bridge, allowing for a lower rail. It's steel. If lower rings were to be used it would be as low as KLR's.



Just looking at the photo which zooms it up, I'm noticing the finish on it. Not too shabby. It's basically a mint rifle with a pristine bore. I've never fired it!

Your rifle has more value than you think.

[Multigunner]

Over the years I've read several posts on converting the SMLE or No.4 rifles to .45-70.
One I remember stated that for reliable feeding a relief cut of some sort had to be milled in the action body where the case rims exit the magazine.
The post stated this was part of the process for commercial conversions.
This is probably only necessary if the original double stack magazines are to be used.

Can't tell you any more about this, but one should look this up before beginning such a project.

[Ronnie Dale]

My magazine is a late production but quite obsolete single stack affair.

From what I've read if you don't have one of these your conversion simply won't work.

[W.R.Buchanan]

Ronnie: if that is a picture of the side of the receiver of your gun then I would have to retract my earlier comments about its value.

Maybe putting a scope mount that covers all that pitting up would be a good idea. I didn't know that Gibbs used actions that looked like that for these rifles.

I had heard that the magazines had plastic spacers on both sides to make them work as single stacks. but I had not seen one with the two new ears in the rear,,, which makes sense.

One way or another it is a shooter and I think you'll probably enjoy it.

Randy