Questions Thread

[Turkish007]

Was the Lee Enfield No.4 Mk I used before WW2? Prototypes?

[THeTA0123]

No. The SMLE was the standard Enfield during the interwar period.


The british did however developed an SMLE with simular sights like the No 4 MKI

this was the No 1 MKV

http://www.deactivated-guns.co.uk/images/uploads/zzzsmle22/zzzsmle22-038113_12.jpg

The first No 4 MKI's were produced in 1939 and it was officially adopted in 1941. By 1943 it was the standard enfield for British troops.

[VonMudra]

No4 was first issued in 1939, but it didn't start getting common place until 1943, and never fully supplanted the SMLE in Italy, the Pacific, and many commonwealth/government in exile armies.  The Australians literally refused to use it, believing that the british government was trying to stick them with a worse quality rifle.

[Turkish007]

Yeah, I know that, but I'm talking about precisely the No4 Mk1. Or anything similiar of its muzzle?

[THeTA0123]

No4 was first issued in 1939, but it didn't start getting common place until 1943, and never fully supplanted the SMLE in Italy, the Pacific, and many commonwealth/government in exile armies.  The Australians literally refused to use it, believing that the british government was trying to stick them with a worse quality rifle.

Actually the aussies believed that the time and effort it took to retool the Lithgow plant was to much for what you got. british india made the same decision. They felt that it was "unneeded" aswel and with japan on there doorstep i can kinda understand that decision

Yeah, I know that, but I'm talking about precisely the No4 Mk1. Or anything similiar of its muzzle?

As me and mudra said. 1939

[siben]

IIRC, wasn't the problem that the bolt could be assembled the wrong way and fail catastrophically?

Yes, I heard the same. The shooter could get seriously injured for making even a slight mistake reassembling it. Had something to do with the locking lugs not locking correctly when chambering a round resulting in a bit of a mess IIRC.

[THeTA0123]

This was with the very first variants only tough.

[VonMudra]

No4 was first issued in 1939, but it didn't start getting common place until 1943, and never fully supplanted the SMLE in Italy, the Pacific, and many commonwealth/government in exile armies.  The Australians literally refused to use it, believing that the british government was trying to stick them with a worse quality rifle.

Actually the aussies believed that the time and effort it took to retool the Lithgow plant was to much for what you got. british india made the same decision. They felt that it was "unneeded" aswel and with japan on there doorstep i can kinda understand that decision

Not the stories I've heard of it.  The aussies basically believed they were getting a raw deal, and that the english were trying to offload poor quality guns on them

[THeTA0123]

...But the No 4 was gonna be manufactured in Lithgow so the aussies decide the quality right?

[Kading]

No4 was first issued in 1939, but it didn't start getting common place until 1943, and never fully supplanted the SMLE in Italy, the Pacific, and many commonwealth/government in exile armies.  The Australians literally refused to use it, believing that the british government was trying to stick them with a worse quality rifle.

Actually the aussies believed that the time and effort it took to retool the Lithgow plant was to much for what you got. british india made the same decision. They felt that it was "unneeded" aswel and with japan on there doorstep i can kinda understand that decision

Not the stories I've heard of it.  The aussies basically believed they were getting a raw deal, and that the english were trying to offload poor quality guns on them

You're both right. Australian gets told by English guy: "hey! new rifle, pretty much the same as the old one but is fancier and you have to retool your factories to produce it. Did I mention it isn't a significant improvement on the old design other than the sights?"
Naturally, the Australians declined. And if you ask me, the pig sticker bayonet didn't help the case.

[VonMudra]

...But the No 4 was gonna be manufactured in Lithgow so the aussies decide the quality right?

They thought the rifle design itself was bad.

[Turkish007]

...But the No 4 was gonna be manufactured in Lithgow so the aussies decide the quality right?

They thought the rifle design itself was bad.

They were definately right. The older enfield is better in all ways.

[THeTA0123]

...But the No 4 was gonna be manufactured in Lithgow so the aussies decide the quality right?

They thought the rifle design itself was bad.

They were definately right. The older enfield is better in all ways.

euhm

No?

No 4 has a heavier more accurate barrel
No 4 has flip up, rear reciever mounted sights. These are vastly superior to tangent sights like the SMLE/Mauser
No 4 has a shorter action wich is also simpler and faster then the SMLE

[Turkish007]

But if I was a soldier of the British empire of the era I'd definately choose the old one. I wouldnt mind a few extra pounds.

[THeTA0123]

Actually The no 4 is heavier. The bolt is lighter. But the new heavy barrel adds extra weight