Spinnerjones23
Inactive
Hi! New to the site, but I'm looking at an Enfield Model No. 2 snub. My experience with topbreaks is minimal, but i see a bit of a cylinder gap and movement. What should I look for and what is normal?
Enfield Model No. 2
- Thread starter Spinnerjones23
- Start date
Have you fired it yet? If not has anybody told you about their experience(s) having done so with that particular firearm? It could really date back quite a while. I would have a pro take a look at it. Just a heads up though, ain't going to compare to a smith and wesson combat master, lol.
Last edited:
I have a standard No2 (dated 1932), and always have my eye out for one of the snubbies. They seem to be pretty rare. At least around here anyway. If I came across one, Id probably pounce on it, working or not, and go from there.
I would say go over it like you would any other revolver, check for function, and make sure the timing and lockup looks right.
Probably not as much an issue with these guns, as they were made for the 38/200 (38S&W) length round and have a cylinder that reflects that, but Id also make sure that the cylinder wasnt bored out for 38 Special. The 38 special rounds would probably poke out the front of the cylinder if it was done, but you never know, people have done stranger things.
Thats more an issue with the Lend-Lease S&W Victory's, but you never know, and its the very first thing I check with them. I passed up on a couple of nice guns that had that done to them.
Everything on my Enfield seemed to check out OK, right up until I tried actually shooting it. I would get one or two rounds off and then it would start to bind up, to the point you couldnt pull the trigger because of it. I tried a couple of different brands of brass and it was always the same.
I ended up getting another recoil shield from Numrich, and it still had the issue when it was installed, so I started running it across a piece of emery on a flat surface a bit at a time, putting it back together and trying it until it would run. Only took a couple of tries.
Once that was done, its been fine ever since and is a good shooter.
I load 38/200 for it as opposed to 38S&W. Both shoot well out of them, but the standard 38 S&W shoots a little low. The 38/200 shoots POA.
Matts bullets have proper 200 grain bullets if you want to go that route.
Factory 38S&W is SALTY! When I first got my Enfield, I had to go to three more shops on the way home, just to find a box, and they only had one box, and plain old basic Remington 146 grain was almost $40 for 50!
Reloading is the way to go for this round.
Ugly as sin, and kind of rough looking, but fun guns.
I would say go over it like you would any other revolver, check for function, and make sure the timing and lockup looks right.
Probably not as much an issue with these guns, as they were made for the 38/200 (38S&W) length round and have a cylinder that reflects that, but Id also make sure that the cylinder wasnt bored out for 38 Special. The 38 special rounds would probably poke out the front of the cylinder if it was done, but you never know, people have done stranger things.
Thats more an issue with the Lend-Lease S&W Victory's, but you never know, and its the very first thing I check with them. I passed up on a couple of nice guns that had that done to them.
Everything on my Enfield seemed to check out OK, right up until I tried actually shooting it. I would get one or two rounds off and then it would start to bind up, to the point you couldnt pull the trigger because of it. I tried a couple of different brands of brass and it was always the same.
I ended up getting another recoil shield from Numrich, and it still had the issue when it was installed, so I started running it across a piece of emery on a flat surface a bit at a time, putting it back together and trying it until it would run. Only took a couple of tries.
Once that was done, its been fine ever since and is a good shooter.
I load 38/200 for it as opposed to 38S&W. Both shoot well out of them, but the standard 38 S&W shoots a little low. The 38/200 shoots POA.
Matts bullets have proper 200 grain bullets if you want to go that route.
Factory 38S&W is SALTY! When I first got my Enfield, I had to go to three more shops on the way home, just to find a box, and they only had one box, and plain old basic Remington 146 grain was almost $40 for 50!
Reloading is the way to go for this round.
Ugly as sin, and kind of rough looking, but fun guns.
Spinnerjones23
Inactive
Would 400 for a snub seem unreasonable?
My sense of what things ought to cost kind of got stuck 30 some odd years ago...
But I'd say it depends on why you are buying the pistol.
If you're buying it because its an uncommon variant of an obsolete British military revolver, $400 might not be crazy, though I remember passing on such guns when they were below $200, and that doesn't seem all that long ago, but was probably 20 years...
If you're buying it as a plinker and defense gun, you're buying an old, obsolete top break in an underpowered obsolete caliber that, while still produced, is a niche round and considerably more expensive and less powerful than the .38 Special.
Be aware that the .38 S&W cartridge is NOT the same as the .38 Special.
The .38 S&W case is shorter and somewhat "fatter" than the .38 Special. The common US loading is a 145gr bullet at 745fps. The standard .38 Special load is a 158gr bullet at 850fps.
the British name for the .38 S&W is the .38/200. They load it with a 200gr bullet. It was adopted as their military pistol round before WWII, replacing their .455 Webley round in service. The Enfield No.2 revolver is a Webley pattern gun, and came about basically because the British govt needed revolvers, and didn't want to pay Webley's prices and decided to make their own.
The 200gr .38 S&W load was called the "Super Police" load in the US, and had a listed muzzle velocity of 630fps.
145gr ammo will shoot low from the Enfield, as its sights are regulated for the 200gr bullet.
A friend of mine seems to find good condition used S&W revolvers in .38 Special in the $400 range fairly regularly. If you're looking for a "working" gun you'd be better off with a S&W .38 SPECIAL than the Enfield.
But I'd say it depends on why you are buying the pistol.
If you're buying it because its an uncommon variant of an obsolete British military revolver, $400 might not be crazy, though I remember passing on such guns when they were below $200, and that doesn't seem all that long ago, but was probably 20 years...
If you're buying it as a plinker and defense gun, you're buying an old, obsolete top break in an underpowered obsolete caliber that, while still produced, is a niche round and considerably more expensive and less powerful than the .38 Special.
Be aware that the .38 S&W cartridge is NOT the same as the .38 Special.
The .38 S&W case is shorter and somewhat "fatter" than the .38 Special. The common US loading is a 145gr bullet at 745fps. The standard .38 Special load is a 158gr bullet at 850fps.
the British name for the .38 S&W is the .38/200. They load it with a 200gr bullet. It was adopted as their military pistol round before WWII, replacing their .455 Webley round in service. The Enfield No.2 revolver is a Webley pattern gun, and came about basically because the British govt needed revolvers, and didn't want to pay Webley's prices and decided to make their own.
The 200gr .38 S&W load was called the "Super Police" load in the US, and had a listed muzzle velocity of 630fps.
145gr ammo will shoot low from the Enfield, as its sights are regulated for the 200gr bullet.
A friend of mine seems to find good condition used S&W revolvers in .38 Special in the $400 range fairly regularly. If you're looking for a "working" gun you'd be better off with a S&W .38 SPECIAL than the Enfield.
I paid $400 for my Enfield a couple of years ago. You dont see them very often around here, and the couple of others I have seen, were in pretty rough shape, at least on the outside.
Ive also picked up a couple of The Lend-Lease 38 S&W's over the past couple of years as well, and both for around $450. I think a lot of that will depend on where you are too. Ive seen them over $500. Then again, it seems most of the older Smiths are going more and more for a premium.
One of my Smiths had the wrong caliber (38 SPL) on the tag too, and that seems to be a common mistake.
You can usually tell just by looking at them that they are likely marked 38 S&W, as they usually have 5" barrels.
Ive also seen a couple of of them that were bored out for 38 Spl, and was told in both cases, that it was fine to shoot 38 Special out of them by those selling them. That is not the case. They may function and shoot, but I dont think its "fine".
As 44 AMP mentioned, the 38 S&W is a different round, and will not chamber in 38 Spl guns. 38 Specials shouldnt chamber in the 38 S&W's guns either.
In those guns that were converted, they may fire, but the cases will likely swell and split and will not be reloadable.
The barrels are also a different diameter too, .361 vs .357.
Ive also picked up a couple of The Lend-Lease 38 S&W's over the past couple of years as well, and both for around $450. I think a lot of that will depend on where you are too. Ive seen them over $500. Then again, it seems most of the older Smiths are going more and more for a premium.
One of my Smiths had the wrong caliber (38 SPL) on the tag too, and that seems to be a common mistake.
You can usually tell just by looking at them that they are likely marked 38 S&W, as they usually have 5" barrels.
Ive also seen a couple of of them that were bored out for 38 Spl, and was told in both cases, that it was fine to shoot 38 Special out of them by those selling them. That is not the case. They may function and shoot, but I dont think its "fine".
As 44 AMP mentioned, the 38 S&W is a different round, and will not chamber in 38 Spl guns. 38 Specials shouldnt chamber in the 38 S&W's guns either.
In those guns that were converted, they may fire, but the cases will likely swell and split and will not be reloadable.
The barrels are also a different diameter too, .361 vs .357.
There is a little more I probably should have mentioned, and that is, due to tolerances, The spec for the .38 S&W case at the mouth is .380". The spec for the .38 Special is .379". Keeping in mind that ammo usually runs a little under the max spec (to ensure easy chambering) and sometimes the cylinder chambers run a little "loose" for the same reason, a .38 S&W should not chamber in a .38 Special gun but MIGHT, if tolerances line up just right.
Also the opposite can be possible. IF the .38 S&W gun does NOT have a forward "ledge" cut in the chamber (and some cheaper guns DO NOT) then it is possible for the longer (1.15" vs. .775") SPECIAL case to chamber in a .38 S&W gun.
In guns like the S&W DA revolvers where both .38 SPecial and .38 S&W were chambered in the same guns (which all had cylinders long enough for the Special round) "boring out the .38 S&W chamber" is just removing that forward ledge. This does result in a chamber that is SLIGHTLY oversize at the rear, but usually not much (again, tolerances will vary), and while Special cases often swell they seldom split. However seldom does not mean never.
The .38 S&W round was introduced in 1877 and have been made in all kinds of guns from cheap low quality to the best guns made. So any combination of tolerances is possible, and rounds could fit (and fire) in guns where, technically they shouldn't. just something to be aware of.
Spinnerjones23
Inactive
Does anybody know if the snubs saw any military use?
I don't know about the Enfields, but the Webley MkIV .38 was built 3and 4 inch sort of round butt guns for Secret Service and Detective use. Also .320 revolvers in short barrels for Police.
I was told many, many years ago, that most shot Enfield .38s were shortened after the war to make them more attractive to buyers.
I was told many, many years ago, that most shot Enfield .38s were shortened after the war to make them more attractive to buyers.
Spinnerjones23
Inactive
The reason I ask is because mine dates back to WWII and qould think itd be neat
Jim Watson
New member
I think the 2" No 2s were sawn off by importers to feed the US market for "snubbies" in the private eye book, movie, and TV fad of the 1950s and 1960s. Same as the S&W BSRs cut off and losing the barrel lug.
As far as I can find out, Enfield never made any "snubnose" guns. Enfield was a govt arsenal, who made (among other things) Webley pattern revolvers because it was cheaper for the Crown to make them and pay Webley a royalty on each one than buy the guns from Webley.
Webley produced various snub noses for the civilian market, but I can find no indication that Enfield ever did. There is, however ample documentation many ex-service Enfields were modified by commercial companies for the civilian (primarily US) market after the British adopted the 9mm semi auto and sold off lots of their revolvers.
Webley produced various snub noses for the civilian market, but I can find no indication that Enfield ever did. There is, however ample documentation many ex-service Enfields were modified by commercial companies for the civilian (primarily US) market after the British adopted the 9mm semi auto and sold off lots of their revolvers.
OneFreeTexan
New member
sorta along the same lines,,,,an importer in California,,, I think it was Golden State, brought in a lot of Enfields rifles,,,,,they shortened them and called them ‘Jungle Carbines’. And somehow a story got started that the English Gov’t had brought out that particular carbine, but discontinued them because they had a roving zero.......I have one,,,,I believe they sold for about $39 back then, because they were a ‘limited’ run.
Unlike "tanker Garands" there actually was a No5 Jungle Carbine in British service late in WWII.
Along with several other features different from the standard rifles the Jungle Carbine had relief cuts in the receiver to reduce weight. This is the origin of the wandering zero stories. Supposedly the lightened receiver flexed too much and the zero would wander...
Can't say for certain that they all do that, as there are folks who say theirs did, and others who say "mine doesn't"...
But the odds are good that if you find a Jungle Carbine today, its likely to be a fake, (not done by Brit govt) as a great number of regular rifles were modified to resemble actual Jungle Carbines due to the profit in filling the demand for a "rare" variant.
Outside of a handful of Garands shortened as testing prototypes there were no actual military issue "tanker Garands" though there were a lot of them sold to consumers at one time.
Along with several other features different from the standard rifles the Jungle Carbine had relief cuts in the receiver to reduce weight. This is the origin of the wandering zero stories. Supposedly the lightened receiver flexed too much and the zero would wander...
Can't say for certain that they all do that, as there are folks who say theirs did, and others who say "mine doesn't"...
But the odds are good that if you find a Jungle Carbine today, its likely to be a fake, (not done by Brit govt) as a great number of regular rifles were modified to resemble actual Jungle Carbines due to the profit in filling the demand for a "rare" variant.
Outside of a handful of Garands shortened as testing prototypes there were no actual military issue "tanker Garands" though there were a lot of them sold to consumers at one time.
Jim Watson
New member
I have read that a fake No 5 "Jungle Carbine" without the lightening cuts will probably be more accurate than a real RA issue.