Mystery Enfield?

C

Capybara

New member
Hi all:

So I finally took the plunge and bought my first Enfield, even though I only know the most basic points about them. I bought this gun from a fellow Calgunner who has shot it and it seems to be a nice rifle. To be clear, this rifle seems to me to possibly be a mix master, the wood looks as if it has been sanded and that's okay as I got a good deal and I want this mainly as a shooter more than a collector. That said, some of the parts look as if they could have been scrubbed, for some reason, most of the markings look soft and garbled, take a look, you'll see what I mean.

A few questions:

1. The receiver is stamped "England" and has a small crown proof mark so I know that this is not a Canadian, American or Australian. But the markings on the opposite side receiver band are a mish mosh, even the serial number looks funky. The date 1943 is pretty clear and several of the parts of stamped with an upper case B.

2. Is that seam along the bottom of the magazine normal?

3. The bolt is tight and smooth and the trigger feels very good for a military rifle. The bore looks to have lots of life left in it, it has some mirror shine to it, can't tell if the particulate in the bore is corrosion, carbon or just grease/cosmo residue? I will have to give this gun a good cleaning to get the whole story on the bore, but strong lands and grooves.

4. Crown and front sight look good.

5. Seller listed it as an Enfield #4 MKI, but in looking at the faint receiver markings, they look like No 4 MKII to me? How can one tell the difference between a No 4 MKI and MKII?

This is my first so are there any problem or trouble areas to look for? I will buy a few hundred rounds of Prvi to put through it and will then begin reloading with that brass.

Let me know what you think about this rifle and what your opinions are as to the possible origin of it. Also came with the pig sticker and cover, both of which are in great shape. Very happy I took the plunge, even though I have only shot one Enfield, I like them and will likely enjoy shooting with this one a lot.

DSCN2254_zpsc00e6efd.jpg


DSCN2255_zps0cffa7f5.jpg
 
Last edited:
Its my understanding the England stamp was required by the U.S. Government on arms imported to the U.S. before 1968. I have a No.1 MK III with it.

 
No mystery. You have a No. 4 Mk 1. What appears to be "II" is actually an extra scratch. No 4s generally used standard Arabic numerals in the designation (i.e "No 4 Mk1," or "No 4 MK 2"). From what I see, other than someone has refinished the stock, your rifle is about 100% correct.

When you get around to disassembling it, if you find that the trigger is pinned to the receiver rather than the trigger guard, you have a No 4 MK 1/2.
 
The magazine is normal; as Hawg says, the "England" is the "country of origin" marking put on when it was imported into the U.S.

My large concern is that that jumble on the receiver includes the serial number which has apparently been deliberately obliterated; it is a violation of US federal law to possess a firearm with the serial number removed or defaced.

The only legal thing you can do is contact BATFE and ask them if there is any way to make it legal or, if not, surrender it. (Some might suggest returning it and getting a refund, but that would not change the fact that you and the seller have committed a federal felony.)

Jim
 
The gun could have well been imported that way too then no felony and have seen worse slip in on marked up gun numbers but the issue is how do you prove that?
 
Can't add much except the B stamped on the stock stands for Bantam ( short ).
The rear stocks came in three lengths I believe.
 
Hi, Radom,

Sorry, but there is a problem. The law bans possession of a firearm with the number obliterated or altered; that was intentional, since if the law simply banned making an alteration, every owner would be just point the finger at someone else. So, even if the rifle did slip through the importer's check (what serial is in his records?), the dealer's check (again, what is in his book?), and the initial buyer's presumed scrutiny, the current possessor is the stuckee. Since there appears to be part of a number, it can't be claimed that the gun never had a number; besides, no one will buy that the manufacturer "forgot" to number one rifle when millions like it had numbers.

I know that BATFE has bigger fish to fry and it is very unlikely that anyone would ever be in serious trouble over a minor and unintentional infraction, but it is a law violation.

Jim
 
MKII are post war production and much rarer, usually go for double the price unless you know a guy. generally speaking they make better shooters because they've never been abused.
 
The Mk II differs from the Mk I in having the trigger attached to the receiver rather than to the trigger guard, giving much better trigger control and consistency.

Jim
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top