Whats the best Lee-Enfield?

R

Rustle in the Bushes

New member
Whats a Canadian about to buy his first Enfield to do? I have a lead on a nice 1918 marked B.S.A.C or a 1916 mark 3.

Of all the variants whats a good one to buy for a guy who wants a decent shooting gun, bores being equal.
 
For ruggedness, your best bet is a No.4 and, in particular, one made at Long Branch if you can find one. Many of the No. 4s were converted to 7.62 NATO by the UK and kept in reserve. The No. 1 actions, while strong enough for Mk VII ball, were unsuitable for conversion to 7.62, and have nowhere near the strength of the No. 4 action. (With the exception of the 2A and 2A1s made at Ishapore with entirely new receivers made from a very high grade of steel.)

Since you live in Canada, you should have no trouble finding a Long Branch gun.
 
Being you are Canadian I would look for a No4 Long Branch. The first 15k or so rifles used the standard bolt release, then they went to the war time expedient release. A early model would be very desirable, if you can find one. The later, 45? and up production LB's were parkerized and have a very nice finish, also very desirable.

If the number one concern is accuracy look for a No4 MkII with a UF or PF serial number prefix. You can find these still new in the wrap or with a very low round count. These rifles are normally in pristine condition and shoot accordingly.

Here's a set of twin MkII's

twins01.jpg
 
The last & best of the real Lee-Enfield line, the #4 MkII. Why? Stronger action & barrel than the #1 model. Better trigger & better manufacture quality than most of the #4 Mki variant as they were made after WW2 & so were not subject to wartime expediency measures.:cool:
DSCF6173.jpg


Failing that an L42A1 in 7.62 NATO:D
Prices?
A nice all matching #4 MkII about $400~$550, an L42A1, about $1600.00:eek:
 
So the difference is the quality of machining vs the mark 3? This mark 3 seems to be in decent shape, $390.00. what do yall think?

Either that or some fair-good condition #4 mk. 1 someones selling for $370.00
 
Last edited:
While the No.4's are excellent rifles for all the reasons given, the post war ones do not have any historical value and even the war time ones have less history than those that went through both wars which is likely the case with the SMLE Mk III's made in the WWI era.

Of course for accuracy and ruggedness, the No. 4 Mk 2 is hard to beat. It is the latest (and no doubt the last) of the LE line).

Jim
 
There is no "mark 3".
There is a Mk 1/2 & a Mk 1/3, those are #4 Mk 1, or Mk 1* upgraded to Mk II specs post war.

Now this means they were completely rebuilt & upgraded after WW2, but they were originally #4 Mk 1 or Mk 1* rifles.

Personally I don't like the Mk 1* versions as they were wartime expedient originally. Good? Well yes good enough to win a war, so they aren't horrible, but I'm not fighting a war so I go for the best currently available. Historical? Yes absolutely, but I'm not a history buff so I don't find this a big deal. Others may well have different opinions.
 
Hi. Thousands of both models have been assembled out of parts bins with zero QC. Always check the headspace or get proof of good headspace before you buy any Lee-Enfield.
If the headspace is bad, fixing it on a No. 4 is easier than it is on a No. 1. No. 1 bolt heads are not numbered so fixing bad headspace requires a handful of bolt heads to try with proper headspace guages(no empty cases, bits of tape or anything else) until you find one that gives safe headspace. No. 4 bolt heads have a number. Going up by one number can, but not always, fix bad headspace. However, they're numbered from 0 to 3. If you have a 2, finding a 3 will be an issue. If it's a 3, gunsmithing is required.
Post war Longbranch made No. 4's were the best ever made. Some have more than 4 groove rifling too(6 groove), but that's not much of an issue.
Don't bother looking for milsurp ammo either. It's long gone.
Come by http://www.canadiangunnutz.com/forum/.
 
There is no "mark 3".
Click to expand...

Mk III (or Mk 3) was the original designation of the Rifle, No. 1 Mk III before the nomenclature was changed.

So the difference is the quality of machining vs the mark 3? This mark 3 seems to be in decent shape, $390.00. what do yall think?
Click to expand...

No, it is NOT the machining. The No 4 rifles were a major redesign that included a strengthened receiver, heavier barrel, better sights and other improvements. No. 1 rifles used a lower carbon steel that was perfectly adequate for Mk VII ball, but, regardless, the No. 1 action is weaker all the way around. ( Ishapore 2A and 2A1 rifles excepted.)

I think $390.00 is way too much unless it is a scarce variation gun, such as a Standard Small Arms (SSA) or National Rifle Factory (NRF), or the gun is in excellent, near new condition. I have been disposing of a large collection of Lee Enfields for the past year and have not gotten anywhere near that amount for any of them.

Of course, things might be different in Canada; I know $390.00 would be no bargain for a No.1 Mk III here in the U.S. unless it was a scarce variation, but maybe things are tighter up there.
 
The wierd state of Enfields In Canada

Yeah its weird! You would think we would have a ton of these them being our heritage and all, I'll bet they either come in waves like everything else were a relatively small market vs the states. Either that or the supply of good ones is drying up.

Heres an update-

Ive found a really nice no 4 mk1* star. How does this compare to the no. 1 and just how much rarer are the no.1s?

Also, this no 4. mk 1* longbranch has rivets on the top furniture. Thats odd does anyone know the deal with this?

Its a tough call between this and the SMLE but honestly I want the better shooter though Im feeling bad at passing up a chance to own history.

I can TOTALLY understand how some of you guys have 10 enfields. I just hope they dont all disappear by the time I'm ready to pick up a nice old SMLE.
 
Last edited:
Who made the No. 4 you found? Was it from Long Branch or from England? What year was it made? How many grooves rifling in the barrel? Bore condition?

As I stated, the No. 4 is a much stronger action than the No. 1. Overall, more No. 1 rifles were produced than No. 4s, but the history of the No. 1 is, obviously, long and varied.

What is the intended purpose of your rifle? Shooting or collecting??

It is unfortunate that you can't purchase weapons from the U.S. as I still have about 65 Lee Enfields that I am going to dispose of. I could sure give you better deal than $390.00.
 
Last edited:
I once owned one of the very late production No. 4 something or other Lee-Enfields, British made. It was in virtually new (without tags) condition but it was still a service grade rifle. It didn't have sparkling metalwork or a commercial grade finish on the stock. It was obviously meant for issue, though it didn't seem to have ever been issued. The stock was fairly rough and the metalwork was all finished in paint. It didn't look as good as the others in the earlier photos. Still, I believe it was probably the best of all of them and I've had several.

That doesn't mean it would be my first choice. That would be the No. 5 I had ages ago. It was slightly beat up and well broken in but I shot just as well with it as with any other rifle I've ever shot at ranges no greater than 100 yards. I never fired my at any greater distance than that.
 
I'll admit I'm a bit confused by the last post, but here goes my best answer.
The #4 Mk1* was a simplified version of the rifle. Many small changes were made to things like the sights, the bore & the bolt catch as well as stampings replacing forgings for a lot of the hardware. Based on the choice between a #4 Mk1, or a #4 Mk1* I'd prefer the non -* version as it is a little better made IMHO. 2-groove bores can shoot well, but many have been eroded by ammunition over time & won't shoot boat-tail bullets for beans. The only way to tell is to test fire it with boat tails & flat base & see how that individual rifle runs.

Rivets on the handguards, where? brass rivets at the front of the rear, & rear of the front are normal.
 
Myself I'd have to say buying an Enfield would be a problem for a first time buyer because the No1 MkIII is such a good rifle and so are any of the No4's I am surprised no one brought up the No 5 Jungle Carbine which I happen to like a lot but to choose which to be the first I'd have to take the No4 rifles in fact the No4 MkII as it is the newest and to me the best for the first time buyer.
 
Best is subjective ... in my view classic is the answer to the first time buyer and if you want "classic", look no further than the No1 MkIII ... I would advise a Lithgow as your best bet, though a BSA or Enfield will do just as well..

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