-
If you enjoy the forum please consider supporting it by signing up for a NES Membership The benefits pay for the membership many times over.
-
Be sure to enter the NES/MFS May Giveaway ***Canik METE SFX***
1919 enfield
- Thread starter Rotaryrocket
- Start date
- Joined
- Jun 18, 2008
- Messages
- 1,473
- Likes
- 128
I love Enfields as well. Pics are a must. 1919 would have been a slow production year and therfore hard to find. For a 1919, it most likely it will be a Lithgow or an Ishapore. I do not even think the Brits made any SMLE's in 1919 but I would have to look that up to be sure.
What are the markings on the right wrist, which is the part of the receiver between the forestock and the buttstock where the bolt knob rests? Looking forward to the pics.
- Joined
- Jun 18, 2008
- Messages
- 1,473
- Likes
- 128
Very nice Australian rifle. Lithgow's first year of production was 1913. (There are only 12 1913 rifles known to exist). Early Lithgows are very desireable.
There should be markings on the right side of the buttstock. At least there were when it was made. Any markings there?
- Joined
- Jun 18, 2008
- Messages
- 1,473
- Likes
- 128
Nice 1919 Lithgow.
The wood does look a little rough but I do not think it is original. It looks like walnut to me and it would have been Queensland Maple in 1919. Most Enfields are fiddled with and refurbed so that is not uncommon. Many Lithgows also left Australia to serve elsewhere in the British Empire so there could be a number of different countries who once had their hand on this old warhorse. The Assuies made the SMLE all the way beyond WWII and it was their main rifle in that war. The good news is that replacing walnut parts to match the walnut forend will be a lot easier than trying to find a Queensland Maple front hand guard.
Your rear hand guard is cracked badly but could be repaired and used. The front handguard however should be from the nosecap to the rear sight so that needs to be replaced. They show up on Ebay and are reasonable. The butt is missing a chuck on the top of the wrist but that could be lived with as well.
Have you removed the rear handguard to see the markings on the barrel? Do this carefully. The rear handguard is simply attached with a spring that snaps over the barrel. Carefully take a flat head screw driver and start to lift the rear handguard. When you can get your fingers under it pull it the rest of the way off by pulling straight up. There will be a date and other markings on the barrel.
There is one concern and it may be nothing. But there appears to be a DP mark on the butt stock. DP was a mark used for drill purpose rifles. DP'd rifles are assumed to be unsafe to fire. Are there any other DP markings on the receiver and the barrel? That mark could also be a BP marking. I would not know what that means. But the DP aspect needs to be examined.
Would love to see pics of the barrel markings and any other DP markings if they are there. Overall a nice rifle in a hard to find year.
The wood does look a little rough but I do not think it is original. It looks like walnut to me and it would have been Queensland Maple in 1919. Most Enfields are fiddled with and refurbed so that is not uncommon. Many Lithgows also left Australia to serve elsewhere in the British Empire so there could be a number of different countries who once had their hand on this old warhorse. The Assuies made the SMLE all the way beyond WWII and it was their main rifle in that war. The good news is that replacing walnut parts to match the walnut forend will be a lot easier than trying to find a Queensland Maple front hand guard.
Your rear hand guard is cracked badly but could be repaired and used. The front handguard however should be from the nosecap to the rear sight so that needs to be replaced. They show up on Ebay and are reasonable. The butt is missing a chuck on the top of the wrist but that could be lived with as well.
Have you removed the rear handguard to see the markings on the barrel? Do this carefully. The rear handguard is simply attached with a spring that snaps over the barrel. Carefully take a flat head screw driver and start to lift the rear handguard. When you can get your fingers under it pull it the rest of the way off by pulling straight up. There will be a date and other markings on the barrel.
There is one concern and it may be nothing. But there appears to be a DP mark on the butt stock. DP was a mark used for drill purpose rifles. DP'd rifles are assumed to be unsafe to fire. Are there any other DP markings on the receiver and the barrel? That mark could also be a BP marking. I would not know what that means. But the DP aspect needs to be examined.
Would love to see pics of the barrel markings and any other DP markings if they are there. Overall a nice rifle in a hard to find year.
Last edited:
That mark is definitely a BP mark. I will pull the rear hand guard and look for marks. There is not any other marks visible on the receiver. I'll see what other marks I can find! The top guard has been ordered already.
- Joined
- Jun 18, 2008
- Messages
- 1,473
- Likes
- 128
Good news about it being BP. I almost did not bring it up as it looked like a B but was not sure. Would love to see what is marked on the barrel. My guess, considering the wear (character) on the gun it was most likely rebarreled but you never know. There might also be some other marks that could hint as to where the gun has been?
Do the numbers match? On an SMLE they will be bolt handle, receiver, barrel, rear sight base, sometimes the sight leaf and the nosecap. The original buttstock on a 1919 Lithgow would have had the serial number and date on it as well.
- Joined
- Jun 18, 2008
- Messages
- 1,473
- Likes
- 128
Not sure what that is. It could be a unit marking or a rack number. I pulled this off the web, it should look like this.
- Joined
- Jun 18, 2008
- Messages
- 1,473
- Likes
- 128
There you go and it explains the walnut. Those are Brit proof marks and the broad arrows. The English rebarreled that Lithgow in the middle of WWII, 1943. It makes you wonder what history that gun saw! It must have seen some hard use during the early part of the war. It went through a British refurb and must have a lot of British parts. The star marks are Lithgow and the arrow and crown marks British.
That's good to know. There are no other markings on the butt stock. I can faintly see where they might have been. But must have gotten worn down. The bolt is the only item that is not matching. I think I will track down a top handguard and let this old girl loose! I am very happy with my purchase with all the information you have given me.
- Joined
- Jun 18, 2008
- Messages
- 1,473
- Likes
- 128
It would also explain the wood plug in the stock disc hole. How about import marks? Matching bolt, rear sight and nosecap?
- Joined
- Jun 18, 2008
- Messages
- 1,473
- Likes
- 128
The British would have renumbered everything during a refurb like they did with the barrel. The butt is not original and an English replacement like the rest of the wood. The gun could have served in the empire after the war so that could explain the mismatched bolt.
The great thing about a rifle like yours is that you know is was there and did it. Enfields saw a lot of action. That is one reason why I like to collect them. Good pick up and have fun shooting it.
The great thing about a rifle like yours is that you know is was there and did it. Enfields saw a lot of action. That is one reason why I like to collect them. Good pick up and have fun shooting it.
Last edited:
- Joined
- Jun 18, 2008
- Messages
- 1,473
- Likes
- 128
Prior to 1968, there were no import marks on guns. There was a requirement, not sure if British or American, that the country of origin be stamped on the gun. So an early import/export mark is the word "England" on the receiver. This was even stamped on the SMLE's made in Australia but exported from England into the US. I have one such marked so I am sure about that. After 1968, all imported arms had to be stamped. There was some variation on where but the importer and they location needed to be stamped on the gun. Starting in the 1980's, most of the guns were stamped on the barrel near the muzzle. Some time in the late 1990's or early 2000's they had to be stamped on the receiver. This is all from memory and there is always some disagreement on the details. So if some one would like to add, detract or correct feel free.
It looks like you do not have the England stamp on the receiver or the later banner mark on the receiver. So, it there is not a mark on the barrel near the muzzle they yours is not import stamped. However, I do have a 1920 Lithgow that is stamped on the charger bridge.
- Joined
- Jun 18, 2008
- Messages
- 1,473
- Likes
- 128
The rear sight is Brit and non-matching. The nosecap is also non matching and British based on the S prefix. The gun was completely gone over by the Brits in 1943. But everything would have been rematched so someone or some other country played with it.
By 1943 I would think that most British troops were using the No. 4 in Europe. That could explain why your was taken off the line and refurbed in 43. If you look at the pictures of the British in the African campaign you will see most of them have SMLE's. But the Brits on D Day had No. 4's. There is a good chance your rifle was sent out to some other part of the Empire, which as you know was huge. So who knows where or who has reworked since 1943. The bore looks real nice. I bet it will shoot great.
BTW... I am far from an expert. There are some very serious collectors on gunboards at the Enfield board, and many Aussies who might be able to give you more detail. If you want, you should post it there as well. Any information I have given you is to the best of my knowledge, and may be wrong here and there.
Last edited:
I really appreciate what you have told me. I tracked down a topset for the front hand guards and will post pics once she's all back together! Thanks for all the info. It seems I keep being lured towards these old enfields. Two so far. In very little time of being a gun owner. There will be more! I love the old stuff
- Joined
- Jun 18, 2008
- Messages
- 1,473
- Likes
- 128
You are welcome... Enfields are my favorite. I even took a deer two years ago with a No. 4. It knock it right off its feet at 40 yards. 
Here is my favorite SMLE. It is a LSA (London Small Arms) made in 1913 as a Mk. III. I bought it as a matching (minus the nosecap) sporter and restored her back to a Mk. III configuration. The SMLE is a thing of beauty in my opinion.
Here is my favorite SMLE. It is a LSA (London Small Arms) made in 1913 as a Mk. III. I bought it as a matching (minus the nosecap) sporter and restored her back to a Mk. III configuration. The SMLE is a thing of beauty in my opinion.
Last edited:
