I have an old No 1 Mk 4 . . .

[IditarodJoe]

that I bought about five years ago. I haven't fired it for some time, but Rick's post about "Ol' Number 1" prompted me to pull it out for a little quality time.

http://i5.photobucket.com/albums/y183/IditarodJoe/No%204%20Mk%201/157_5733_zps3d31e27c.jpg (http://s5.photobucket.com/user/IditarodJoe/media/No%204%20Mk%201/157_5733_zps3d31e27c.jpg.html)

It was a CAI import that was built at Fazakerly in March 1943 and, as far as I can tell, never went through FTR. The s/n, BA264xx, is also stamped on the bolt handle, but anything that was ever stamped on the stock is now long gone. The magazine is an unmarked replacement.

I'm puzzled by a few things and thought I'd see if anyone here might be able help out. First is the serial number. Stratton (the only Enfield reference I have) states that Fazakerly was assigned the range 20000-29999 but only prefixes HA through PF. Supposedly, BA would have been a Maltby prefix. Is Stratton wrong?

The rifle came with a gray, pewter-looking buttplate that's probably what Stratton refers to as "Zamac", as well as a flip-type rear aperture sight. Both of these were supposedly characteristic of Savage and Longbranch Mk1* rifles. Would these have originally been the cast brass buttplate and stamped, leaf-type rear sight?

http://i5.photobucket.com/albums/y183/IditarodJoe/No%204%20Mk%201/156_5697_zpscc56370d.jpg (http://s5.photobucket.com/user/IditarodJoe/media/No%204%20Mk%201/156_5697_zpscc56370d.jpg.html)

Finally, this old boy has a grooved rear handguard with what appears to be a bit of heat damage at the chamber end. Is there any chance this was original to the rifle?

All in all, it's a fascinating piece of history and now has me wondering if maybe I should start looking for a No. 1 Mk. III to keep it company!

[JB White]

Skip Stratton wrote his works based upon "observed" specimens at the time. The word 'observed' is paramount when reading his books. Prior to his death he always made that clear whenever his publications came into question. His books were entry level aimed at getting some low-cost information into the hands of novice collectors. Great works in that regard but sorely lacking in content once someone gets to the intermediate level.

The MkII flip sight and the alloy butplate (Zamac or Mazak depending upon which side of the pond you're on) were used as wartime expedients by all manufacturers at the time. Among the key elements distinct to North American production were the MkI* type bolt release and the stamped front sight guard used by Savage. Not often seen anymore are the stamped triggerguards, as most were replaced postwar. The mkII and MkIII rear sights along with the alloy buttplates were to be replaced too, but it's obvious not all made it back for retrofit.

[IditarodJoe]

Thank you for that information, JB. I do appreciate Mr. Stratton's book for what it is, in spite of its shortcomings. The only book I'm aware of that seems to be (more or less) regarded as definitive is Ian Skennerton's "Complete Study" tome that sells in the $100+ range, and, well . . . um ... :o

This rifle definitely says "I was there". If only it could tell us more of its story!

[John Sukey]

hesitate to correct, but you have a No4Mk1 not a No1Mk4 which is an entirely different rifle.
Also the sling is on backwards. The tabs should be facing the wood with the smooth side of the rivits next to the wood. Only the claws should be visible on the outside of the sling

[IditarodJoe]

:o:icon_redface::o What can I say, my friend . . . the connection between the brain and the fingers just isn't what it used to be.

I didn't know about the sling - thank you. Please never hesitate to correct me. I'd much rather have my errors pointed out than remain ignorant! :icon_salut:

[dogtag]

In addition to what John said: The sling should be fixed approx 2" from the butt swivel.
All adjustments to sling length are done at fore end.

[IditarodJoe]

Thanks dogtag. I'll take care of it. In reality, the claws on that sling fit so tightly around the fabric that it's unlikely that I will ever adjust it once it's on properly, but I do want the installation to be correct.

I tool a look at Ian Skennerton's web site and it looks like he currently offers a number of (somewhat) affordable books that would cover the Mk 1 and Mk 4 rifles but his descriptions of the books are less than helpful. Can someone here recommend one that is less of a "coffee table" history book and more a nuts and bolts parts/dates identification book? Thanks.

[JB White]

You did it again. No1 and No4 rifles. The Number describes the rifle. The Mark denotes any variations. There is a world of difference between what's known as a SMLE MkV and a No5 MkI. ;) You'll eventually learn the lingo. We all did the same at one time or another.

Skennertons SAIS series is among the best for dedicated pams. You'll get you money's worth so don't fret that part. If you're interested in deciphering all the markings then "The Broad Arrow" is a great reference to start with. Other books will fill in some of the blanks but TBA is the most comprehensive.

[IditarodJoe]

:icon_redface: The sad thing, JB, is that I actually knew what I meant to type. Ever since I hit the big 6-5 this sort of thing just seems to be happening more and more often. Early onset senile dementia maybe? :icon_rolleyes:

Thank you for the information on Skennerton's books. I'll call in an order for the SAIS books for the NUMBER 4 and NUMBER 1 rifles tomorrow.

[rifles4me]

Damn fine rifle!