No. 1 Enfield Vs No. 4

fastcarsgofast

The Enfield I was looking at is a No. 1 Mk 3. Other than being an older model how does it compare to the No. 4 rifle? What if anything makes the No. 4 better?

Also do the stocks interchange?

11b6r

Buttstock MAY interchange, forestock and handguard are diferent. Different sights (#4 is to the rear of bolt, much longer radius, #1 is forward of chamber)

#4 in GENERAL is a much newer rifle, and may have less wear. Bolts and bolt heads do NOT interchange. My #1 is a 1915, #4 is 1944.

armilite

If given the option go with the number 4 or 5. The number 5 is the carbine version. The reasons have already been given 11b6r.

ikeda

Sights on #4 are much better and it has a heavier barrel. Tends to shoot better.

ern98

Have you seen any of the Indian Ishapore Enfields? It is hands down the latest issue of all the Enfields. They are made of much more modern steels are chambered in 7.62x51 Nato and are in the No. 4 configuration.

fastcarsgofast

Budget was the main reason I was considering the No. 1. I can get one for under $200 and convert it to a carbine.

armilite

quote:fastcarsgofast Posted - 10/29/2009 : 6:59:17 PM Budget was the main reason I was considering the No. 1. I can get one for under $200 and convert it to a carbine.


Then save yourself the headache and just get the #5 Jungle Carbine.
If your just gonna hack off 6-8 inches of barrel, you still have to have a good crown put on the barrel by a gunsmith which will cost you more money. If you don't crown it properly the gun won't shoot worth a damn. And your $200 investment won't be worth $50. So then where did you save any money but that's just my $.02.

chiefr

quote:Originally posted by armilite1015
quote:fastcarsgofast Posted - 10/29/2009 : 6:59:17 PM Budget was the main reason I was considering the No. 1. I can get one for under $200 and convert it to a carbine.


Then save yourself the headache and just get the #5 Jungle Carbine.
If your just gonna hack off 6-8 inches of barrel, you still have to have a good crown put on the barrel by a gunsmith which will cost you more money. If you don't crown it properly the gun won't shoot worth a damn. And your $200 investment won't be worth $50. So then where did you save any money but that's just my $.02.



Agree
I have an original #5. It is not fun to shoot with the as issued stock which has a reduced size hard rubber butt plate. The carbine is however, light, short, and handy. I plan to keep it original.

dfletcher

quote:Originally posted by fastcarsgofast
Budget was the main reason I was considering the No. 1. I can get one for under $200 and convert it to a carbine.


If that's the goal, Navy Arms chopped a bunch of Ishapore 7.62s and turned them into carbines. I had one for a while and it was a neat little gun, think I paid about $190.00 for it.

fastcarsgofast

No. 5's aren't within my budget right now, but there are plenty of butchered up (sporterized) No. 1's that can't be returned to original without spending a lot of money that I could convert. I've done the math and I can get the rifle and do the conversion for less than or maybe a little more than $200.

ENBLOC

I have a sporterized #4 mk1 with five groove bbl. and an original #4 mk1 with two groove bbl. I like the #4 mk1 (which have a bolt head release) vs. the #4 mk1* which do not and have other short cuts. I once had a #4 mk1* with a sloppy chamber that allowed case to swell on one side. Got rid of that one! The #4 mk1 are the "best" British Enfields in my opinion. The Indian Ishapore Factory rifles are a re-designed #1 mkIII, called the 2a or 2a1. The #5's are for collectors as they had lightening cuts made in rcvr & rear of bbl. to reduce weight and develop a "wandering zero" Going into battle I'd choose the #4 mk1 over the others because of it's heavier bbl. and longer sight picture like the m-1 Garand.