Help identify B.S.A .303 rifle

[DarkStar]

On the weekend we were helping the wife's grandfather pack cause he's moving.

While there he said I can have his .303 rifle because he wants it to stay in the family.

Can some tell me a bit more on this rifle like model, value (not planning on selling), etc.





Many Thanks,
DS

[Wanderin' Zero]

Magazine Lee-Enfield, ex-Union Defence Force. Sporterised, which unfortunately has rendered it worth next to nothing. A great pity. What you effectively have is a nice, cheap .303 hunting rifle.

[DarkStar]

Another Question

In the last photo the middle marking is actually upside down, but it looks to be a D.P with a line stamped through it. Searching the net I've found that a DP stamp was used to mark a rifle as "For Drill Purpose Only". I've also found that some DP rifles were re-activated and re-proofed (possibly why the line is stamped through the DP)

Is this a potentially unsafe weapon?

Should I go through the trouble of licencing it when also considering This Potential Problem or should I have it deactivated or just hand it in at the cop shop?

[Wanderin' Zero]

I doubt its unsafe if its been used for years for hunting.

Deactivating a gun requires much effort and legal admin and you need to pay a gunsmith to do it. It's illegal to damage a gun/render it inoperable before surrendering it to the police.

The advice JS4 has given you on the other thread is correct. The old man still has a valid license in law - in fact one that is valid for life as matters now stand. You will though need to get a print out from your DFO using the old man's ID.

If you don't want the gun, don't scrap it. Just get it to Andrew Soutar at Classic Arms and ask him to sell it. Someone will want it though it won't fetch very much (but even then sometimes strange things happen on auctions).

Finally, don't transport it yourself as that would be illegal.

[Daan]

Darkstar, this specific gun of yours has a bit of unique SA history to it.

To begin with, The barrel is a replacement, so no worries about the (cancelled) DP stamp on it.

Your gun started life as a Mk I* 'Long Lee' made by London Small Arms Co. Ltd. in 1899. So this was an Anglo Boer War Rifle. Most of them had their barrels shot out properly during the war. (The cordite load used then was notorious for rusting barrels if not cleaned rather immediately)
After the war, it became the property of the Union Defence Force, whom at some stage put the DP stamp on it, usually due to shot out barrels.
But the UDF (and the British..) were caught without enough rifles at the start of World War One, and would you believe it, World War Two again.
Most probably in the inter-war years, the UDF got hold of a consignment of BSA made SMLE barrels, bolts and some SMLE stocks (Short Magazine Lee Enfield, the WWI .303), and re-barrelled DP rifles in a effort to relieve the shortage of rifles.
Keep in mind that the first SMLE rifles were just upgraded Long Lee's, so the receivers would accept an SMLE barrel.

How do I know all this? Have a good look at your rifle:
The receiver is standard Long Lee; no charger bridge to take the 5-round stripper clip like the SMLE. But the bolt is early SMLE (no dust cover over the bolt or safety catch on the rear of the bolt).
Then the barrel is shorter (25.2 inches) and thinner than the Long Lee barrel (30 inches), and the sights are pure SMLE. The Long Lee's had a rather fragile low profile rear sight, and an equally low profile front sight.

So you have got a rifle that was assembled from different parts.

Above here I mentioned that the UDF received 'some' SMLE stocks. They obviously received less stocks than barrels and bolts as some of these upgraded rifles ended up like yours; with the Long Lee stock just shortened and rounded off behind the barrel band.
One may ask why they did not just shortened the Long Lee stock enough just to accommodate the slightly shorter barrel so that it will still take a bayonet? The Australians did that on most of the rifles they upgraded similarly, but it is quite a job to re-fit the metal fore-end to the shortened stock, so the local military armourers probably just took the easiest way and cut off the fore-stock altogether.
The new barrel is also thinner, so the middle barrel band could not be tightened around the barrel, and would work loose if a sling was attached to it. So rifles modified like yours had no place to attach the sling on the fore-end; the armourers then removed the screw-in rear attachment on the butt and plugged it. Have a look; you will see the round little wooden plug just in front of the brass butt plate.
Other of these locally upgraded rifles had an SMLE fore-stock added as well, which made it almost indistinguishable from an actual SMLE, if it was not for the fact that it is lacking a charger bridge.
One of my similarly upgraded rifles has an 1889 Mk II Lee Metford (the forerunner of the Lee Enfield) receiver with the original bolt and dust cover, but with the SMLE barrel and sights like yours. The UDF probably took whatever they had just to assemble as much functional rifles as possible.

These local upgrades are nowhere described in either Skennerton's or Statton's books on the Lee Enfield series of rifles. Skennerton touches on how the Australians upgraded their rifles; there they were called Club Pattern rifles.

Usually the barrels of these rifles are still good, as they are 'new'.
I've got two of them. And friends of mine has another three between them. I've seen some of them at Blunderbuss as well. They are not that uncommon.
Classic Arms in Witbank once had one exactly like yours up for auction and described it as an 'SA Arsenal Upgrade'.

Please don't have it de-activated. Or even worse, handed in for destruction.

Collectors would be interested in it, including me.

[Daan]

Just to summarise my long-winded reply: Your rifle is a Long Lee fitted with a new SMLE bolt, barrel and sights. Although it looks like a typical 'sporterised' 303, this complete conversion was done in the local military arsenals probably in the run-up to World War Two, to relieve the shortage of serviceable rifles. Don't hand it in for destruction please.

[Wanderin' Zero]

I defer to Daan and retract my original post on this thread.

[Daan]

WZ, my first thought was exactly the same as yours. What caught my eye however was the BSA logo on the barrel, while the receiver ring was LSA Co. Ltd. All these converted rifles that I've seen so far has BSA made SMLE barrels, that's why I assume the UDF got hold of an consignment of BSA barrels. And all these barrels has got the "Z" stamped on the knox-form of the barrel. Wish I can find out what that was for. And neither has I had any confirmation what the "Diamond-inside-U" stamp means. I know the Kimberley Regiment had a diamond on their emblem, but some collectors say it is the Union "sold out of service" stamp. All but one of these rifles I've seen had that stamp on. DS, having a closer look, I see the bolt of your rifle still appears to have the dust cover on; so only the 'cocking-handle' on the rear of the original bolt was replaced, not the entire bolt. You will also see the slot on the left hand side of the loading gate where the magazine cut-off was removed when the rifle was re-fitted. In SA that was done to all the upgraded rifles. The Brits left this rather useless and potentially lethal IMHO device on the rifles they upgraded, and even manufactured new SMLE's with it into WWI, only left it out right at the end of the war in the SMLE Mk III*. Ps. for some reason all of a sudden I cannot make any line breaks in this post. Doing something wrong somewhere?

[DarkStar]

Daan, I have to say many thanks for that in-depth explanation.

That would also explained why the barrel length looked "wrong" for a Sporterised MLE.

Here is the un-cropped photo that includes a part of the bolt


From memory it looks more like this Lee Metford Mark II, just with the magazine cut-off removed.


Do you think they re-stamped serial numbers when they re-fitted the rifle because the number on the side of the barrel under the top hand-guard matches that on the top of the bolt handle.

P.S. The first thing when I get it is a thorough cleaning. Don't think it's seen oil in decades.

[Daan]

DS, the new barrels were probably left blank, and the rifle's original number was stamped on the new barrel on completion. I've also noticed; all these rifles receiver and barrel number match, but rarely the bolt as well. You are right about the bolt, but the date on your receiver is too late for a Lee Metford, probably just swapped the bolt out at some stage.