Help identify B.S.A .303 rifle

[DarkStar]

Once again thanks Daan

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.

My mistake: Serial number is actually on the receiver ring. I don't think there was anything on the barrel. I suspect the bolt handle was restamped to match the receiver because the numbers on the bolt are much more "crude" and rough.

So to recap:
The receiver is MLE Mk1* "long lee"
The barrel and sights are SMLE
The stock is MLE, modified to fit the new barrel with middle barrel band, fore-stock and metal fore-end removed
The bolt is Lee Metford with dust cover.
Matching serials on bolt and receiver

[Daan]

DS, here's some photos of the two I've got.LeeKarb 03.JPGDSCN2566.JPGDSCN2567.JPGDSCN2569.jpgFirst pic, Lee Metford Mk II receiver, MLE bolt with dustcover, 6 shot mag, SMLE barrel and sights, stock shortened Australian "Club Pattern" style. Next rifle: LE Mk I* receiver, CLLE bolt (notice absence of dust cover, or dust cover studs, but still with the safety catch on the cocking handle) SMLE fore-stock, even with the cut-out for the (absent) charger bridge. Both have the mag cut-off removed. Talk about mix-and-match! Both these rifles's barrels are still quite good.

[Donald]

Daan I must say thanks for the very good info posted here. I was able to convey this info to someone this weekend who produced a similar looking old .303 and wanted to know something about it. It just looked in a far worse condition than the one here.

Thanks again Donald

[Daan]

Glad you could use the info Donald. Having to write up collector's motivations for a dozen 303's forced me to read up on them.
I've heard there is a local collector who have around 300 .303's, and who don't consider his collection complete! Hope to still meet him one day.

[gerritf]

Hi Daan. Seeing that you seem to have the answers, I bought a BSA no2 mk4. At first I thought it was a.22! There is also no date on the ring. Is this a hybrit?

Sent from my GT-P7500 using Tapatalk 2

[gerritf]

This is a photo of the ring with the markings.

Sent from my GT-P7500 using Tapatalk 2

[Daan]

I bought a BSA no2 mk4. At first I thought it was a.22! There is also no date on the ring. Is this a hybrit?

Gerrit, post photos of the whole rifle, sights, and action from the right hand side.

[gerritf]

I have replace the stock. The one I bought it with were sporterized, but were not done profesionally. These fotos are of the gun in present form.uploadfromtaptalk1371128380840.jpguploadfromtaptalk1371128380840.jpg

Sent from my GT-P7500 using Tapatalk 2

[Daan]

Gerrit, the No 2 Mk IV was an SMLE .22 cal. trainer. Many of them were in fact converted from SMLE's. They were manufactured between the world wars. The marks on your rifle is typical of that .22 trainer rifles. I can only assume that your rifle was made up using a No 2 Mk IV receiver. The bolt is any SMLE up to Mk III and the rear sights is early Mk III. Technically your rifle is a SMLE Mk III.
As I've mentioned in other threads; at the outbreak of World War 2 the British were caught without enough small arms (again). The newly developed No. 4 rifle was not yet in production, so every available World War 1 vintage rifle, and older, was pressed into service, and un-serviceable rifles were refurbished. It is common for SMLE's to have mismatched parts due to rifles being assembled form whatever parts was available under wartime pressure.

[Peter Wells]

DarkStar

Two things
1) with this rifles very 'interesting' history, I would STRONGLY suggest you get the headspace checked before firing and
2) SMLE furniture can be found if you want to restore it to it's probable inter-war state. Post a Want Ad and see what comes up.