Talk:Lee–Enfield

message: on the MLE section there is a photograph of a carbine, but it is not an MLE, in fact it is not even claiming to be one; the caption is Cavalry carbine, 1865 - BL Foster 994, it is a percussion cap
this image seems a little pointless and irrelevant I think it should be removed  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 151.224.178.123 (talk) 12:31, 7 April 2014 (UTC)
thread_title: MLE photograph

message: I am not sure any Lee Enfield's remain in service today, at least not with the British army, especially not those in .303
(table taken directly from article)
:
Model/Mark                            	In Service
Magazine Lee-Enfield                  	1895–1926
Charger Loading Lee-Enfield           	1906–1926
Short Magazine Lee-Enfield Mk I       	1904–1926
Short Magazine Lee-Enfield Mk II      	1906–1927
Short Magazine Lee-Enfield Mk III/III*	1907 – present
Short Magazine Lee-Enfield Mk V       	1922–1924 (trials only; 20,000 produced)
Rifle No. 1 Mk VI                     	1930–1933 (trials only; 1,025 produced)
Rifle No. 4 Mk I                      	1939 – present (officially adopted in 1941)
Rifle No. 4 Mk I*                     	1942 – present
Rifle No 5 Mk I "Jungle Carbine"      	1944 – present
Rifle No. 4 Mk 2                      	1949 – present
Rifle 7.62mm 2A                       	1964 – present
Rifle 7.62mm 2A1                      	1965 – present
(Fdsdh1 (talk) 11:56, 31 May 2013 (UTC)
replies: text:  The Mosin Nagant is still in service with Finnish sharpshooters, and predates both the MLE and the SMLE.  The Mauser 98 was still in use in Brazil, for military training, within the last decade. Mzmadmike (talk) 23:28, 3 July 2016 (UTC)
thread_title: Service Periods?

message: A minor point but surely, given the widespread use of this weapon among British Empire/Commonwealth forces, it would be slightly more fitting to include a bit more variation in the images? This seems to be a trend with quite a number of articles.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.147.62.103 (talk) 21:28, 9 September 2013 (UTC)
thread_title: Canadian images

message: The Enfield .303 is no longer in use by either the military or the police in Pakistan. Thus the reference to it being used by second line troops and police in Pakistan should be deleted.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Bolori (talk • contribs) 14:30, 6 February 2011 (UTC)
thread_title: Pakistan

message: This is untrue, the Mosin-Nagant is from 1891 and still in Finnish service today (as the 7.62 Tkiv 85)
Товарищ (talk) 22:37, 14 January 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: The Lee-Enfield (well, OK, the Lee-Metford, but the only real difference is the rifling) dates from 1889, predating the M91, and the Tkiv 85 is a heavily modified M91/30, whereas there are actual WWI/WWII vintage SMLE Mk III* rifles still being used by Indian and African police services. In that respect, the Lee-Enfield is indeed the oldest and longest serving bolt-action rifle still in service. Commander Zulu (talk) 04:46, 24 February 2010 (UTC)
replies: text:  So, your claim is that one modified rifle is older than another modified rifle and therefore the modified rifle can make a claim the modified rifle cannot? Even though the modified rifle is built on receivers that predate the modified rifle?Mzmadmike (talk) 23:34, 3 July 2016 (UTC)

text: The 'Enfield' part of the designation actually refers to the pattern of rifling employed. Enfield rifling was designed to be more usable with the then-new smokeless powders, such as Cordite, which the Metford rifling was less suited to. So the name format used was action/rifling
In that case the Carcano would be the oldest serving bolt action, being used by the National Liberation Army in Libya and designed in 1890. And There's a chance somewhere out there there is a bolt action still technically in service older than that. I think we should be careful about making claims like that in the article. Nlesbirel (talk) 06:12, 26 September 2014 (UTC)

text:  You are correct, yet the claim remains in the article. "One of" would be accurate. "Oldest" requires documentation of issue or acquisition by a government or recognized rebel force with a logistics program.Mzmadmike (talk) 23:31, 3 July 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Oldest Serving Bolt Action 

message: I have understood for many years that upon the adoption of the No. 4 rifle in early WWII that the "Lee" name was dropped completely. As I have read in US literature on the subject, the SMLE was the last Lee-Enfield because the Lee name was not associated with the No. 4 rifle.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 207.114.151.21 (talk) 19:07, 10 August 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: "Lee" refers to the bolt design, "Enfield" to the rifling. The Rifle, No. 4 used the same bolt action and rifling as the earlier SMLE, and is still a Lee-Enfield. Ditto the Rifle, No. 5 "Jungle Carbine" and the Ishapore 2A1. Commander Zulu (talk) 04:52, 24 February 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Lee-Enfield name usage 

message: Great article. My thanks to all the contributors. One of the things I enjoyed was learning of rifle users using the names "Smelly" (SMLE) and "Emily" (MLE) and I found myself reading the letters that way as I progressed through the article.
What I'd like to see added, if anyone is able, is a bit more colour; perhaps some quotes from British WWI troops about their feelings towards the rifle. Since the gun was very effective I imagine that British soldiers were quite favourable towards the guns; if anyone has a soldier's quote or reminiscence about the guns it would be marvellous to see that in the article. And/or something from politicians about the gun's contribution to British success. For someone who has no deep interest in weaponry I would have been pleased to see such human angles alongside the detailed information of the weapon's build and capabilities. --bodnotbod (talk) 13:19, 29 October 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: True afficionados consider the term "smelly" offensive. We (conflict of interest revealed) prefer "smiley." Rumiton (talk) 08:17, 11 April 2011 (UTC)
replies: text:  I own dozens and am certainly an aficionado, and it's a Smelly. ;) Mzmadmike (talk) 23:41, 3 July 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: It was usually pronounced ess-emm-ell-ee.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 95.150.18.209 (talk) 09:27, 20 September 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: George MacDonald Fraser served with 9th Battalion The Border Regiment, 19th Indian Division, Fourteenth Army, in Burma in 1944-5. He carried an SMLE No.1 MkIII of Great War pattern. In Quartered Safe Out Here: A Recollection of the War in Burma (HarperCollins, 1993, pbk HarperCollins, London, 2000, ISBN 0 00 710593 2), pp.29-30, he recalls:- 'The standard arm was the most beautiful firearm ever invented, the famous Lee Enfield, either of the old pattern with flat backsight and long sword bayonet, or the Mark IV [he means No.4] with the pig-sticker, a nine-inch spike with no cutting edge. The old pattern, which I carried, was the great rifle of the First World War, which the Old Contemptibles used with such speed and skill that the enemy often believed they were facing automatic weapons... I'm no Davy Crockett, but I could hit three falling plates (about ten inches square) out of five at two hundred [yards], and I was graded only a first-class shot, not a marksman. The Lee Enfield, cased in wood from butt to muzzle, could stand up to any rough treatment, and it never jammed... She's a museum piece now, but I still see her on TV newsreels, in the hands of hairy, outlandish men like the Mujahedeen of Afghanistan and capable-looking gentry in North Africa, and I have a feeling that she will be loosing off her ten rounds rapid when the Kalashnikovs and Armalites are forgotten. That's the old reactionary talking. No doubt Agincourt die-hards said the same of the long bow. Nowadays the automatic rifle, and concentrated firepower, are the thing, spraying rounds all over the place... but I doubt if the standard of marksmanship is what it was -- it can't be, except at short range -- and I wonder what happens if, say, a bridge has to be blown from a distance, because there's no fuse, and someone has to hit a gun-cotton primer, the size of a 10p piece, at two hundred yards? (A Sapper lieutenant did that in Burma, with a Lee Enfield, one shot.) Possibly such problems don't arise in modern, hi-tech war, or perhaps they just plaster the bloody thing with automatic fire, and hope.' Khamba Tendal (talk) 19:10, 15 October 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Great article chaps. I have a request for additional content. 

message: There are actually two quite different ".410" cartridges being discussed here.
The first is the common ".410" sporting shotgun cartridge, made in several different lengths (which may prevent conversions with short chambers from accepting longer cartridges) while the other is the quite distinct ".410 Musket" or ".410 Indian Police" cartridge, produced by loading a .303 cartridge which had not had the final "necking down" step performed.  
The .410 shotgun conversions to the commercial sporting cartridge were largely the result of British and Australian gun control laws.  Shotguns could be owned with little paperwork, while military rifles required registration and police permission, secure storage, in-home inspections of storage, etc.  As a result, many .303 rifles had their barrels drilled and reamed out to .410 and the chambers recut to accept commercial .410 sporting shotgun cartridges.  This allowed the owners to register them as shotguns rather than as rifles.  Many such conversions were done by individual gunsmiths, though there were some "factory" .410 shotgun SMLEs produced in Australia after WW II.
The .410 Musket was the result of the government of British India wanting to arm police with a weapon that had a reduced range (for general public safety) and that could not accept easily-obtained ammunition (to make them less useful for insurgents), thus the development of a unique "Musket" cartridge.
British (and British-ruled India) ammunition manufacturers used cordite as a propellant, this required that the strands of cordite be loaded into the case while the case still a (nearly) straight-walled cylinder; the case mouth would then be "necked down" to the final form, to accept the .311" bullet.  This is unlike the case-forming and loading processes used elsewhere when using granulated propellants where the case is brought to its final form prior to installation of the primer and propellant charge.
In the case of the .410 Musket, the partially formed .303 case was simply loaded with a suitable charge of a granulated smokeless powder, as used in a shotgun cartridge, and then loaded more or less in the same fashion as a shotgun cartridge with either fine shot, "segmented shot" or a "ball" round that was literally a round lead ball.
The chamber for the .410 Musket has much more taper than that of a sporting .410 shotgun cartridge, and even 2" .410 shotgun cartridges will not chamber.
The .410 Musket remains in use with police in both India and Pakistan (http://policewb.gov.in/wbp/unit/ptc/ptctrg.php for an Indian example) and ammunition is presumably loaded in both nations, but it is not available for export or civilian sales.
.410 Musket has been loaded commercially (presumably under contract from Indian or Pakistani government users) by British firms such as Kynoch in the past, but there does not seem to have been any production in decades.
While many of the .410 Muskets that have been sold as surplus outside India and Pakistan have been modified to use commercial .410 shotgun cartridges (the US surplus gun dealer Springfield Sporters, for example, reamed the chambers of many of the .410 Muskets they imported, they charged about $10 more for this work) it is possible to modify .303 cartridge cases to use for handloading .410 Musket.  The usual procedure is to anneal the mouth of a .303 cartridge case with a propane gas torch, then load with a "fire-forming" charge of a small amount of a fast-burning powder (5 grains of Bullseye powder for example) topped by filling the case with a filler material such as corn starch to provide sufficient resistance for the powder to burn properly.  When fired in the .410 Musket chamber, the soft (annealed) brass of the case mouth will expand to fit the .410 Musket chamber and can subsequently be loaded as a .410 Musket cartridge case.  There is a web page on this process at http://www.fourten.org.uk/reloading303.html  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 63.228.162.7 (talk) 09:51, 20 June 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  .410 conversions 

message: No documentation provided for Filipino use of the No4 Lee Enfield.  Such use is extremely unlikely as the Phillipines were under US control at prior to WW II and used US-supplied small arms, in particular the .30 caliber M1917 "Enfield" rifle.  Post-war/post-independence small arms continued to be supplied by the US.  
The No4 Lee Enfield was in short supply in Britain prior to the Japanese invasion of the Philippines.  None would have been available to supply to a non-Commonwealth nation.  While some Canadian-produced No4 rifles were supplied to Chinese forces, there is no evidence that any were supplied to Filipino forces, regular or irregular.  Nor is it likely that Japanese-captured No4s would have been supplied to Filipino forces collaborating with the Japanese, as few of the Commonwealth forces the Japanese were facing were equipped with No4s.  British forces at Singapoe and Hong Kong were equipped with MkIII Lee Enfields, and Indian, Australian and New Zealand forces were almost entirely equipped with MkIIIs for the duration of the war.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.175.212.115 (talk) 23:34, 9 October 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: IIRC, a ship carrying a cargo of supplies intended for Canadian troops was captured by the Japanese at Hong Kong. IIRC, the cargo included among other things, a number of Universal Carriers, so it is possible it also included rifles. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 95.144.50.167 (talk) 12:09, 28 March 2018 (UTC)
replies: text: Unlikely to have included any sort of Lee-Enfield rifles.  Canada was in short supply of rifles when Hong Kong capitulated on 25 December 1941, having shipped most of their MkIII Lee-Enfields to the UK and being so short of weapons that they purchased a large number of M1917 rifles from the US to arm Canadian troops in Canada.  The No4MkI production did not begin until June 1941 and there would have been only small quantities available by December 1941, all going to Canadian forces before any thought would have been given to providing them to allied Chinese forces.  The Chinese did not receive any No4MkIs from Canada until at least 1943.  References to 'Enfields" in the Philippines are to 1917 rifles supplied by the US.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.178.166.3 (talk) 00:49, 19 February 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Philippines listed as user? 

message: Hi I am hoping to find out more about this rifle which has these
Markings . (A crown with er below, then BSA Co 1902. )On the stock it
Has (Birmingham BSA A crown  & M.C.)all in a circle. Then (Commonwealth
Of Australia MTLY Forces .AI?). In another circle. It also has other stampings
On the stock. The rifle has all matching numbers, it also has a fold up peep
Sight with cross slide adjustments. It does not have a safety catch only a 
Magazine slide arrangement. It also has brass muzzle cap (dirt protector ?)
The rifle has a greasy film all over there are also other stampings on the barrel
Has brass stock plate with oil bottle and pull through in stock hole.
Hoping someone can help Regards. 
Ron A.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 60.228.209.128 (talk) 03:08, 25 March 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  1902 BSA Co 303 Rifle. 

message: "For example, there are some surviving SHTLE Mk III rifles made in 1916 at the Birmingham Small Arms Co in Victoria Australia that have the "pre 1915" round knob bolt action."
Maybe I'm missing something, but I don't find any clues in the article to explain just what a "SHTLE" rifle is. I've never heard of any such thing. "Short Hand-Training Lee-Enfield"? Maybe the person who wrote that sentence, or some other knowledgeable fellow could explain the acronym, because now I'm curious. .45Colt 05:09, 10 March 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: Given that the usual pronouncement of "SMLE" is "Smelly", exactly how does one pronounce SHTLE"? – Bardbom (talk) 00:17, 22 July 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  "SHTLE"? 

message: Barrel length for first entry on the right (presumably mark 1) is listed as 44 inches, which is absurdly long and i can find no evidence of any service rifle with a barrel length this long, much less the enfield. needs changing. 
here are the appropriate barrel lengths:
Barrel length	
    767 mm (Lee-Enfield Mk.1)
    640 mm (SMLE No.1 Mk.3)
    640 mm (SMLE No.4 Mk.1)
    478 mm (SMLE No.5 Jungle Carbine)  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 100.32.154.2 (talk) 20:16, 4 November 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Incorrect barrel length listed 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified  on Lee–Enfield. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.ottawacitizen.com/news/Military%20draws%20blanks%20bids%20rifles/5559652/story.html
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20130606221212/http://www.quarry.nildram.co.uk/256brit.htm to http://www.quarry.nildram.co.uk/256brit.htm
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20090123222212/http://www.sportingshooter.co.uk:80/guns-and-shooting/useful-stuff/firearms-law to http://www.sportingshooter.co.uk/guns-and-shooting/useful-stuff/firearms-law
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at ).
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 09:13, 14 September 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 5 external links on Lee–Enfield. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20100922085230/http://enfieldrifles.ca/ti5.htm to http://www.enfieldrifles.ca/ti5.htm
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20090224132052/http://www.amstevens.fsnet.co.uk/Inforeq.htm to http://www.amstevens.fsnet.co.uk/Inforeq.htm
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120204071804/http://www.rugreview.com/stuf/afgwar.htm to http://www.rugreview.com/stuf/afgwar.htm
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120224180438/http://www.euroarms.net/EFD/index.htm to http://www.euroarms.net/EFD/index.htm
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070603044406/http://www.worldwar1.com/france/portugal.htm to http://www.worldwar1.com/france/portugal.htm
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 01:02, 22 March 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 2 external links on Lee–Enfield. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.ottawacitizen.com/news/Military_draws_blanks_bids_rifles/5559652/story.html
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20100527041456/http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m0BQY/is_4_51/ai_n11840303/ to http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m0BQY/is_4_51/ai_n11840303/
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 10:56, 13 May 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Lee–Enfield. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120318074754/http://www.daylife.com/photo/0f8CajpgQn4bt to http://www.daylife.com/photo/0f8CajpgQn4bt
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 09:12, 24 May 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: The IOF .315 sporting rifle is a civilian version of the British military Lee–Enfield rifle, chambered in the 8x50mmR Mannlicher cartridge rather than the .303 British military cartridge due to Indian gun control laws. 1.23.152.116 (talk) 10:30, 7 September 2017 (UTC)
thread_title: IOF .315 sporting rifle

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Lee–Enfield. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://www.webcitation.org/64yrkPBMO?url=http://www.ottawacitizen.com/news/Military%20draws%20blanks%20bids%20rifles/5559652/story.html to http://www.ottawacitizen.com/news/Military_draws_blanks_bids_rifles/5559652/story.html
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 23:17, 19 December 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: A lot of good pictures on this article, but any picture of the quintessential British rifle being used by British forces seems rather conspicuous by its absence.  Is there any particular reason for this?  Sadly, I don't have one of my own to contribute. --Vometia (talk) 14:27, 3 June 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Nice pictures, but... 

message: Ian McCollum just explained that the SMLE Mk. III did NOT initally accept Spitzer rounds. The article should be changed to reflect that.  --84.189.95.128 (talk) 13:14, 20 January 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  SMLE Mk. III/Spitzer 

message: The recently added pop culture section does not adequately demonstrate its importance. As stated at MOS:CULTURALREFS, pop culture sections should not be included, unless there are secondary sources that provide in-depth coverage that explain why a particular appearance in popular culture is noteworthy. Loafiewa (talk) 21:50, 13 March 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes, the last policy that you sent looks much more related to this discussion than the previous ones. I no longer object to the removal of the content. Cheers. 88.243.159.0 (talk) 23:32, 13 March 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Pop culture 

message: In 2001 our long inactive colleague Commander Zulu added, referencing a printed book, that during WWI SMLE Mk III cost £3 15s, and it's still present in the article. But I find it suspicious that Frederick Kellaway described a different cost dynamic after the war: namely, it "fell from £4 1s. to £3 8s". Could anyone please check in that 2001 book at which year the price was £3 15s? Ain92 (talk) 10:22, 22 May 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Actual WWI production costs