LGS has one. I'm developing an interest in these after watching A Bridge Too Far again a few weeks ago, but I know very little. I forgot my reading glasses so I couldn't see too well, but I saw very little in the way of markings. It what I would call the ladder sight, which I've never used. The stock was solid, well used. I know pictures would be needed but I was in a hurry. What should I be looking for? Price was $550.

If that was a Long Branch with a decent bore...I couldn't get my wallet out quick enough. But that is more a personal preference than good sense. Lithgow next. English? I'd walk. Personal preference only, I emphasize.

First of all, it is a No 4, not a Mk 4. The most common are No 4 Mk I and No 4 Mk I*, though there are other variants. Lithgow never made these. They were made in Britain at one of three plants, and wartime production tend to have rather ordinary external finish (machining marks, painted finish) but are strong and work well. Most are No 4 Mk 1*, which was somewhat simplified for more rapid production.

They were also made at Long Branch (Canada) and in the US (by Savage). The latter two types tend to have better cosmetics, and are No 4 Mk I*. They are also prominently marked as to their origin, so the lack of much in the way of markings suggests a British one.

There was also No 4 Mk II, made in the UK, most post war, and a lot of these hit the market some years back in mint unfired condition, and they are very nice if you can find one, though you'll pay more.

Other less-common versions tend to attract a price premium, if unmolested and in good nick.

There are several versions of rear sight, including a nicely machined version with click adjustment for elevation, a couple of simpler pressed steel versions, with a sliding mechanism for elevation, and a simple two-distance flip over version, as the set-up was simplified as the war progressed. They are easy to swap over though.

I can't comment on the prices they are attracting there. FWIW I have a Savage version myself, and have owned a British No 4 Mk I. Of the two I prefer the Savage, and a Long Branch would be about as good.

At least he didnt call it a SMLE and went on about receiver stretching.

Well yes, there is that. Still early in the thread though ;-)

Be careful. They made a lot of them and some have a lot of wear. .I just bought an all matching number including the stock & forearm 1954 No 4 Mk2 with the micrometer type sight after a lot of looking for $650. It's definitely been used but everything works and it's a good shooter. Pretty much the same gun as the MkI other than how they hung the trigger. IMO $550's a good price today if it's decent general condition as far as bore, stock, everything works as it should, etc They're not making any more of them.

There's a Brit called "Range Bloke" on you tube that's got a good video of what to look for. Two things for sure is to check that the stock & forearm fit tight and the bolt guide rail's not chipped.

Sympathy expressed.

I must have had some temporary dyslexia last night when I posted😀. I went back and looked at the rifle briefly this afternoon. It does not have many markings (had my reading glasses too!). No 4 MKI is faintly marked in the left side of the receiver, England somewhere in the right. 16991 is the number on the band on the stock. What appears to be Asian writing of some sort is stamped a couple of places, very small.

I'm not hot on buying this one, just trying to educate myself. Thanks for the info so far.

I had one of the ones made by Savage. It was actually pretty accurate too. Still kicking myself for selling it.

Since I wanted to learn more, I bought the Skennerton book. Wow. And as luck would have it, I stopped in a local pawn shop yesterday afternoon and they had a jungle carbine, or at least what looks like one.

Just be sure it’s a true Jungle Carbine with all the lightening cuts. There are a lot of “made up” carbines floating around.

I've shot a "jungle carbine" (quotes because it was a production chop job, not real) and it was loud AND inaccurate. A Long Branch or Savage rifle? In good shape? In a heartbeat.

Agreed, with more recoil.

After looking at the Number 4 Mark I some more and digging through the Skennerton book, I'm thinking this is a Maltby rifle. The serial number is clear, but many of the other marks are really faint. I'm considering putting an offer in on it.

Check the forestock and make sure it does not wiggle when you depress the trigger after releasing the firing pin. If the forestock moves when pressing the trigger all the way back it might need some work to bring into good order. The "draws" are the key to accuracy in Lee Enfields. Check out Skinnerton on that issue.
Also, pull the bolt and turn the bolt head counter clockwise. If it moves more than 16 or 18 degrees then it should be replaced. That means there would be stress on the thread of the bolt and the bolt head. These are fixes that can be made, just add to the eventual cost of getting it up and good running order. Also, good price negotiating points. Find everything wrong you can and then make your offer.

I believe the pad is actually a recoil intensifying device.

Thanks. I like the sights on this one, they appear to be the original style. The Skennerton book has a lot of information to take in, but I like learning something. I looked at a Lithgow SMLE online today and considered it but I need to be more knowledgeable.

They're all good rifles The jungle carbines really blast out some fire . I may be wrong but the ones made in England are the ones I like best.
They were available for 5 dollars in grease in the 60's but the one my dad got only had 2 lands.The best part is the 10 rounds ; don't forget to get a bayonet.

Well, if you do buy a Lithgow SMLE, and if our borders open up again, you'd be able to go to LSAF and see where it was made. The factory's still going, and it has a museum with lots of interesting stuff, including some of the machinery and the first-offs, as well as examples of some of the prototypes and special versions, and a lot of other stuff. FWIW when LSAF was set up to make SMLEs it was a state of the art gunmaking facility. It's continued to have some pretty advanced stuff as time went on - I actually worked there for a while.

I've been doing some reading on the Australian production of SMLEs, interesting, and really cool that you worked there.

I went back and looked at the Number 4. Serial number in the bolt handle and butt socket match. One thing I noticed was that when applying some pressure on the trigger the bolt handle moved up. I did some research and it sounds like that's not a big deal. The front band is missing the screw, not sure if there's an appropriate amount of movement in the barrel or not. Regardless, I'm enjoying learning about these.

Would it be fair to say as generalization, military bolt rifles with two piece stocks, inherently more 'fussy' & tend to require attention on that accord than equivalent mauser, Springfield, or 'others of genre', with conventional single piece stocks?

No offense intended to the collectors of this forum. Simply "inquiring mind..."

Best & Stay Safe!
John

IME based on all but one of the Enfield No 4 Mk1s and more than a few Mausers and Springfields I've owned the Enfields have been as reliable and trouble free as the Mausers. At the same time I think it would be fair to say there's more that can go wrong with an Enfield if you don't get a good one. The two piece stock was a factor with both the butt bolt and forend draws wore out on the one bad Enfield I owned.

The draws "wore out" or were damaged? There's nothing to wear on them, after all, but they can be damaged, such as by people not disassembling or reassembling correctly. You can also have the timber crack or be compressed due to the draws not seating properly - again, often a product of people messing with them who shouldn't. Not saying that was you of course.

The stocks weren't intended for anyone but armourers to remove, and there are some traps for the unwary or untrained in doing this. Getting the process wrong can cause damage.

On the other hand the but socket arrangement does have advantages. It is easy to provide for different stock lengths for example, and these were provided. It is also very strong, certainly strong enough to buttstroke an enemy without fearing that you'd break it. As well, it allowed better utilisation of stock wood, and allowed replacement only of that part of the stock which needed it on a FTR.