Zulu - What Was The Name Of The Stand-in MH Rifles ? |
oldcontemtible
|
If I remember correctly (its been awhile since I last saw it) there is at least 1 Enfield No4 MK1 in the shot at the redoubt scenes. One the kneeling soldiers is holding it.
Guy |
||||||||||||
|
Sawubona
|
They're either "Long Lee-Enfields" or Lee-Metfords, the difference being in the rifling and not discernible without close examination. The Lee-Metford was the official replacement for the Martini, issued from 1888 (I think) and was a bolt action magazine rifle designed to fire a black powder .303 cartridge. With the introduction of smokeless powder, it was discovered that the Metford rifling fouled too readily and an Enfield designed rifling replaced it. The Long Lee-Enfield was replaced by a new rifle design in something like 1906 that was longer than a carbine yet shorter than an infantry rifle in hopes that it could replace both. It did and serviced on through both World Wars and Korea as well as the Short Magazine Lee Enfield or SMLE-- arguably the finest bolt action magazine rifle every made.
If you look closely enough, Coll, you can glimpse some MH Mark IV's as well. Corporal Sheiss is dragging one along during the closing credits, in spite of the fact that it isn't going to be made for another decade or so. Notice the longer cocking lever? |
||||||||||||
|
Dave Colbourne
|
Most of the non-Martini's seem to be Charger Loading Lee Enfields (CLLE). If you look closely you can see where the charger guide for clip loading has been fitted to the body of the rifle. the CLLE was mostly issued to the Territorial Army before, and in the early part of, World War 1. Lee-Metford's had finger grooves in the fore-end, making them quite recongnisable.
|
||||||||||||
|
Sawubona
|
Ahh, I see! Thanks for that, Dave. I never realized about the grooved fore-end, but the difference can clearly been seen in various photos of the two available on the web. That sort of mistake can happen when one doesn't have an example of either in spite of lusting for both!
|
||||||||||||
|
Dave Colbourne
|
I used to own a CLLE back in the days when I shot, very nice rifle and very accurate. Would have loved to have had a Lee Metford, but never found one at a price I could afford
Re the CLLE, though, I can remember reading that the Territorial Army were still equipped with this when they went to France at the end of 1914. During the Battle of Loos, a Territorial battalion were able to re-equip themselves with SMLE's recovered from the battlefield but neglected to recover the bayonets. When they indented for these, there was an enquiry as to why they wanted bayonets for rifles they were not equipped with. The upshot was, they had to hand in the SMLE's and were re-equipped with CLLE's. Good old army! |
||||||||||||
|
Sawubona
|
Yes, the price of some of the rifles (and handguns) of that vintage are getting pretty much out of sight now. Stateside, one can still pick up three MH's for the price of a Lee-Metford (when one can even find one)!
|
||||||||||||
|
Zulu - What Was The Name Of The Stand-in MH Rifles ? |
|
||
Powered by phpBB © 2001-2004 phpBB Group
phpBB Style created by phpBBStyles.com and distributed by Styles Database.
phpBB Style created by phpBBStyles.com and distributed by Styles Database.