rorkesdriftvc.com Forum Index


rorkesdriftvc.com
Discussions related to the Anglo-Zulu War of 1879
Reply to topic
Identifing Martinis from a long way away*
Sawubona


Joined: 09 Nov 2005
Posts: 1179
Reply with quote
In the course of a discussion in the Main Forum about a photograph of Hook wearing his VC, a link was posted to the Museum of the RE (thanks for that link, John); http://www.remuseum.org.uk/campaign/rem_campaign_zuluwar79.htm

About midway down the page at that link is a picture of what appears to be a MH MK IV (the long cocking lever and distinct action body) which is curiously captioned as being a "MH MK V'. My understanding is that the unusual Mark V MH, although it did exist, was a rare conversion of a standard Mk II (with the short cocking lever, of course) to .303 caliber with Metford rifling and was subsequently (and quickly) renamed a "Martini-Metford MK I'). One expert claims that only patterns and a few samples of this long arm exist while another states that Australia at least received several hundred of these unusual rifles. To add to my confusion, another site lists the Martini Metford as being in 577/450 caliber rather than .303 and yet another says that said MM had the "fore end furniture' of the Long Lee. My feeling is that the RE site's caption of it being a MH MK V is a typo, but if that's the case, doesn't it seem a pretty fatuous error that should have been noticed and corrected two and a half minutes after it was posted? Am I missing something here? Does anyone have a link or an actual picture of a MH MK V? Has anyone seen a MH MK V or a least a picture of one (not the carbine)? Is there anything particularly recognizable about the fore end that would distinguish a MH MK V from a MH MK II?

*The author wishes to thank Monty Python for the title of this post
View user's profileSend private message
Neil Aspinshaw


Joined: 05 Sep 2005
Posts: 290
Location: Loughborough
Reply with quote
Sawumbona
The Martini as you rightly say is a Martini Henry Mk4 B or C pattern. To be fair apart from close up you cannot tell the difference unless you measure the knox form length, Its slightly longer on a C than a B dur to engineering alterations made in the conversion from a .402" calibre Enfield Martini Mk2.

The MkV and MkV1 Martini rifles do exist, albeit in very scarce numbers now. The MkV was made with a light profile Metford Barrel in .303", most were re-designated M-M Mk1, often seen in Australia. The Rifle has a wooden handguard adjacent to the receiver.
The MM Mk1 was converted and was fitted with the Rigby pattern nosecap as found on the L-M, plus a trapdoor butt plate to accept the pull through and oiler.

The MkV1 is harder to spot, it is actually designated as MH MkV1, BSA had a contract to supply 36000 .450 calibre MH in 1889, however 9600 were amended to .303" calibre Metford Rifled and have the standard heavy profile barrel. For all intents it is a Mk2 however, The only give-away is the ramped Lewes Pattern frontsight as found on the Lee Metford/ Lee Enfield Rifles. Otherwise it is identical.

The foresight has a barleycorn retro-fitted to the lewes pattern, this was done at Weedon C1892 to take account of the poor sighting of the Lewes sight, and the deflection of Higher Velocity rounds. Sighting was still for Black powder. In the even the MH MkV1 were not all redesignated as M-M Mk2, as Canada took delivery of 1001 rifles, they then found the new Mk2 ammo (cordite) would not chamber as the rim was made heavier with a chamfer to accept the extraxctor claw of the Lee Met, so they went to stores.

I have a prestine MH MkV1 in my collection, it is on my firearm certificate. It had M & D (Militia and defence, Canada) markings, but the manufacturing codes are spot on as MkV1. [url]



[/url]


Last edited by Neil Aspinshaw on Tue Aug 04, 2009 11:42 am; edited 1 time in total

_________________
Neil
View user's profileSend private messageSend e-mailVisit poster's website
Neil Aspinshaw


Joined: 05 Sep 2005
Posts: 290
Location: Loughborough
Reply with quote
For at a glace recognition here is a few from my collection as posted on Jasons website
http://www.martinihenry.com/readersrifles/Pages/20.html

The MkV1 is 3rd from bottom, hard to compare with the Mk1-Mk3 top three.[/img]

_________________
Neil
View user's profileSend private messageSend e-mailVisit poster's website
Sawubona


Joined: 09 Nov 2005
Posts: 1179
Reply with quote
Very nice collection of MH's (and I'll bet you've got a few more knocking about as well). Thanks for the enlightenment on the MK V's and VI's-- I was not even aware of the existence of the latter.

What's the story behind the MK IV actioned Jeffery? It looks something like a Cadet with a large frame. Australian? .303?
View user's profileSend private message
Neil Aspinshaw


Joined: 05 Sep 2005
Posts: 290
Location: Loughborough
Reply with quote
Sawumbona
The Jeffery is a very rare piece, one of only two or three know to exist of the twenty made. One does appear in the Skennerton books, the serial number is 2673, mine is 2668

It is a full frame .450 Calibre, I have a copy of the original receipt, It was made by Thos Turner for �3 10s 6d, delivered to WG Jeffery on 14/6/1894 where it retailed to �5 13s. It is listed as "M-H Target Rifle MkIV action 450/577. It has the original Martini Patern rearsight cover and nickle foresight protector.
[url]

I have just aqquired a very rare HRB Co Henry Rifled barrel Mk2 dated 1893 which is extremely rare, plus another 1873 Mk1 second pattern stock number 17... I also have No16, and you are correct I do have lots of others, I keep taking the pills and powders but it isn't curing me one jot.[/url]

_________________
Neil
View user's profileSend private messageSend e-mailVisit poster's website
Sawubona


Joined: 09 Nov 2005
Posts: 1179
Reply with quote
Indeed? I'm impressed! Maybe it's my imagination or perhaps the angle of the camera, but the Jeffery looks to be slightly slimmer than the MK IV, particularly in the forestock and wrist. Should I be familiar with "WG Jeffery"? Did he receive delivery of all twenty of them, hence the moniker? Do they have a reputation for noteworthy accuracy? Do you notice that it's a product of superior workmanship?

Was the MK VI so designated because of the late amendment to .303? I can see why the sobriquet for the MK V, what with the change in butt plate (and I assume the elimination of the cleaning rod entirely), the caliber, and the handguard, but it seems odd that a new Mark would be christened simply for the substitution of a different foresight as in the case of the MK VI. Why not just call it something like a MK II Pattern B? Or is the "Mark" designation officially retired at some point in time and no rifle, no matter how similar, can be so called after that?

Have you tried hypnosis? I've heard that that sometimes works. Or simply consider the wise words of Dylan Thomas (paraphrased) : "I'm not a responsible adult with a Martini collecting problem, I'm a Martini collector with a responsible adult problem."
View user's profileSend private message
Sawubona


Joined: 09 Nov 2005
Posts: 1179
Reply with quote
It also appears that the stamping of the MK "VI" on the receiver in your photo above is offset just a bit to the left as is often the case of a MK I upgrade to a MK II. Am I imagining that, or could the first numeral ( the first "I" of "II") have been polished off and a "V" restamped in its place?


Last edited by Sawubona on Tue Aug 04, 2009 1:13 pm; edited 1 time in total
View user's profileSend private message
Neil Aspinshaw


Joined: 05 Sep 2005
Posts: 290
Location: Loughborough
Reply with quote
Sawumbona
Dimensionally it is as a Mk4 rifle, but the short lever does give the effect that the wrist grip is smaller, when it is not actaully.
The woodwork is a stunning walnut, made as a custom piece, you will notice the next entry on the line as "Best" target rifle.

Turner was not a prolific gunmaker, but the quality is always first class, I have recorded Sniders, Mk2 and Mk4 Martini's but the Mk4 action is fairly unique. Turners usual trademark was a Castle turret. As BSA repair were refurbishing Mk4 rifles for the military (You do find 1895 dated military receivers), I suspect Turner bought the "trade" parts from them in the assembly of the rifle. The extractor is Mk4, but has no military marks.

The MkV Martinis in M-M Mk1, I am not 100% if they actually had the early Rigby nosecap to take the clearing rod as found on the L-M Mk1 and L-E Mk1, the Mk1* variants of both had no rod hole and a butt trap to take the pull through,

_________________
Neil
View user's profileSend private messageSend e-mailVisit poster's website
Neil Aspinshaw


Joined: 05 Sep 2005
Posts: 290
Location: Loughborough
Reply with quote
Sawumbona
The receiver has the V I stamped equa-distant from the lock viewers mark so they were made specifically as MkV1, only when the nomalclature was changed did they get any re-designation, but by then these had been delivered from Weedon.

The woodwork has been stamped slightly offset but this is more than likely hand stamped. The best part of the whole gun is the forend wood, whoever assembled this piece at BSA in 1889 wrote the serial number in pencil in the channel...its still there!.

_________________
Neil
View user's profileSend private messageSend e-mailVisit poster's website
Sawubona


Joined: 09 Nov 2005
Posts: 1179
Reply with quote
Thanks again, Neil. I seemingly can always count on your responses for the definitive answers to obscure, sometimes esoteric questions about 'teenies, Sniders, and the like. Keep that collection far away from the ravages of time, accidents, and theft, huh? I was going to write "heavily insured", but obviously no amount of money could replace some of your precious antiques!
View user's profileSend private message
Identifing Martinis from a long way away*
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
All times are GMT  
Page 1 of 1  

  
  
 Reply to topic