Pattern 1913 Enfield Trials Rifle

/ forgottenweapons
One of the lessons learned by the British military in the aftermath of the Boer War was that modern Mauser rifles were superior to their Lee-action rifles and carbines. In response, British ordnance began experimenting with a Mauser-pattern rifle, ultimately finalized as the Pattern 1913. This rifle would also leave behind the obsolescent .303 rimmed cartridge, in favor of a new rimless .276 Enfield round.
The Pattern 13 rifle itself was excellent - it balanced and handled well, it had very good sights, and a smooth and fast bolt throw. However, the .276 Enfield cartridge was really more potent than it needed to be, and caused problems. The cartridge threw a 165 grain bullet at just under 2800fps, pretty close to the ballistics of today's 7mm Remington Magnum. Loaded with Cordite propellent, this led to excessive barrel wear and unpleasant recoil, along with some parts breakage. However, as final testing was being done in the first half of 1914, the Great War broke out.
At this point, plans for using a new cartridge were abandoned. The rifle itself was redesigned in the .303 cartridge, to be manufactured in large numbers by American firms under contract. It would also be refitted for the .30-06 cartridge and used in large numbers by the American armed forces as the M1917 Enfield rifle. According to General Julian Hatcher (who ought to know), it was the best rifle of the First World War.

[@khairaredeemed]

A 1917 with a ten round magazine would make a lot of people happy

[@anthonyhayes1267]

It would ruin the look for me

[@richardmckinney4963]

Khairaredeemed I own a 1917 Lee-Infield S.M.L.E. .303 and still shots great today. I use it for my deer rifle.

[@lunabluevinemassacre6182]

OP right? Why didn't the make it use the SMLE mag? You'd have the best of the mauser and Enfield actions and still have the mag capacity.

[@isaiahmadrid6738]

@@lunabluevinemassacre6182 The SMLE magazine was considered a point of weakness in the rifle at the time; they were easily dented when compared to integral magazines, and the feed lips were also easily damaged. The decision to move to an integral magazine was intended to solve those problems. Now you and I know that those problems didn't dissuade the British and their Empire from using that basic action well into the 1970's, but at the time, those who were in charge of designing and adopting a new rifle were bitterly opposed to the Lee action based upon their experiences in the Boer War. Then when WWI rolled around and the decision was made to keep the SMLE after all, the rifle proved itself to be an excellent combat rifle, so much so that the British would not bother to attempt to replace it with a new design until the L1A1 in the '50s.

[@GECKOZFTW]

Designs new rifle for the military *gets rid of magazine cut off* *keeps volley sights*

[@coaxill4059]

I mean the cut off is literally useless, just allowing you to cripple yourself if you feel like it (or are ordered to). The volley sights are of hypothetical benefit even if it's not terribly practical.

[@Rixoli]

@@coaxill4059 Indeed, the machinegun hadn't really come into it's element at this point in history. It might've seen an engagement or few before WW1 but on the practical application for them hadn't reached it's full stride. The idea of infantry being able to lay a beaten area of suppressing fire with the rifles doesn't seem so outlandish if you take the MGs out of the equation. It wouldn't be accurate by any stretch of the imagination, but if it stalled the enemy from advancing long enough for artillery fire to start raining down I'd say the riflemen would happily take that as a possibility.

[@danmadsen7256]

What a beautiful example of a 1913 Enfield. One of the lesser know small arms adopted by the US military. Most people believe that the 1903 Springfield was the quintessential WW1 infantry rifle, but this design was more prevalent.. in the .30-06 round of course.

[@canadianclassics]

Just bought a P14 yesterday my first ever rifle in excellent shape and I am absolutely in love with it

[@matthewmoses4222]

And in the meantime the MkVII .303 cartridge was designed and found to be a really effective round, the SMLE had also been improved in 1907. The British army also decided to improve its marksmanship training post Boer War (the first Battle of Mons showed how well they could shoot). Finally post WW1 a lot of the information they had gained in the 1913 testing was put to good use when the No4 Mk1 was designed (particularly the aperture rear sight design).

[@KathrynLiz1]

My very first rifle was a P14... bought it in 1959.... Good rifle (sporterised of course).... Had another in the 1990s...about the same but barrel not as good..... Recently got a BSA-sporterised action in a trade for a gun smithing job....had the stock with it.... It now wears a 25" .308W barrel (had to modify the magazine....)... Just finished putting it all together. As the action lacked the aperture sight (location marked with the BSA logo), I machined up pair of scope bases (these had to be "split level" as there is a 5mm difference in height above bore between receiver front end and the rear bridge)..... It's scoped now, so waiting for thr end of Lock-down so that I can get to the range and see how it shoots. It helped to pass the time.... although I don't hunt any more as I turn 78 this year and NZ hunting areas are steep mountain country... not that fit now... :-)

[@MythicFool]

I absolutely adore my M1917, and love teaching people about it when they ask at the range. Thanks for this extra information on the Pattern 13.

[@mrbeast85]

That P1913 is in beautiful condition, the bluing has that luminescence to it that you get on a well cared for rifle.

[@gortbot7748]

I filled last year's Deer Tag with my P14. The .303 is still a great game cartridge with lots of history.

[@brucelee3388]

.276 Enfield was a belted cartridge supposedly designed with advice from Holland and Holland who popularised belted cartridges for sporting rifles. 'Volley' sights are calibrated out to over 2000 yards - the front assembly is rotated -down- from the horizontal stored position and at longer ranges sticks out below the stock - accuracy is such that they were intended for harassing fire against massed troops. They were also fitted to SMLE Mk.3 rifles along with the magazine cutoff and windage adjustable rear sights - all deleted for the Mk.3*

[@MrMonkeybat]

+Bruce Lee In all the webpages I just opened the .276 Enfield is a plain rimless case no belt.

[@brucelee3388]

+Indigo Hammer Yep, got that wrong, as did my source. Thanks for the follow ups

[@Sheerwater909]

Yet another wonderful firearms history lesson. Thank you Ian.

[@SaintMarneusCalgar]

now finally after watching so many hours of your videos, i have to say thank you ian for this great channel, its a unique channel! keep it up =) grreetings from austria

[@billyboy3404]

Thanks for making this video Ian! Been waiting a long time for this one!

[@caseyalso1684]

Hi Ian, great video. In respect to the to the bend in the bolt handle. It is of significance to the design as it positions the handle in the correct position to the trigger for smooth and rapid operation. I do like your videos. Keep up the great job.

[@marco529]

I had an Eddystone 1917, it had been a drill rifle for the VFW since before WW2. Sadly Tweekers stole it along with my whole safe in December. I loved that rifle.

[@KincadeCeltoSlav]

+Marco Dunn Sorry! I wish you had caught them with it in your hands!

[@vguyver2]

the pain man, that just hurts the heart.

[@damiangrouse4564]

I wish nothing but bad for those people. For my education...what size safe & was it bolted to the floor/wall? Am thinking about it.

[@marco529]

My safe was bolted into the wall and floor. They used a come along and winched it out.

[@marco529]

***** Are you really blaming me for some meth head breaking into my home and stealing half my life from me? Short answer is no I didn't have 24/7 security surveillance.

[@GjVj]

Fantastic piece of history. Great video, thank you sir!

[@doctorroboto5018]

Inherited my grandpa's 1917 sporterized one. When I got it it hadn't been shot since maybe the late 60's. Pulled up a video tutorial on cleaning it, hauled the bolt apart (it was almost pristine), cleaned it, put it back together and after that cycling it was smooth as silk. If I pointed the barrel up and gave the bolt a little slap it cycked up and open. Also I'm commenting before watching the whole video so apologies if I'm repeating info but the Danish Sirius Dogsled Patrol still use these as service rifles 114 years later as they cycle reliably in the cold.

[@chlebowg]

Thanks Ian, we've captured two Remington P14s (still with volley sights) here in Astan and one Khyber Pass M1917 sporterized. They still shoot, been rode very hard and still serviceable. That's a testament of their design.

[@WhiteCavendish]

This is an excellent video for me, as I'm doing a restoration of a butchered P14 I got on the super cheap at a local gun shop. It won't be an absolutely perfect in every way restoration in terms of the bands and such having the correct markings, but the gorgeous rifle in the vid gives a good idea how a pristine example should look. I have two P14s, and they are absolutely outstanding rifles with amazing accuracy.

[@aggonymephisto6963]

I own a P14 with all matching numbers and volley sights, but I'll be damned if the P13 isn't a prize worth having. Great video, I hope ONE day we get to see it in action. Actually I'd like to see a comparison between a P14 and more traditional Mauser rifle, perhaps an idea for a video one day?

[@jacknelson8601]

Ian, you are the coolest guy alive and you have the best job on the planet.

[@jtgarner1970]

I just bid on this rifle with Rock Island Auctions over the phone with a cover me bid and I will be on the phone during the live auction. If I win this rifle I would very much like to thank you Ian for doing this video and letting me know it was available!! Cheers

[@jtgarner1970]

+TheRealColBosch thanks mate! I have a like on a set of form dies for reloading and have determined that 8x68S cases are suitable to be used to make this cartridge. I am still working out an appropriate load that would work and I've settled on using IMR 3031 or IMR 4831. The original loading was 49.3gr or cordite with a 165gr .282 diameter projectile. I really think I could safely make this weapon fire again!! :) If I was able to achieve this I would love to have Ian feature the rifle being fired provided I win the auction

[@gannonwoods2456]

+Jeremy Garner You would be one of the greatest fans ever if you let him shoot it. Thank you for sharing

[@jtgarner1970]

Gannon Woods It would be an honor to let Ian and Karl fire the weapon if I win this auction! I have always wanted this rifle in my collection and actually had poised a question to Ian in the last Q&A about this very rifle and cartirdge because I am a Patreon supporter of his.

[@ScottRuggels]

+Jeremy Garner Outstanding idea. Hope if you do get a good load working for this, that you can get some video of it in operation. good luck!

[@ForgottenWeapons]

+Jeremy Garner Good luck!

[@angiefav1847]

Yep we all love the old 303 l have a few of them, but l like M17 as well great gun that can fire a potent round 30-06 did the job vey well and sports a strong action to boot love your videos Ian keep up the good work boyo cheers from Australia

[@troy9477]

Great rifles. I have a Remington M1917 with a low 3 digit serial #. Great sights, excellent bolt, excellent accuracy. If the British had had time, a good plan would have been to reduce the power a bit to 7x57 levels, say a 140 gr bullet at 2700-ish fps. We know that works well and should give a better trajectory than the 173 gr round nose of the 7x57. Then, use something other than Cordite. I'm surprised they didn't do this after WW1, since they had about 20 years before the war clouds really started to gather heavily. But they must have decided the 303 was good enough, based on its performance. Human exhaustion and depletion of resources by the war were probably major factors too. At least the rifle lived on and gave excellent service, as Sgt York would attest. Great video as always. Thank you

[@samrussell4065]

The most important lesson the British Army took from the Boer War was the fact that marksmanship had been totally neglected: the Lee-Metford was an excellent rifle, but needed someone trained to fire it accurately to bring its best qualities out. Prior to the Boer War, the Army had effectivly rested on its laurels since the Napoleonic wars, with not much significant change in tactics ( partly due to the Duke of Wellington, who was resolute in stopping any progress until the day he died), with the Army in effect relying on volley fire to defeat its enemies, hence the overwhelming obsession with drill ( it had "worked" in the Crimean War, after all). The Boer Commandoes were a salutory lesson (and also a source of the removal of a lot of dead wood and dunderheads in the British high command), galvanizing the Army to take into account the accuracy and potential of modern weapons, and with a surprising rapidity speed and accracy became the touchstone of the Infantryman. Thus when the BEF went into France at the beginning of WW1, they were the only army to have fought a modern war with modern weapons against a similarly-equipped enemy, and that was how a small Volunteer Army of professionals could shock a large army of conscripts.

[@DonMeaker]

+Sam Russell Well, there was that bit of unpleasantness in the Crimea- and another bit in South Africa and the Zulus, and then the Sudan where Chinese Gordon bought it, and Kitchener had to go thump the dervishes a bit. Then the Boxer Rebellion.... So there was a bit more than Napoleon and then WWI.

[@samrussell4065]

All of which were campaigns that essentially used single-round weapons the same volley-fire tactics used at Waterloo. Between The end of the Napoleonic Wars and the Boer War British Army tactics essentially stagnated: Lord Raglan, Commander of British forces in the Crimea was so set in his ways that he referred to the Russian enemy as " the French. " In the Boer War the British Army, armed with a magazine-fed rifle, went up against an enemy with a similar weapon but with a far superior understanding of how it could be used. It took a lot of British casualties for the High Command to realise that against a trained enemy with a modern weapon the old tactic of marching in line to volley-fire was no longer going to win a battle. The British learned harsh lessons in that war, but they put those lessons to use in 1914, when the faced a German Army still using the old tactics of a mass assault against a trained and entrenched enemy.

[@DonMeaker]

Sam Russell Well there were the gatling guns used against the Zulus....and the Maxim guns used against the Dervishes. Churchill even had a broom handle Mauser at Omdurman in the Sudan.

[@samrussell4065]

The important point isn't the weaponry firing one way, it's the weaponry firing back. If the Dervishes had had Maxims it would have been a very steep learning curve.

[@nivlek95]

Damn, didnt know I needed that rifle till now.

[@corporalpunishment1133]

Excellent video i love this channel thank you for your work. The rimmed .303 cartridge is the Lee Enfield biggest downfall. Think WW2 if the British had a rimless cartridge take a Bren gun put a feed cover on it then you have a gas operated general purpose machine gun with a quick change barrel.

[@KincadeCeltoSlav]

Beautiful Rifle!

[@chexquest87]

I think with the adoption of the mk7 spitzer .303 bullet made up a lot of ground for staying with the Lee. 2440 FPS was more than enough

[@P226nut]

Very cool, I've always been a fan of the p14 and p17 rifles, could you do some tests of wwi era rifles on in range tv? Maybe a massive mud test followed by accuracy and overall handling and have each of you choose a winner for the best overall rifle of wwi?

[@tarintheis9198]

More U.S. troops were sent to Europe in 1918 equipped with a 1917 Enfield than 1903 Springfields because all of the American manufacturers were already tooled for the p14, they just re-chambered them and went on to produce 2.1 million of them. One thing I find a little funny is that Eddystone out-produced both Remington and Winchester despite being just a Remington subsidiary because they had the largest factory in the U.S. at the time. Eddystone produced 1.9 of the 2.1 million total Enfields

[@ypaulbrown]

how could that be correct, I have a U.S. Model of 1917 made by Winchester in March of 1918, which has a serial number of 2244xx, or in the 200 hundred and 20 thousand range....which leaves Remington completely out of the picture of ever making any rifles......

[@USAACbrat]

the early arrival UStroops, the rainbow division ,were issued the p-14 in place of their m-17,Eddystone ri.fles because 30-06 ammunition wasn't available yet

[@ozdavemcgee2079]

Awesome rifle. I had a 303 scoped very accurate

[@leary4]

I hope this one is included in the "how much they sold for" video. It really is a pretty weapon it would go well in anybody's den or above the fireplace.

[@NormanMatchem]

I consider the Lee bolt to be better than the P13/P14/M1917 bolt because of the 60 degree bolt turn making it smoother, and the 10 round mag is nice of course. There's obvious advantages to that British Mauser however. Much stronger bolt can handle hotter cartridges, the sights are FAR better until you get to the No.4 Lee Enfield in 1939, adopted 1941. As mentioned in the vid, I hear it was cheaper to produce than the Mk.III* Lee Enfield. You can also disassemble the bot with something as simple as a coin while the Lee bolt requires a tool. Ultimately, I'm rather happy that the Mk.III* was kept on, because I consider the No.4 Lee Enfield to be the greatest standard issue bolt action ever made. Buttery smooth bolt, 10 round capacity, can be reloaded from empty within 5 seconds with 2 clips, thick floating barrel to improve accuracy, long radius aperture sights to further improve precision as well as quicker follow-up shots potentially. Reloading with 2 clips, if you grab 2 clips at once in your hand, doesn't take all that much longer than reloading with just 1 clip, so having twice the capacity doesn't mean twice as long of a reload. It takes less time to load 2 clips at once than if you were to load a clip on 2 separate occasions. I guess the reason they considered the Mauser superior in the Boer War was because at the time, to my knowledge, they still used line formation drills, which SEVERELY slowed down the potential rate of fire of their Lee Enfields and Lee Metfords. They also didn't use clips to reload; 1 round at a time, which put them at a disadvantage. Of course if black powder Lee Metfords were still in use, then that would definitely put them at yet another disadvantage compared to smokeless Mausers. Ultimately, I think they resolved most issues with the Mk.III in 1907. It did suffer some minor accuracy issues but it was still about as accurate as an M1 Rifle, which isn't exactly known to be particularly inaccurate, though perhaps slightly inaccurate when compared to a Mauser rifle. You'd have to go out to pretty long distance before it starts to be come a hindrance though. Nah, I think they should have saved their money when developing the P13. Just stick to the Mk.III, and save the money for when it's needed, like during the largest conflict of human history at the time once WWI started. As for .303, yeah the rim is quite old school, but it's not a big deal. The 7.62x54r is still in widespread service nowadays and it has an even BIGGER rim! .303 was used right up to the 1950s-1960s, and with the Canadian Ranger who used them for sustenance and wilderness protection against things like bears or potentially bull moose if they get aggressive, .303 wasn't replaced until VERY recently. Just last year in 2015 I think. If .303 can take down moose, then I power certainly wasn't the issue. They thought they should go rimless, but ultimately I don't see it as being such a detriment as to require replacing a rifle they adopted less than a decade ago; the No.1 Mk.III Short, Magazine, Lee Enfield. Sure it wasn't the most accurate bolt action around, but it certainly wasn't INaccurate. Just not quite as accurate as the stronger Mauser action which typically shot slightly hotter rounds. Perhaps 100 ft/s advantage if it was using ammo with the same bullet weight and a rifle with the same barrel length. Not exactly something worth writing home about.

[@Simon_Nonymous]

+NormanMatchem summed it up nicely - thank you for your knowledge

[@bushyfromoz8834]

brilliant norman. Add to that too the precision that was the 4t series of sniper rifles (which succeeded the p14 as well in the sniping role) and their length of service as 4T, L42 and all thos other precision target rifles in civilian life (L39, Envoy, Enforcer come to mind) its hard to argue the Lee Enfield wasn't up to it, especially when it outlived the "better and cheaper" P14 by several decades

[@minuteman4199]

The No4 Mk 1 is only just being taken out of Canadian service now. The government just let a contract to buy this en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Colt_C-19. to replace them as the rifle to equip the Canadian Rangers, which are a branch of the reserves made up mostly of Inuit in the far north.

[@bushyfromoz8834]

Minute Man i did know that, dunno why i didnt think to mention it

[@dunadan7136]

you say it like the Mauser bolt isn't buttery smooth also. which is false, because the Mauser bolt is far from rough, on the contrary it is considered to be very smooth. there are so many videos that show off just how smooth the Mauser action really is. the Mauser design is also more durable and secure, very important aspects for a combat rifle also.

[@W7DSY]

Thanks Ian for another great review. I am curious as to whether you fire any (certainly not this one) of these guns that are at auction.

[@W7DSY]

Thanks, Real.

[@MilsurpWorld]

So does this end the age old Enfield vs Mauser debate if the British themselves were wanting a Mauser?

[@ForgottenWeapons]

+North Florida Gun Guy Arguably, yes.

[@stamfordly6463]

+North Florida Gun Guy One would have to have found an Old Contemptible from 1915 who had been in one of the trials units and asked him if he'd have traded the extra five rounds in the magazine of his SMLE and it's quicker operating bolt for the P13's increased accuracy and more modern cartridge. While it's arguable that the Mauser that contributed to Boer success it's equally arguable that British tactics and musketry were lacking. So after that war while there were some in the War Office agitating for a completely new rifle based on the Mauser there were others in the Army working on and implementing re-organisation of the Infantry and it's tactics and training. At the same time they also managed to replace the long and carbine Lees with a universal rifle for all arms that may have been lacking in some areas but in 1914 very definitely did the job.

[@JohnyG29]

it's still a debatable subject. The P13/14 may have been slightly more accurate, but the SMLE was not inaccurate by any means, and had a quicker action and could carry 50% more ammo. It worked well in both wars and was still in use in India and Canada until recently.

[@tobyman360]

+Forgotten Weapons No way, the Lee Enfield was far better battle rifle than the Mauser, the action is far superior firstly the bolt can be racked without the removing your cheek weld. The cock on closing method is superior as it separates the two most difficult parts of the cycle, extracting the cartridge as and Cocking action making a far smother overall feel which greatly increases speed. Not to mention the fact that the bolt can be cycled in almost one movement instead of two as well as being able to be fired whilst maintaining grip on the bolt, an around better rifle. And the magazine capacity is higher!!!

[@MilsurpWorld]

They say imitation is the sincerest form of flattery. Which action has been copied more by both militaries and gun companies?

[@thejack0924]

Man if i lived down there i total would buy that thing no matter the price. But as a Canadian im stuck with my lee enfiled.

[@351WINCHESTER]

Beautiful rifle.

[@scottbuckley6578]

Great video ice just learned a lot from this and now know better history of my 303 now unfortunately not that's it's a bad thing but mine was cut down sights taken off and sporterized just after ww2 by BSA great rifle tho

[@larrykathyloper5182]

I do not know why special volley sights are needed. Can't volley fire be done with the regular sights? Perhaps you can do a video demonstrating the concept.

[@sthenzel]

+Larry & Kathy Loper With the very long sight length, the flip-up rear sight probably would have been too long to be practical. The side-mounted volley sight with a much shorter length adressed that issue pretty well, I think. If it was really usable well and had the necessary precision? I don´t know

[@fdsdh1]

+Larry & Kathy Loper the idea if you'd get a whole group of infantry to fire with volley sights at once. Volley sight fire could be indirect. this would create a beaten zone they used to do it with machine guns too, this was much more effective which made having it on rifles pointless

[@bushyfromoz8834]

The volley site predates the area denial provided by the Vickers 1912 fire indirectly... which itself was officaly replaced by the 3 inch mortar!

[@greendogg83]

Hello Ian, Could you possibly do a video just about the evolution of bullets through the 19th to 20th century?

[@colinmcdonald8521]

Bullets, or cartridges?

[@rogerjones9535]

How would they have fared in the mud of Flanders?

[@FosterIsle]

If you ever got your hands on an FN-49, I'd love to see a video on it. I don't seem to find much on it!

[@scottyjohn]

off subject, have you done any videos on the MP31 Soumi? just curious because it is a very strange weapon other than it influenced the design of the PPSh-41

[@michaelmacek9433]

The action of the pattern 1913 is approximately 1/2 inch shorter than the pattern '14. I fpund this out when I needed a replacement bolt for my P14 Eddystone. The surplus parts dealer shipped a bolt that had the same apperarance as my broken P14 bolt but when I inserted it into my rifle, it became abundantly clear it was not correct for my rifle. Upon further inspection, the bolt face was too small for the .303 british cartridge.

[@brianfitzpatrick1183]

I'd never heard of an " American Enfield " until I bought one. Got it cheap because the previous owner sporterized it and tapped the reciever for a scope. Still a fine rifle with a smooth action

[@pakistanheroes007]

Very nice

[@EngineeringVignettes]

One of these days KZbin is gonna wake up realize that educational videos about weapons don't really belong in the same category as educational videos about how to stop your children from interrupting. Aside from that, nice video Ian, excellent as always. - Eddy

[@nickmoore385]

One thing they used to use against German sniper armour plate, was to pull out a .303 bullet, reverse it and shove it back in the cartridge. That way it would hit the armour plate backwards and knock a scab of metal off the other side into the snipers face. That was the hope anyway.

[@potation8913]

Just unlocked this gun in BF 1, now i'm here to learn about it's history. :)

[@aceelectriccompany1181]

Well done historical video as usual. The wood stock patina-finish is much admired by me. I wonder if you know what was used to repair the several small areas on the right side of the stock? They are sorta grey looking compared to the brown finish.The reason I ask is because the stock of my 1909 Arg. carbine has several repair areas that look identical. I'm guessing that it is an early 1900'a wood repair putty used at the time?!

[@elektro3000]

What was the point of switching from a 10 round magazine to a 5 round magazine?

[@ForgottenWeapons]

+elektro3000 The 5-round magazine is fully enclosed in the stock, and not liable to be damaged.

[@damiangrouse4564]

+Forgotten Weapons To your knowledge of dimensions could the barrel on this rifle be re-chambered to 7mm Rem Mag and would the cartridge cycle thru magazine & bolt?

[@fdsdh1]

+elektro3000 I think it might have been erroneous Boer War lessons that every soldier had to be some kind of super marksman rather than just shooting as fast as possible.

[@Simon_Nonymous]

+sharkfinbite sounds dodgy to me - apart from calling a Tommy a GI - I started using the Rifle No. 4 at the age of 12 and 35 years later (and shot one 6 months ago) I have never heard of any such advice being given. What was actually said - I think - was load with 10, but when you're down to 5 rounds, use the 5 round stripper clip to recharge the mag, ie never empty the mag unless it's the mad minute time or the Germans are on top of you etc. NB yes moving to a 5 round internal mag in my opinion was a step down, as the reliable 10 round magazine gave the Lee-Enfield a small advantage for rapid firing over the 5 round competition. NB - the obsolescent .303 round continued happily until the mid 1950s! Happy shooting guys :-)

[@PhilipKerry]

+Damian Grouse Why would you do that and completely devastate the monetary worth of this rare and beautiful rifle ??

[@PhilipKerry]

Great video Ian as usual . I know that you have done videos on the FN Fal but as an ex British soldier could you please do a video on the British Army variant the SLR , they are substantially more accurate than the Belgian original and it would be great to see your opinion on the rifle .

[@mikoyanig5512]

+mallory1970 a weapon that isn't commonly found and is an interesting piece of history or has significance to the advance of firearms technology

[@MrMonkeybat]

+Aidan Templeton This channel is the best for information on the development of firearms and how their mechanisms work. As someone who lives in a country where you cant just get a gun anywhere and play with it, I appreciate it when Ian disassembles more common weapons too.

[@lptomtom]

+Aidan Templeton The channel has explored more common, and even iconic weapons before: it's never been about "forgotten" weapons only, but also about the great explanations, good camera angles, and Ian's mesmerizing charisma!

[@altair1983]

patience guys...patience

[@PhilipKerry]

+BLaCKoNi666 Since the late 1990's the British Army has used the SA80 which is a bullpup based on 5.56 Nato . As a Soldier who has used the SLR both on the range and in active duty I can assure you that when properly zeroed and the sights glued in I personally could achieve a 5" group at 300 yards , from the videos on the other variants that I have seen they seem to be substantially less accurate .

[@MeowMeowDeathRay]

Has the concept of volley sight ever proven useful? I can't find agreeing opinions on forums.

[@robertkubrick3738]

The cartridge's ballistics are not equivalent to the 7mm Remingtom magnum but the 280 /7mm Remington express. Maybe the barrel erosion was equivalent to todays 7mm Magnum. I owned a P17 and it was a beast.

[@davidfriesen9512]

Hi Ian. Would you happen to know if the p14 enfield is a control roun feed? Or push round feed? Thanks

[@RedXlV]

Honestly, they'd have been better off if they'd just chambered the Pattern 13 in 7mm Mauser. But I guess the thinking was that if the high-velocity, flat-shooting round the Boers used was good, an even higher-velocity, flatter-shooting round would be even better.

[@bushyfromoz8834]

7mm mauser wasnt exactly a new cartridge by 1913

[@bushyfromoz8834]

Bjørn Hjelmerud that they were not producing. combat record alone should show the 303 british though ordinary was still very serviceable

[@466htrd]

Man that's a cool gun! I want one!

[@WhattAreYouSaying]

Finding a P13 will be almost impossible as it was a trials rifle. But a P14 or even a P17 (M1917) would be easy to come across. They are essentially the same rifles as the P13. Except for the calibers, the P13 is in .276 Enfield, the P14 is .303 and the P17 is 30-06. I have a P14 and it's a beautiful rifle.

[@ilmob1234]

I have a Pattern 1914, I haven't had the chance to fire it yet but that will change this weekend. However when you handle the P14 you know you're hold a quality gun, and when you take it down its made of quality parts. I'm not able to find to much info on the markings on the receiver though. The top of the receiver there are the typical England markings, but when I fully stripped it the bottom of the receiver has markings that I can't find any info on. Its an Eddystone and its an early production, the serial numbers fall between 2500 and 3000. Where can I find more info on these markings?

[@tedenderpalmer6550]

My step dad give me his Winchester model 1917 that was his service rifle for the Allusion campaign, I treasure it.

[@mothman7531]

Ever thought about doing an episode on the Japanese Type 26 revolver?

[@deadsweetheart1]

besides a serial number is there any rollmarks on the receiver? I ask because i have a m1917 oddly with the rollmarks missing

[@cameronvolek3209]

Are you going to do a video on the bsa Thompson

[@Trekpanther]

I'm a little confused about the utility of the volley sight. I figure they were supposed to make rapid valleys easier, but looking at that volley sight it doesn't seem like it would be any better than using your regular sights for volley fire.

[@bushyfromoz8834]

the standard sight was ranged to 1700 yards or so, the volley sight went out to around 2700 depending on what ammo it was graduated for

[@zachsplep]

How much did the rifle sell for at auction? Great video!

[@Matt9Xx]

Can you tell me what the volley sight would be used for, I don't understand the need for it when they have the main iron sight. Thanks

[@13lochie]

I'm also perplexed.

[@smokeydops]

+KingcloneCentral Did you hear about those times the Japanese used machine-guns and rifles to fire over hills and into foxholes, artillery style, in both the Russo-Japanese War and WWII? That's what that sort of sight is used for. You can use it to angle the bullet UP, in an arc to your target, which would have been very useful in trenches.

[@13lochie]

smokeydops I thought that was it but It just didn't seem like you'd get that much of a better angle than just maxing out the standard ladder sight. But literally as I've typed this I've realised that the front sight being further down the stock would increase the angle further, thanks anyway

[@ClockCutter]

+smokeydops It would have been utterly unuseful. And it was, which is why no one practices volley fire. For that to work, you'd need massed troops in close formations firing upon massed troops in close formation. Like archers. But in . . . Modern War . . .massing troops for volley fire would make them entirely vulnerable to artillery fire. And, small units trying to get hits with volley fire at 2k on small units would just waste ammo and expose them.

[@smokeydops]

ClockCutter You're right. But the idea is what it would have been useful.

[@antyrabbytmeow5021]

What's the volley fire ? I've seem on your channel a few rifles that had them, but I've never understood what it was referred to, and now with this gun's volley sights I'm even more confused

[@desroin]

You know one can say about the british bolt action rifles what they want, but they sure are beautiful looking rifles :O

[@rednecksniper4715]

It's funny that both the British and Americans almost at the same time take their rimmed cartridge bolt actions up against the model 93 in 7mm both wanted new guns after lol

[@indymcconnell]

I have a 1917 eddystone enfield. the bore is in bad shape. do you think in your opinion it is worth reworking by a shop to get it functional again? or is it a wall hanger. it was my great grandfather's while he served in ww1.

[@gregeoryl]

The American Enfield was popular to rechamber to 458 win mag.

[@shepherd8762]

I have a p14 in .303 and it is hands down the toughest and most reliable rifle i have used

[@fitteritout3622]

Well I've been trying for a while to figure it out and all I can come up with Ian is I'm a gun nurd like you and it's all your fault!😜😝 lol your videos peek my interest and I love watching them I wish some of my friends had the same interests they just don't care how they work as long as they work every time it's kind of like driving a car until it quits and wonders why when they have 80k miles on it and never changed the oil. Anyway I love your videos Ian so never stop making them.

[@1fanger]

Oh, would that I could afford your excellent rifles! Also, please explain what volley sights were for, and the different reference between the tactical exercise of volley fire. Thanks

[@mikoyanig5512]

Hey Ian have you ever seen a German contract Finnish 1924 Mosin Nagant? I have one that was made by a German air rifle manufacturer that brought it up to Finnish specs and I was wondering if I'm allowed to send it to you if you would like to look at it?

[@swiley223]

I have an Eddystone 1917 in 30-06. It's a shooter....

[@roberthickham5386]

First! Love watching these videos in the morning. Thanks Ian!

[@Ensign_Cthulhu]

First course of action might have been to cut 25-ish grains off the bullet weight; a 139gn 7mm spitzer at 2800fps would still be quite fearsome, and it might have made a lot of the recoil and fouling issues go away.

[@christianstebleton7669]

I have a rare 22lr military training rifle called the savage stevens model 87m you should try to get ahold of one and make a video

[@MrDoctorCrow]

I've never found the source, but I always heard that Alvin York preferred the Eddystone to the m1903.

[@FishKepr]

+MrDoctorCrow No, it was the other way around. York grew up shooting with open sights and immediately took to the M1903 while in training. He was issued an M1917 on arrival in Europe with its peep rear sight and expressed a great displeasure about it, calling it 'that British rifle.' Rumor is that he somehow 'creatively acquired' an M1903 again.

[@oscarfloyd2678]

So what do you prefer, Notch Tangent sights or Arperture sights and why?

[@ForgottenWeapons]

Aperture; I find them easier to use.

[@hardyakka6200]

That p14 rifle was not used in the trenches as it was slower than the smle. They were used as sniper rifles however, but I have never seen a unit in the field armed with them. Well not front line troops anyway. During WWII they were issued to the home guard, and some were used again as sniper rifles ,but No4 Smle soon replaced them there too. I always wanted a P14 but they eluded me. Non were made at Lithgow.

[@SlyPearTree]

I realize that you can only show us what you find being sold at auctions so I already think my request is probably hard to fulfill. I'd like to see more off the wall, early repeating firearms that do not use current mechanisms. Preferably ones that do not use cartridges if that is possible (I do not know when cartridges were invented). Did anyone try to make a repeating firearm that "automatized" the action of putting powder in the gun and than a bullet? i.e. something with both a powder reservoir and a bullet reservoir. Are there old blueprints, plans, drawings or books sold at those auctions? Those would also be interesting.

[@DarkestVampire92]

What would´ve been interesting would be to see the barrel of this example- using cordite as propellant is obviously a bad idea (I know it was largely used in naval guns and other artillary so it -might- be a bit too powerful for rifles in general) but it´d be interesting to see what the cordite actually ended up doing to this preticular gun.

[@wilfredoikle7534]

One fact missing in this video is that the USA was into full production of these rifles where The O3 Springfields were not. The military decided that they would rebarrel these and call them the P-17 in 30-06. As a result the Army was equipped with more P-17 at the start of WW1 than Springfields. When I was a teenager I knew many WW1 vets At Post 13 American Legion in Worcester, Mass. I often bugged them many questions and it turns out most of them were issued P-17's. Their complaint was that the P-17 was heavy and wanted to trade them off for Springfields.. My first centerfire rifle was a sporterized P-17 that I lost in a housefire.

[@Vicus_of_Utrecht]

Wilfred Oikle No shit?

[@jayfelsberg1931]

I ourn your loss. We used them as drill tifles at NTC Orlando in 1973. SGT York used an M 1717, not a Springfield. You can do very good shooting with these rifles, but I prefer my various .303 Enfields for fast shooting. Plus, a little oractice and you can get good groups with the .303.

[@dbmail545]

My grandfather was in France with the AEF. His story was that he was issued a Chauchat which he tossed when it jammed and picked up a 1917 from a fallen doughboy. That rifle and a couple of bottles of wine were traded for a 1903 Springfield. BTW that rifle was NEVER called the P-17. It was the "model of 1917". "Pattern" was British nomenclature and not used by the US Army.

[@ronaldjohnson1474]

There is no such thing as a "P17". The US never called rifles "pattern" anything.

[@kevinoliver3083]

Never say never. The M1917 was known as the Pattern 17 when used by the UK Home Guard in WW2.

[@Emdee5632]

What is the relationship between this rifle and the one in use during WW2 by the British Home Guard (as can be seen in the famous BBC televison series "Dad's Army")? A side question: Were the Home Guard ever issued the SMLE?

[@desolationjunction]

+Marc Dezaire The British Home Guard were mainly issued with the American M1917 rifle which was called the P17 and they had to be marked with a red band either on the butt or hand guard to denote that they took 30-06 calibre round instead of the British .303 round. This was part of the lend lease program and some of the .303 P14s were issued but the majority of rifles issued to the Home Guard were M1917. As for the SMLE's, I gather that they were starting to issue them to the Home Guard but this was hampered by the events at Dunkirk when the BEF had to leave most of their equipment behind and any SMLE's ear marked for the Home Guard had to be issued to the army. I have, however seen some pictures of the Home Guard with SMLE's and I presume they would have been issued them after 1942 when the SMLE was replaced by the Enfield No4 in the UK (though Commonwealth troops in the Middle East and Asia continued to use the SMLE). Actually, as an aside, I have seen a picture of Luftwaffe guards with SMLE's!

[@kevinoliver3083]

The Home Guard were mostly issued with the P14, the US M1917 (P17 in British service), and the Canadian Ross Mk.IIIB. Some SMLEs were issued in 1940. In 1943, as the Rifle No.4 replaced the SMLE in the Army, SMLEs were passed on to the Home Guard. But they had not replaced all the P14s and P17s, when the Home Guard was stood down.

[@tombogan03884]

It wasn't so much the gold and diamonds, they could get those in Canada or Australia. But, many would have killed for a Cape to Cairo rail line.

[@MadraktheRed]

The mauser action presumably means the famous 'mad minute' rifle drill would not be possible. Is the stronger/more accurate action worth the rate of fire reduction?

[@jasonstark8889]

The rate of fire reduction would be negligible. That cock on close Mauser action on the P13/P14/M17 is smooth, reliable......and fast! Not far behind the Enfield to be honest. The other thing is reloading. Reloading my M17 with Springfield stripper clips is easy as pie....and quicker than loading the rimmed .303 rounds in my Enfield. Now, if I cheat and use extra loaded detachable box mags....that is a different story! haha! But that isn't how they were used in the field. So, rate of fire isn't as far off between the two as you think.

[@drmaudio]

So it is this P14 (or the US variant), rather than the SMLE, that York would have used in his famous event.

[@JohnLeePedimore]

Even though the .276 had a smaller bullet than the .303,and it was rimless,it was still about the same size case.In fact the base of the .276 is slightly larger.When they made the 1917 in 30/06 the gun actually held 6 rounds in the same magazine because the 06' has a smaller case diameter.

[@horkinyorkin]

the cartridge was basically a 280 Ross ballistically.

[@Sladey93]

Does the 276 Enfield have similar ballistics to the 276 Pedersen?

[@ForgottenWeapons]

+BASlade93 No, not at all. The Enfield is significantly more powerful.

[@rman126]

+Forgotten Weapons How does it stand up to the .280 Ross?

[@piritskenyer]

+Forgotten Weapons Is the .280 British developed post-WWII for the original EM-2 in any relation with the .276 Enfield, or was that a completely new cartridge built from the ground up?

[@piritskenyer]

Anon A Mouse Oh, thanks a bunch!

[@ottomatick7513]

probably close to a 7x64mm or 280 Rem. in terms of performance.

[@RK-dj1ry]

Goodness, close to 7mm Rem Mag power? Can you imagine a nation using the 7mm rem mag as a main battle rifle cartridge? That’s fascinating.

[@augiedoggie8814]

Looks a lot like my old "Royal Enfield" that I got for five bucks.The same store was selling SMLE'S for ten.

[@charlesinglin]

Just comparing the .276 Enfield to some other period cartridges, you have to wonder if it wouldn't have made more sense to just adopt the 7x57mm Mauser. Tweak it slightly, give it an English designation for appearance sake, and avoid the complications from trying to eke out an extra couple hundred fps.

[@cyclonetaylor7838]

Technically they did. The .275 Rigby is basically the exactly same as the 7x57 Mauser.

[@lm42ro]

what's the voley sights for?

[@colinmcdonald8521]

Not really persuaded - by 1913, it was realised that the 303 round, mk VI /VII, wasn't ideal as a machine gun round - there were no self-loading military rifles at this time - and a new rifle to replace the SMLR of 1907, was designed round the cartridge. The cartridge was a genuine improvement, but the rifle, with its obsolescent long barrel and absurd 5 round mag, was a major retrograde step. A better rifle than the SMLE? For sniping, possibly. Not for general service. Better if something on the lines of an SMLE MkIV had been brought out around the new cartridge - with the sighting system of the P13 (as actually used on the No 4 rifle in 1941), a heavier barrel, and sighted only out to 600m.

[@scottmccrea1873]

A bird in hand is much better than a bird in field testing.

[@dbmail545]

So it had a hotter load than 7x57?