Bloke on the Range videos

ugly

LE
Moderator
It went OK actually, thanks! Feedback was good!
It went far better than that, it went really very well. You certainly won over the older members of the audience.
Sad to say that David P looked really rather poorly.
However here is a brief review.
Subject matter: 10/10 the audience selects the lectures to attend so you pretty much guarantee that only those interested and club officials turn up. You covered the stuff we already knew about and widened our knowledge of the matter. The subject was pretty much what our club was founded about. Well done
Presentation 9.9/10
Not your fault the lighting wasn't brilliant but it didn't detract from the lecture overall. I certainly enjoyed it and your manner came across well.
Audience participation 10/10
You managed to keep the questioning as a whole until the Q&A session at the end and despite the Chairman's determination to interrupt had us all seriously interested.
Overall score 10/10
Not the biggest audience but well presented and your obvious depth of knowledge of the subject along with an understanding of what is still to be discovered or is perhaps lost for ever came across clearly. Not only did you know your subject but you also teased nuggets from the audience that will no doubt help you later presentations on this.
I hope this makes an appearance on your channel at some point soon!
Jolly well done and looking forward to a follow up at some point in the future!

Right thats the arrsse kissing done, do I get a free hold my T mug?:D
 
It went far better than that, it went really very well. You certainly won over the older members of the audience.
Sad to say that David P looked really rather poorly.
However here is a brief review.
Subject matter: 10/10 the audience selects the lectures to attend so you pretty much guarantee that only those interested and club officials turn up. You covered the stuff we already knew about and widened our knowledge of the matter. The subject was pretty much what our club was founded about. Well done
Presentation 9.9/10
Not your fault the lighting wasn't brilliant but it didn't detract from the lecture overall. I certainly enjoyed it and your manner came across well.
Audience participation 10/10
You managed to keep the questioning as a whole until the Q&A session at the end and despite the Chairman's determination to interrupt had us all seriously interested.
Overall score 10/10
Not the biggest audience but well presented and your obvious depth of knowledge of the subject along with an understanding of what is still to be discovered or is perhaps lost for ever came across clearly. Not only did you know your subject but you also teased nuggets from the audience that will no doubt help you later presentations on this.
I hope this makes an appearance on your channel at some point soon!
Jolly well done and looking forward to a follow up at some point in the future!

Right thats the arrsse kissing done, do I get a free hold my T mug?:D

Awfully kind of you, thanks!
 

ugly

LE
Moderator
6mm US Navy Lee, I have had my hands on two rounds for it but gave them back!
 
Interesting demonstration, it would certainly be a grim place on the delivery end of that minute.

Out of interest were there other rifles built with the same sort of action as the Lee Enfields in their various forms?
There's the earlier Remington-Lee rifles adopted in small numbers by the USN, then the modern but short lived civilian Australian International Arms rifles. Ishapore are still making Lee-Enfield actioned hunting rifles in 8x50R Mannlicher.
 
Interesting demonstration, it would certainly be a grim place on the delivery end of that minute.

Out of interest were there other rifles built with the same sort of action as the Lee Enfields in their various forms?

There are quite a few other common rifles built with rear locking lugs, which are the essence of the Lee Enfield system. MAS, Steyr, some Krags and Mannlichers, etc.

Whereas its quite common for Mauser aficionados (mostly the other side of the Atlantic...) to drone on about how "Mausers sold around the world but Enfields didn't", etc, its worth remembering that this was largely down to the fact that - due to the good old British Empire and dominions - standard Lee Enfields were already present in well over 100 countries and territories anyway!

Another reason for the comparative lack of non-British variations on the Enfield design was that there was little need for a country to go to the expense of doing so - BSA's commercial production was 100% British military spec and each rifle was viewed by actual military inspectors. Hence there was little reason for any customer to seek a variation on "British military pattern".
 
There are quite a few other common rifles built with rear locking lugs, which are the essence of the Lee Enfield system. MAS, Steyr, some Krags and Mannlichers, etc.

Whereas its quite common for Mauser aficionados (mostly the other side of the Atlantic...) to drone on about how "Mausers sold around the world but Enfields didn't", etc, its worth remembering that this was largely down to the fact that - due to the good old British Empire and dominions - standard Lee Enfields were already present in well over 100 countries and territories anyway!

Another reason for the comparative lack of non-British variations on the Enfield design was that there was little need for a country to go to the expense of doing so - BSA's commercial production was 100% British military spec and each rifle was viewed by actual military inspectors. Hence there was little reason for any customer to seek a variation on "British military pattern".

Plus the Mauser designs were commercial - Mauser would sell you either entire rifles or an entire factory to make your own. And they were squeezed domestically - the Gew 88 wasn't a Mauser design, so they weren't producing for the German government between about 1888 and 1898. Then during the Weimar Republic, they were squeezed again quantity-wise (and apparently did much exporting of incomplete rifles to a factory in Kreuzligen, Switzerland, where they were final-assembled to get around Versailles treaty rules.) Hell, in the 30's Mauser were selling to both the Chinese and Japanese at the same time, when Japan was allied with Germany and at war with China (although that situation was rectified).

On the British side, L-E's were a government design, and BSA will have needed an export permit to export them. For some reason, people seem to think that arms exports were not controlled in the era in question... as if Vickers could sell a capital ship to anyone they wanted...
 

ugly

LE
Moderator
If you were replying to Tyk, then the US Navy Lee had a completely different action from the Lee Enfield. The former used a straight pull action with a tilting bolt.
Still a Lee!
The action isn't normal by any means even by the weird and wonderful standards of the day it wasn't normal.
 

ugly

LE
Moderator
Whereas its quite common for Mauser aficionados (mostly the other side of the Atlantic...) to drone on about how "Mausers sold around the world but Enfields didn't", etc, its worth remembering that this was largely down to the fact that - due to the good old British Empire and dominions - standard Lee Enfields were already present in well over 100 countries and territories anyway!
As an aside Canada was denied the plant to build No1 rifles. I have yet to find a sufficiently good reason!
 
As an aside Canada was denied the plant to build No1 rifles. I have yet to find a sufficiently good reason!
Quite. If Canada was denied the rights and the tooling, it's not like we'd have sold it to Elsewhere!
 
As an aside Canada was denied the plant to build No1 rifles. I have yet to find a sufficiently good reason!
I haven't seen the reason anywhere for Canada not being able to get a plant to produce Lee Enfields prior to WWI, but if I had to speculate about the reasons the first places I would start looking for answers would be what markets BSA was given the rights to and what production time periods the UK state arsenals investment plans were calculated over. Canada would have been scheduled to get UK manufactured Lee Enfields eventually, the question would have been when and in what order compared to other imperial forces.

Rifles took time to produce and introduce into service, and part of the reasons for this had to do with the sizeable investment in machinery and tooling having to be amortized over a reasonably long period of production. If you build a big enough factory to make all the rifles you need in one year, that's great from the army's perspective, but it means the expensive factory will be sitting idle until you need replacements and repairs unless you can find enough export customers, and a lot of export sales were determined by alliance and diplomatic factors (and bribes).

From the late 18th to the mid to late 19th centuries Canada was one of the frontiers of the empire facing an active military threat and regular warfare (with both the US itself and with various insurgents operating from US bases). I have heard or read that as a result of this Canada received Snider rifles very early on that rifle's introduction (I think that British Muzzle Loaders mentioned this). As an aside, I believe that we also previously discussed on this thread that Canada bought a batch of Peabody rifles as a short term temporary measure until Martini Henries arrived (the Martini was an indirect derivative of the Peabody), and that these were consecutively serial numbered with a batch that Switzerland bought. These were bought in direct response to the threat of Fenian insurgents.

However, by the end of the 19th century the strategic situation had changed, and so Canada was further down on the priority list for being able to buy Lee Enfields from UK factories by the time the Boer War rolled around. As London would have been looking at things from the perspective of the empire as a whole while Ottawa would have been looking at things from the perspective of Canada only, that would have led to some disagreement over where the priorities should be.

It would be interesting to know whether the arguments around the Ross Rifle adoption in Canada had any influence the decision to set up the Lithgow arsenal in Australia.

And as to whether the Lee Enfield was used outside of Britain, it should be remembered (as others have mentioned) that very large numbers were produced in India, Canada, and Australia. Add those numbers up and Mauser's sales to South America start to look a lot less impressive. And that production in those three countries can't be dismissed by simply saying that "Britain told them they had to take Lee Enfields", as Canada adopted the Ross first despite UK objections and switched to the Lee Enfield later, and India adopted a different LMG (the VB) than the rest of the empire did (the Bren).
 
Last edited:
Re. BSA - it's often forgotten that they were the only producer of SMLE rifles in the UK between the wars, just kept ticking over by small continuous Govt contracts, the Siamese contract, and selling to the civilian trade. And bicycles / motorbikes...
 
Fascinating bits of history there chaps, thanks. Still quite surprised that for such a solid system of bolt and effective extractor that it wasn't adopted more widely. Having watched your primary extractor video it was interesting the effects and approaches.

While digging about on the Lee subject I came across this video which shows a very early Lee entry into gun making and the simplicity and elegance of the design stands out to me, as does the minuscule size of the carbine.
 
Well that clears that up then. The alleged safety reasons around .303 Mk.8z in rifles has no basis. Hands up who's surprised - anyone? Bueller? Bueller? Bueller? :twisted:

1556264146922.png


1556264199645.png
 

Latest Threads

Top