As requested, I have snapped a few pictures of my dad's Jungle carbine's bayonet. I will take pictures of the carbine when I get a chance.

To repeat, my dad died two years ago and left me some nice hand guns and a couple rifles. The Jungle carbine was one he bought at a hardware store when I was a kid in the early 70s and he paid $17.50 for it. The rifle came with a case, a sling, a bayonet and scabbard (frog?), two mags and some ammo. I have shot it a few times. Kicks a ton.

This is the bayonet that it came with. I know nothing about these but this has been with the carbine since he bought it. I don't know why the date after the Poole "P" marking only shows a strong "194" and possibly a very worn off "7" if that is possible. It has green paint on it. I haven't figured out what the letters on the back of the scabbard are yet. I'll have to look when I get a chance. The bayonet is in good shape and there are more markings under the green paint in a couple areas.

Here are the pictures. I hope you experts can help me. I guess these original bayonets for this Enfield are sort of scarce these days. Lots of repros.

Thanks for the help. I'll work on the carbine pictures soon.

I took these quickly and didn't correct for bad exposure.

---

More bayo pics:

---

'Whig' - Well, you have a real British No. 5 Bayonet. It certainly appears to have seen use and the one (lighter colored) grip panel was replaced.

The canvas hanger is British, but, the metal scabbard is improvised from a scabbard for some other country's bayonet and not correct.

After the Jungle Carbine and Bayonet were discontinued, the scabbards were still useful and recycled for later model bayonets.

The scabbard didn't look like others I've seen. The lighter grip panel shows a bunch of grime buildup. It must have been changed out a long time ago.

I imagine that the green paint is authentic for some reason?

I am sure the green paint is legitimate and the lighter colored grip was probably put on at an ordnance depot.

I imagine a veteran bayonet like yours is worth a couple of hundred bucks. (Reproductions sell for $80).

Attached: Some literature on the 'Jungle Carbine' No.5- bayonet

---

Back in 1972, I spent a couple of months traveling around England and Scotland.

I had written in advance and was given permission and an appointment to visit the Pattern Room at Enfield Arsenal.

I was guided around the Pattern Room by Mr. Herbert Woodend, who was a very genial and knowledgeable Superintendent at Enfield Lock.

Mr. Woodend, was from Northern Ireland and very helpful to North American Arms Students and authors from the U.S. and Canada.

I was enthusiastic during my hours in the Pattern Room, asked intelligent questions, and provided some assistance in reassembling an Enfield made copy of the 'Dryse Needle-gun'.

At the end of my visit, Mr. Woodend asked if there was anything he could help me with for my collection?

I said, in jest: "A Jungle Carbine Bayonet"!

He opened a bench drawer full of them and gave me one with scabbard.
He instructed: "Better hide it in your pants. The guards get excited about this sort of thing"!
(Good thing I was lean with a flat stomach, back then)!

Pictures of my prize bayonet attached:

---

Thanks, Butlers, for the info. Nice to piece together some history on this piece my dad has had for most of my life. Certainly a family treasure I'll be passing down to one of my kids.

The carbine looks unused. Bore is absolutely mirror without any evidence of use. Were any of these No 5's unissued?

I'll try to take pictures and post tomorrow.

Fascinating story of how you got your bayonet. Should have asked for two!

Two! That was the first time I saw or handled ONE.

(He also gave me a correct scabbard for my 'three rivet' Pattern 1888 Lee-Metford bayonet. Good thing I was thin and wiry!
The late Mr. H. Woodend was a very intelligent and interesting man. He had a passionate interest in early metallic cartridges, including American ones. I got to meet him again at the Pattern Room, with a group of Canadian Gun Collectors, in 1977. We were able to take him and his lovely wife out to Dinner, in London, a couple of nights later).

BTW - The Enfield Pattern Room is no more. Part of the collection is now in The Museum at Leeds.

Regarding unissued "Jungle Carbines":

When I was about 15 years old (1963), I saw a tableful of 'mint' British Jungle Carbines at Berry's Army Surplus in Detroit. The price was $35, each.

At Michigan Antique Arms Gun-Shows, the 'Jungle Carbine' was a common item in the late 1960's and early 1970's. They often appeared unissued and sold for $35.00.

My first Jungle Carbine was an early one, that had been used and poorly re-finished. Around 1969, I sold it for $35 and bought an 'unissued' one for $35.

Gun prices use to remain unchanged for years. Your Dad got quite the bargain for $17.50. You want to double his money?!!!

Evidently, from your history of the price at that time, my dad must have lucked into a hardware store that was having a "1/2 off" sale.

I wouldn't take less than $45 for it!

Ok ... You drive a hard bargain! $47.50, final offer.  :D

No.5 MK1's are cool. I bought one in 1977 for $45.00. Traded it and some cash for an IHC M1 a year later. I found this one in the LGS a couple of years ago.


  (You need to Login   (You need to Login

Paid a little more than $45.00 for it though.

Nice looking carbine, Littlejohn!

I started collecting as a teenager in the 1960's and focused on British military stuff. It was a lot cheaper than U.S. Arms and some good gun books (in English) were available and inexpensive.
Neat things showed up at Michigan shows, coming into the U.S. from Canada.
A little bit of knowledge and not too much competition from other collectors, made it great fun!

I lost interest in the Lee-Enfield rifles, as shooters, because a lot of them were tough on Brass. I have sold off some of the rarer things, I lucked into, as my interest in other arms grew.

I came to the sad realization there were too many variations of Lee-Enfield rifles and too many 'Holy Grails' that were out of reach.

I have kept these example rifles, that were acquired before 1968, and some bayonets picked up along the way.

My youngest son would like to have these someday.

---

Funny thing about bayonets ... they use to be a relatively low cost accessory you bought to go along with a military rifle.

Now, a fair number of bayonets are rarer and more valuable, than the rifles they attach to!

Is there any truth to the old story that many, if not most, of the "jungle carbines" were NOT originally made as such? I seem to remember an article in "Man at Arms"?

Had one in the 1970s. NASTY to shoot (and I'm not particularly recoil sensitive) as I recall - right up there with the Moisin-Nagant M44 carbine.

From my observation, a lot of bogus "Jungle Carbines" started being manufactured in the 1990's and until 2010.

They were initially marketed by importers as 'replicas', but, soon were being passed off as the real thing. They are easily detected by an experienced eye, but, cause confusion to the inexperienced.

butlersrangers wrote on Oct 8^th, 2019 at 11:49am:

Nice looking carbine, Littlejohn! I started collecting as a teenager in the 1960's and focused on British military stuff. It was a lot cheaper than U.S. Arms and some good gun books (in English) were available and inexpensive. Neat things showed up at Michigan shows, coming into the U.S. from Canada. A little bit of knowledge and not too much competition from other collectors, made it great fun! I lost interest in the Lee-Enfield rifles, as shooters, because a lot of them were tough on Brass. I have sold off some of the rarer things, I lucked into, as my interest in other arms grew. I came to the sad realization there were too many variations of Lee-Enfield rifles and too many 'Holy Grails' that were out of reach. I have kept these example rifles, that were acquired before 1968, and some bayonets picked up along the way. My youngest son would like to have these someday.

Nice trio of British rifles. I'd like to have a No.1 MKIII. Haven't found the right one yet.
My other Enfield is a No.4 MK1* made in 1942 at Small Arms Ltd. Long Branch, Ont. CA

  (You need to Login   (You need to Login

Currently set up with a Weaver v4.5 scope due to "old eyes syndrome".

  (You need to Login   (You need to Login

To kind of stay on topic, here are a couple of rifles with bayonets fixed. 1945 Izhevsk Mosin M44, and Chinese factory 636 SKS.

  (You need to Login   (You need to Login

Cool looking bayonet Whig!  Not sure if it is...but the Aussies would paint their bayonets green for camouflage purposes.  The scabbard almost looks like a Carcano bayonet scabbard that had the rounded top ground flat?  Looking forward to seeing pics of your Jungle Carbine.

Butlersrangers, your Jungle Carbine bayonet is superb and a beauty to behold!

Wonderful Enfield sniper Littlejohn!

A few years back  I should have, would have, could have purchased very nice No5 bayonets for $190-$230.  Now, similar bayonets are bringing $350-$450! :'(

Here's my first GOTO sight when ever I have bayonet questions:

  (You need to Login

...and some more Enfields and bayonets (Pattern 14 thrown in for good measure):

Top Jungle Carbine is a 1947 BSA.

Bottom is a 1945 Fazakerley.  It's my second rifle refurbishment that I had ever done.  Almost everything is original except for the reproduction front stock and flash hider.

The No5 bayonet is a reproduction

---

I'm surprised at the number of reproduction Jungle Carbine bayonets but I didn't realize the going price for originals when you can find one. Nice to have with my dad's Enfield No. 5 collection. Thanks for helping find this info!

Finally got a chance to get a few pictures of my dad's Jungle Carbine Enfield No.5 SN:T101 and the accoutrements that came with it. I haven't dug through the paperwork files to find the original receipt but he paid a whopping $17.50 for the lot in the late 60s or early 70s at a hardware store in Maryland somewhere.

The stock is almost unblemished.

The rifle looks unused. The bore is pristine and I have only shot non-corrosive ammo through it and not much. The 30 cal ammo box below came with the purchase (he paid extra for these on a different receipt) and the sling and small ammo/mag pouch and case all have markings. The carbine has all matching parts including the barrel and bolt. The magazine has green paint on it like the bayonet, interestingly. The mag does not match the serial number of the carbine.

I also wonder if it is unusual for this serial number to be only three numbers after the first letter. Everywhere I look says all jungle carbines have a 4 digit number after the letter.

There are no import marks anywhere. I doubt this is a bring-back carbine because it looks unused. But, I don't know how things worked with these.

Thanks for all your help in identifying this stuff. I have other Enfields I'll get pictures of soon to share. Lots of fellow milsurp collectors out there!

---

More carbine pics:

---

That is a really nice No.5. Looks correct. Not a put-together made from No.4 parts. It's about 6 months older than mine (5/46). Made at the same Royal Ordnance Factory, Fazakerley. ROF (F). Not sure on the SN. Maybe someone forgot to add the leading zero. They would make 9999 rifles with a letter prefix starting at A then start numbering them from 1 with the next letter. The SN of my rifle is prefixed with a V.

The sling is not correct for a British rifle, but if that's what your dad put on it, I can see why you'd want to leave it that way.

The ENGLAND stamp was a pre '68 U.S. import requirement to show country of origin.
Your rifle was possibly imported by Interarmco.

The BNP stamp is Birmingham Nitro Proof. .303 is the caliber. 2.222 is the case length. 18.5 tons is the pressure of the proof round.

The proof was required for rifles sold into the civilian market by the British government.

Very nice rifle.

Thanks Littlejohn. I didn't know that the England stamp was considered an import mark. The sling was on it when he purchased it, from what I remember him telling me. I'm not even sure he even ever fired this nice carbine. If he did, he probably would have used the old corrosive ammo he bought with it and not cleaned the bore. It is so clean, that didn't happen.

Great to have some family treasures. I've got some from my oldest brother who died years ago and used to shoot in old Secret Service matches with his 1956 6 inch Colt Python. That's a nice treasure, also!

Nice early Jungle Carbine! That probably explains the 3 digit number. (It might even be a 'Trial #').

Mine was built by Fazakerly in 1947, so, it has the later metal forearm 'cap' and a four digit serial number.

The British did not issue extra magazines with Lee-Enfield rifles. They reloaded with 5-round 'Chargers' carried in cloth bandoliers.

My magazine has a matching serial number on the bottom of the magazine.
I don't think the war time No. 5 rifles had the magazines serial numbered.

I believe your canvass gear is all U.S. items. The sling is like the one the CMP sent with my M1 Garand.

Like 'Littlejohn' said, the "England" was to comply with U.S. Customs law. The "BNP Proofs" were to comply with British law for civilian sales.

p.s. The pressure test is 18.5 "Long Tons" per square inch.

Swell looking 'Jungle Carbine' Whig!!!

Your father's $17.50 investment will bring you many happy returns.

Interesting, first time I've seen a three digit number.

My Fazakerley is serial number O5327 dated 7/45.

Like Littlejohn had mentioned...the numbering system for Fazakerley made no5s began with A1 to A9999, B1 to B9999 and so forth.  Letters omitted were I and J.

One of my references does mention a B.S.A. (M47C) .22 trials rifle that had a T1 prefix (Only 100 were made).

'Local Boy' - Does your carbine have a metal cap on the forearm tip or is it plain, like Whig's?

FWIW - My first Jungle Carbine had plain wood and no metal cap.

The extra mag I have is not serialized.

That's interesting they had a .22 variety made.

Thanks for the info. I have never studied up on these more than just some basic info when I first got it. Now I know a bunch more! Nice part of any mil-surp collection to have an authentic Enfield No. 5.

Whig, that is an excellent No 5! 
My Aussie friend said he carried a Jungle carbine during the Malaysian Conflict until they were issued L1A1s.  Interestingly enough, he said one day they were carrying the No 5 and the next the L1A1, without any training.
Vic

Hi Chuck...the Fazakerley has a plain wooden forearm tip like Whig's

BTW: Whig I believe your extra magazine is for an SMLE no1 mark III.  You can tell by the groves which extend down to the base of the mag.  No4/5 mags have groves that stop just before the base...their also interchangeable with one another.

FWIW: I've read that the magazines were not marked with the serial number until around mid-1946.  They will often have the number engraved or stamped.

If this extra is not correct for the carbine, I may have just pulled the wrong one from my storage. I'll have to check on that! Boy, they sure look the same. Thanks for the heads up!

I've got too much stuff packed away and don't have enough room to organize it all the right way.

Whig,  Check the mag that's lying on the rifle cover in a previous photo.

I looked through my L-E literature, but, failed to find anything on serial number 'blocks' for No. 5 Mk1 rifles.

However, Ian Skennerton, "The British Service Lee", page 179, states:

"Some changes which were introduced for the No. 5 rifle were the numbering of the fore-end to the rifle, approved on 14th November (1945), and the numbering of the magazine as well, approved on 3rd June 1946. It was also instructed that No. 4 rifles have their magazines numbered to the rifle.
Subsequently, all new production rifles from this date had the serial number engraved on the bottom of the magazine".

Whig's family heirloom, having been made in November, 1945, would not have had the serial number put on the magazine and probably not the stock forearm, (during manufacture).

Skennerton reports, (page 176-177), that an experimental metal 'nosecap' was fitted to the forearm tip, as early as July 1944, but, proved too difficult to manufacture.
A simpler version was devised and appeared on some 1945 production, but, was eventually discarded. Forearm tips were merely rounded off and the grain end sealed.

Skennerton does not give a date, that I can find, when the metal forearm cap again became a feature of No. 5 rifle production. 

There is a serial number that matches the receiver on the top of the barrel under the rear of the hand guard. But, no, there is not anything stamped into the stock. That would correlate with your research.

I'll still have to search for the other mag this carbine was purchased with. But, the one in the carbine has that ugly green paint on the bottom half like the bayonet. But, the carbine has no green paint.

Thanks.

Here's 2 pages taken from the ".303 Rifle, No.5 Mk I, Parts Identification & Lists, No. 5 Series Notes, Exploded Parts Drawings, Descriptions, Accessories & Fittings" by Ian Skennerton.

As far as the fore end metal cap...all I can extrapolate from Alan M. Petrillo's "The Number 5 Jungle Carbine" is that they started manufacturing them with the metal cap in late 1945 or early 1946?

---

Local Boy, those No.5s you showed in post #16 look really good.
What's the story on the No.4 MK1 and the Pattern 14?
P14 is another one on my want list.

Thanks Littlejohn!

I purchased the No. 4 from a local gun shop a number of years ago.  It's ROF Maltby made in 1941.  It has a beech wood stock and an interesting button cocking piece as opposed to the usual flat rectangular ones.

BTW: I stopped by the same gun shop today...still nicely appointed but it's easy to tell their dying a slow death.  Sad to say that the big box stores are doing them in. :-[

The Eddystone Pattern 14 I acquired from a local private sale.   It's in very good shape and all numbers matching!  Unfortunately the forend of the original stock was removed.  Bummer, because the remaining stock was in excellent condition.  Finding a replacement fat boy stock was no easy task...especially in halfway descent shape.  Another nice thing was that the complete side volley sight was still fully intact located on the left center of the rifle!

Whig, I've also included some photos of a no1 mkIII magazine that I modified (before I knew better) to fit Jungle Carbines.  Using my No4/5 magazine as an example...I removed about half the guide rib from the no1 MkIII mag.  It actually fits and cycles bullets well after tuning the tabs.

Sometimes you have to fiddle with the tabs, at the top of the magazine (front and back), to get them to cycle bullets properly.

As you probably know...the magazine was supposed to stay on the rifle and the magazines were to be loaded with a charger or individually one-at-a-time.

---

I didn't expect this amount of interest and experience with Lee-Enfield rifles and other British items on the KCA Forum.

FWIW - Some rambling thoughts on early Lee 'small-bore' magazine arms.

IMHO - The 'genius idea' of James Paris Lee was the 'detachable (sheet metal) box magazine'. The evolution and efficient exploitation of this feature, probably was not realized, until applied to semi-automatic and automatic arms.

It seems, J.P. Lee and the companies in North America, that produced his 'turn-bolt' rifles, saw the 'detachable magazine' best utilized as a means of disciplined 'Fire Control'.

In its military configuration, the Remington-Lee "small-bore magazine rifle", (a.k.a. model 1899), came with four detachable magazines. This Lee rifle design also included a long 'side spring' to serve as a loading aid or platform.

This spring facilitates single loading by preventing a loosely loaded cartridge from dropping through the magazine opening, when the magazine is absent.

When a magazine is inserted, this spring is pushed aside.

The scheme was for troops to normally fire their Remington-Lee rifles as single shot rifles. When rapid fire was needed, the command was given to load a five round magazine.

With four loaded 5-shot magazines available, twenty one rounds of ammo, per man, could quickly be discharged by a unit! (Or ... so was the theory)!

It appears to me, gun designers and military thinkers were really blundering and feeling their way into this "Magazine Thingy".

---

Enter "Mr. Trouble" and things get re-thought!

The British were to have a learning experience during the Anglo-Boer War (1899-1902).

They would face a highly mobile enemy with lots of good rifle shots.

The Boer forces were armed primarily with a variation of the model 1893 Spanish Mauser, Ludwig Loewe and DWM made model 1895 Mausers, chambered for the 7X57mm Mauser cartridge, carried in 5-round 'stripper clips'.

---

In the late 1880's, when looking for a small-bore, smokeless magazine rifle, the British saw virtue in the Remington-Lee (Black Powder) bolt action design and its detachable magazine.

Having a military that knew how to fight using Bullet, Bayonet, and Butt, the British revamped the Lee's wimpy stock into a rather robust "two piece" design with provision to withstand recoiling parts.

The rear bolt lock-up, 'cock-on-closing' striker design, trigger linkage/guard design, and detachable (8 cartridge) 'single stack' magazine were pure to Lee design.

Early Lee-Metford rifles and carbines had their original magazine 'chain-linked' to a loop on the trigger-guard plate. This was so the empty magazine could be released and not lost, while inserting a  spare 'loaded' magazine.

The action had a magazine cut-off to allow operation of the rifle as a single-shot, with the magazine contents held in reserve.

The magazine was soon increased to 10 rounds, 'double stacked'. The idea of changing magazines was dropped. (Likely due to expense and poor interchangeability of magazines).

The British fired their Lee-Metford and Lee-Enfield rifles (10 round) and carbines (5 round) as single-shots. The magazine 'cut-off' was utilized to hold the contents in reserve. Replenishing a 10 round magazine was a slow process.

By 1901, the virtue of 'charger-loading' was clear to the British Army and experimental 'Charger-Loading' short rifles were being produced for trial. This was the genesis of the Short, Magazine Lee-Enfield Mark-I.

By 1907 the design was much improved.

But, within six years, the .303" Short M.L-E Mark-III rifle was slated for replacement by the .276", Mauser inspired, Pattern 1913.
(We all know how that would turn out).

Shorter & handier, charger-Loading, better sights, a quick bolt-action with a great toleration for mud and abuse, showed the British Lee to be a better battle rifle than expected!

(Attached photos showing SMLE Mk-I with early charger-guide).

---