rduchateau2954
Member
Local guy has one, wants to trade for an SKS, which I have. Thoughts? My SKS is an unmolested Norinco.
Sent from my AS985 using Tapatalk
Sent from my AS985 using Tapatalk
SKS for an Enfield No.5 MK1?
- Thread starter rduchateau2954
- Start date
- Status
Gottahaveone
Member
The question I would have, was it originally manufactured as a No 5, or was it converted to look like a No 5 by someone after the fact.
If original, I'd probably go for it. But then, I enjoy having my shoulder abused
If original, I'd probably go for it. But then, I enjoy having my shoulder abused
P5 Guy
Member
Well, I'd say it is dependent on the Jungle Carbine and who made it.
I would, personally keep the SKS.
I would, personally keep the SKS.
conrad427
Member
I would do it. For me at least, the Enfield is a more interesting rifle.
WardenWolf
member
Keep the SKS. The Jungle Carbines have notorious wandering zero issues. There are much better Enfields out there.
I'm personally not an Enfield fan, primarily do to the appearance and relatively weak action, but even I admit I rather liked an Ishapore 2A I encountered in a local gun store. It has a different magazine and better aesthetics. Were it not for its inability to safely handle commercial .308 loadings, I'd have probably snatched it up.
I'm personally not an Enfield fan, primarily do to the appearance and relatively weak action, but even I admit I rather liked an Ishapore 2A I encountered in a local gun store. It has a different magazine and better aesthetics. Were it not for its inability to safely handle commercial .308 loadings, I'd have probably snatched it up.
GBExpat
Member
If the Nº5 is authentic and appears to be equally "unmolested", I would not hesitate to make the trade.
Pay no attention to the Wandering Zero Myth.
Be aware that recoil with standard MkVII ball ammo is stout.
Pay no attention to the Wandering Zero Myth.
Be aware that recoil with standard MkVII ball ammo is stout.
The SKS is more modern and advanced design for which wide selection of ammo is available. I'm assuming the bolt gun is chambered for .303 cartridge. Always keep reliable self loader over something that has to be worked "a mano".
jimmyraythomason
Member
SKSs are everywhere....original No.5 jungle carbines..not so much. IF the jungle carbine is real and original (as mentioned by others) get it. You can pick up another SKS at any pawn shop any time you want.
carbine85
Member
A good original No 5 is worth more than the SKS and they are getting harder to come by. As stated above, pay no attention to the wondering zero myth. The Jungle Carbine is a great little rifle to shoot. Enfields are just great shooters.
Around here a W2 vintage rifle in good unmolested condition sells for $500 - $750
Around here a W2 vintage rifle in good unmolested condition sells for $500 - $750
OP
OP
rduchateau2954
Member
This is his the add description:
Bore is excellent, sharp, shiney. Finish is good, not rusted or pitted, wear from use. Stock is sound, no cracks. Real no.5 mk.1. Has proper reliefe cuts to reduce weight on receiver, barrel, trigger guard. Correct 800 meter sight.*
Sent from my AS985 using Tapatalk
Bore is excellent, sharp, shiney. Finish is good, not rusted or pitted, wear from use. Stock is sound, no cracks. Real no.5 mk.1. Has proper reliefe cuts to reduce weight on receiver, barrel, trigger guard. Correct 800 meter sight.*
Sent from my AS985 using Tapatalk
Some have wandering zero - but certainly not all of them.
If the No 5 is clean and correct I'd go for the trade.
mokin
Member
I have two SKS's and two Lee Enfields. I like 'em all but I might prefer the SMLE's a little more. If it's a real No. 5 Mk 1 go for it.
gwpercle
Member
I would snap up the 303 No. 5 Jungle Carbine in a heart beat. During early 1970's , at local military surplus store I got a No. 4 MK I $19.95 , my buddy paid the extra ten dollars for the No. 5 Jungle Carbine and I've been kicking myself ever since for not getting one also.
It shot just as well as the No. 4 , nothing wandered during our shooting sessions and deer hunts. A lot of sustained firing might do it but during normal shooting it's not a problem.
Gary
It shot just as well as the No. 4 , nothing wandered during our shooting sessions and deer hunts. A lot of sustained firing might do it but during normal shooting it's not a problem.
Gary
Billy Shears
Member
- Joined
- Mar 16, 2008
- Messages
- 1,020
I would agree. But to clarify a point, the wandering zero isn't a myth, the British did have an issue with it, but it affected some rifles and not others. Not all, or even most No. 5s had it. The issue was indeed mentioned in field reports, and was investigated by R.S.A.F. Enfield and S.A.S.C. (according to Maj E.G.B. Reynolds, a member of the Small Arms Inspectorate during and after WW2, and author of the "The Lee Enfield Rifle"). Capt. Peter Laidler, a now retired British army armorer, and author of several technical articles on the Lee Enfield also mentioned encountering the problem. But again, the problem didn't show up in every No. 5. The rifle that did were scrapped and used for parts, if they could not be repaired, and the result is that any No. 5 that is still around today is almost certainly not one of those that had a wandering zero problem. So this is just yet another reason to buy the Enfield if it's a real No. 5 and not a fake. Unfortunately for your shoulder, however, that rubber recoil pad will be rock hard after all these years.
I've heard it said that the recoil pad offers as much reduction as a frozen brick - and I wouldn't argue with that. However, I have seen repro pads for sale - and you always have the option of trading the original for a slip-on pad.
tark
Member
Grab the #5. It is worth more than just about any SKS. I had a #5 years ago and I didn't see any evidence of the wandering zero problem, but that was just one gun, mine. I can't speak for others.
Warden wolf, are you sure about the Ishapore Enfields? They were made of a higher quality steel and were designed from the start to handle 7.62X51 Nato ammo, I have been told. Can't imagine they would be unsafe with 308 commercial ammo.
Again, this is what I have been told and have read in various publications. Doesn't mean it is true.
Warden wolf, are you sure about the Ishapore Enfields? They were made of a higher quality steel and were designed from the start to handle 7.62X51 Nato ammo, I have been told. Can't imagine they would be unsafe with 308 commercial ammo.
Again, this is what I have been told and have read in various publications. Doesn't mean it is true.
carbine85
Member
The WW1 & WW2 Mil surps are drying up and some are harder to find then others. You can always find another SKS.
Make sure the flash hider hasn't been cut off. For some reason people liked to cut them off and originals are impossible to find.
Make sure the flash hider hasn't been cut off. For some reason people liked to cut them off and originals are impossible to find.
Panzerschwein
member
Keep the SKS.
Shells are cheaper and it's an automatic.
Shells are cheaper and it's an automatic.
I have owned both, I would keep the SKS but the no. 5 does have cool factor.
The SKS is cheap to shoot, fairly accurate, and easy on the shoulder.
The no.5 is expensive to shoot since the surplus ammo is long gone, fairly accurate, and has unpleasant recoil. The rubber pad has no give and, in my opinion, is worst than a no.4 steel buttplate since it has less surface area on your shoulder.
I have had several Enfield's and all were very hard on brass because of generous chamber dims. This is great for reliability in the field but a bane for reloaders. I've had new brass ready to fail after 2 loadings.
The SKS is cheap to shoot, fairly accurate, and easy on the shoulder.
The no.5 is expensive to shoot since the surplus ammo is long gone, fairly accurate, and has unpleasant recoil. The rubber pad has no give and, in my opinion, is worst than a no.4 steel buttplate since it has less surface area on your shoulder.
I have had several Enfield's and all were very hard on brass because of generous chamber dims. This is great for reliability in the field but a bane for reloaders. I've had new brass ready to fail after 2 loadings.
OP
OP
rduchateau2954
Member
I'm looking to sell the SKS. Just not a fan. Had it for like 15 years and it's maybe seen 100 rounds. For years it was a cheap deer rifle so it was only shot for sight ins. I stopped gun hunting in like '02 I've put maybe two or the boxes through it. I take it out shoot it a few times until I'm reminded I don't enjoy shooting it.
However, I don't like shooting it because it's not accurate, has a super short length of pull, and a horrible trigger. I worry another basic milsurp with be the same thing.
However, the Enfield is worth more so if I can get it straight up I could make a few bucks.
Sent from my AS985 using Tapatalk
FL-NC
Member
No, those jungle carbines kick like a horse and aren't very accurate most of the time. Also very likely not genuine. I'd keep the SKS if you want a rifle to actually shoot.
Curator
Member
The Lee Enfield No.5 Mk1 rifle is a real WWII artifact and a valuable collectible firearm. BSA made about 80,000 of them and Fazakerley made another 160,000 for a total of about 250,000 rifles compared to about 17 million of the other models. They were made right up to 1947, and war-time examples are more desired by serious collectors. A nice BSA in all original condition has to be worth double what a Norinco SKS is worth. Of course ammo is much cheaper and easier to get for the SKS, and will probably remain so. Value and utility are two different viewpoints. Take it from me, you may never get the opportunity to get a genuine No5 Mk1 rifle this reasonable again.
ontarget
Member
If you want rid of the SKS anyway, then do the trade. You have nothing to lose.
- Status
