This guy deserves the subs. for how much work he puts into these videos. and putting wear n tear on the gear and equipment. It wouldnt hurt to subscribe you guys!
It's not what a collector might be drawn to with it's restored stock and reblued metal, but as for someone who wanted it to shoot, I couldn't have asked for a better example. Best of luck in finding your rifle. Depending on what your criteria are, IMA sells examples of the Mk I*…. Don't know any details about them though… Mk I or I* are rather hard to come by…. Thanks.
Thanks for posting this video. I love the whole "Lee" family, and the MLM is a very beautyfil rifle! Personally I owe two Smellies (Mk III and Mk III*) and a Nr. 4 Mk I*: fantastic weapons! Greetings from Italy
I love the sounds of the leather ammo pouch and the clinging of the cartridges while you load. This video is a joy to watch. I would watch your introduction video but I guess I can't in this country, which is weird. Nevertheless, I love your videos and your Lee-Metford is in excellent condition.
Theres nothing better than working that bolt action on a beautiful and archaic rifle such as this, ejecting that spent case, seeing that smoke and the smell of burnt gunpowder :)
They all follow on in a logical sequence. Like any series of items whether they be rifles or tanks, there are modifications done to them and designations made to their name.
I have seen quite a few people shooting various Lee action rifles (Lee-Metford, Lee-Enfield, and Ishapore) and when firing from the magazine while standing, I often see this technique of unshouldering the rifle to cycle the action. Do you have any documentation on whether that practice was actually taught or prescribed in British or Empire manuals of the time, or is it just something you find yourself doing naturally? Whenever I shoot my Ishapore 2A1 standing (always from the magazine of course, as they're sadly not provided with a magazine cutoff) I have always found it most natural to lift my cheek up off the buttstock, cycle the action without shifting the position of the rifle, then drop back down and sight in for the next shot. Would this have been considered incorrect technique in service?
What great questions... The Metford manuals (Rifle Exercises 1892, 1896) give standard positions for the standing... left hand on the fore stock, left elbow not tucked in.... There is no mention of any "technique" beyond "magazine fire" and no details what so ever... There also aren't any position tidbits for rapid firing as late a 1914... What I do have is an interesting book from the 1920s on competitive SMLE shooting and therein is described techniques for rapid shooting like not removing one's cheek from the stock while cycling the bolt among other points... A point about the cutoff... It was kept on the SMLE from 1903 as a safety feature, not having anything to do with loading and fire control aspects that those on the earlier MLMs and MLEs.... all SMLE ammo was charger loaded... All in all the Musketry and Rifle Exercises of the 1890s were still very much an evolution of those from earlier in the century... Some of the same practices and similar targetry last right up to the Boer War... After the Boer War, targetry changes and musketry (and the manuals prescribing them) becomes much more "field" oriented... Cheers.
I think that the answer lies in the eventual series life of the rifle.... into the 1950s... with modifications of course... the Lebel was outclassed almost immediately and the SR, well that had almost a similar life to the Lee Series.. The K31 being the last of its line.
Yeah, France got ahead of the game with the Lebel but two years later just about every country came up with a better rifle. Well, except for the US, they used the Krag which is nice and they adopted the 1903 Mauser. I mean they designed and adopted the 1903 Springfield which looked awfully a lot like the Mauser.
Since you do everything by the book, I wonder if it was period correct to disengage from the shoulder for each shot when cycling through the magazine.I've always seen this as a bad habit, but was it military doctrine?
+PoppaSquat Haha,... I would say I do everything "by the book" when I am demonstrating,.... "the book"....Here I was not. The book stated that the weapon was brought to the "ready" after every shot. That said, it also stipulated that "Magazine Fire" was to be delivered in as rapid a way as possible (while still maintaining the proper aiming drills). Cheers.
Thanks to your videos the "historical shooting bug" has bitten. I recently picked up a Lee Enfield Mk1 and I can't wait for spring to try it out. It has the offset front sight and according to one of your other videos I can expect it to shoot to the right. Is that correct? Also when you fixed the bayonet in this video, did that change the point of impact? And thank you for all of the historical notes you include with your videos.
Hi there. The sights are offset either way. It's just a matter of how much.... I'm away from my references right now so I can't comment on the marking that will let you know if the mods have been done..
rimsdad Thanks you,. and yes,....... it's 100% authentic.... :-) I think that I was doing some grouping and zeroing work that day,... data recording, you know. Cheers.
Another question if you please....I've noticed that several of your pieces appear to be in excellent condition. Have any been refinished or restored, or have you been fortunate in finding weapons in excellent/unissued condition? I'm aware of the differences of opinion when it comes to that question. Your Lee Metford looks beautiful!
The Metford has been restored,... not by me... but I have made the acquaintance of the fellow who had it done,.. about three owners ago. Wood, bluing, barrel,...the works... It is just fantastic work. The remainder are all either original or PH repros from the 1970s. I have been lucky to have one across some good examples. As for the differences in opinion, I am not a "Collector".... I am an historical shooter.... for me it is the functionality of a given weapon rather than it's collector value or provenance... The crown and rifling beat out rare markings or pristine finishes anyway of the week...
@@britishmuzzleloaders oh yeah I did see that before. Gave you a thumbs up. I guess my real question was the position of the head. Can't rest it on the butt stock like normal. So many countries has long range sight that I guess they were trained on how to stand to use them.
By the way, did you do some shoots of your Lee-Metford MkI with the load of black powder?Indeed, I saw in an other video that you load your cartridges with smokeless powder.
Would not the Remington Lee rifles be the older ancestry of this line of rifles, such as the Remington Lee 1885 and 1899? Or do you set the starting point at the ones that Britain manufactured?
Touche', suppose I should have expected that kind of answer when British is in your channels name. Its just at the front of my mind since I have a rifle in my possession Im appraising right now. Turned out to be a Remington Lee 1899 chambered in 30-40 krag, one of the 2001 ordered by the Michigan Milita, Its very interesting to see the genetics of that rifle compared to the Mk-1 Lee-Metford.
+jasonyama333 The initial marks of pouches held 90 rounds... one 40 and the other 50.. in the late 1890s this was changed to two of the 50 rounders and eventually a different pattern was introduced (again in the 1890s) that held 50 each.. These later versions are the ones that are shown here, in this clip (all be them reproductions with some flaws) During the Boer War, infantry equipment became incredibly ad-hoc... with ammo carried in bandoliers and other pouches... But it was 100 rounds with the later Slade Wallace pouches, as issued. Cheers.
+The Canuck Redcoat HI there... I use smokeless.... "Black powder and Lee Metfords" is a complete red herring... They were made for smokeless........ Smokeless powder has no effect on whether the bullet will strip out of the rifling. If the rifling is decent, it will shoot... (kind of like any rifle). You can not replicate the black powder 303 round anyway... No way to compress 70 odd grains of powder into the case... The whole Metford rifling issue was specifically due to cordite and its peculiarly hot burn temperature. This burnt out the throats of so rifled weapons.. Medford rifling was actually preferred by contemporary marksmen... Cheers.
I just bought a modern in-line muzzle loader in my quest to learn my way around black powder before I buy an expensive replica. I want to get into casting my own conical ammunition, do you know of a good source of information about this topic? Safety is my primary concern, accuracy will be my second.
I don't have any experience with modern muzzleloaders, sorry.... Casting has some generally common characteristics but also some very specific-to-rifle/calibre ones... I have covered casting for the Martini and Snider in the Ammunition playlist if those will be of help?.... many modern inlines are commonly shot with bullet and sabot combinations with modern materials... their twist rate is intended for these modern bullets.... I suppose they'll shoot roundball but again, I have no experience... What kind of reproduction muzzleloader were you thinking of?
I believe a percussion Hawken would be an ideal choice for me. The rifle I have has a1:28 twist, 7 grove rifling in .50 cal. It fires patched round ball just fine, but I suspect that the rifling is not ideal to "grip" the patching, resulting in torn patches. My main concern is the sizing part of the process(casting conicals), I have watched your videos and have a fundamental understanding of what should be happening, but do not want to pay for a press just for the sizing process. Is that step truly necessary, or is it done for accuracy's sake?
Ah I see... yes, sizing... it depends on how big the bullet is... if it is a tad large, then sizing will be a requirement... that said, you don't want a bullet that is any more than 1 or 2 thou smaller than the bore.. so it's not simply a matter of finding a small bullet... you need to get right up to the bore size... less a thou.. for that reason, I have always (when I used Burton style, American minie bullets way back when) used a mould that gives you a slightly larger bullet and then size it down (we are talking only about a couple of thou) to what I needed.... That's the conventional wisdom regarding these bullets, anyway... lots of good shooters will tell you the same thing... Will a really small bullet work? It will fire, yes.... will it be accurate? Not as much as a proper size one.. hope this helps. Cheers.
+gmkmd The Slade Wallace stuff is particularly stiff.. I sanded off the finish down to a sort of buffed appearance, then whitened with shoe-white. Without the sanding the whitening just rubs off. Cheers.
So you literally just went over the whole set with a sanding block? How coarse, like 100-grit? Must have been a lot of work, and hard to avoid fraying the stitched areas.
***** Actually I used a belt sander. The kind mounted on a pedestal. I think it was 120 grit. I used a Dremel with a wire wheel for in-between the stitching on the front of the ammo pouch. Yes it was a lot of work but the ghastly taupe finish that it came with was worth getting rid of.
Indeed. Now if we could only find a way to make that Indian-made leather more supple. It also makes more verdigris on contact with brass than anything I've ever seen.
***** You could always make your own set, if you're into projects. the pouches aren't that hard to make (the later, forward opening ones anyway) and the belt and braces are pretty basic too.
Are you are shooting Mk VII? No, it should be alright. The chamber pressure of the original black powder round (Mk I) was actually higher than the cordite (Mk I-VII). The ammo I made was just loaded with the most accurate load (it happened to be of a similar MV to the early marks with the 215gr bullet). Is your Lee-Speed a sporter or a military version?
I came by a lot of it... I mention in the reloading video that it is rather "high end"... yes #2 would work just fine. "Better" served? I doubt that as far as performance goes... "As well served" yes. Now,.. is making #2 cheaper? by the ingredients, yes. Just a little context, that's all.
Beautiful piece of art, that rifle. Would love to get my hands on one. After browsing through your channel, I noticed I stepped into a new world of expertise. Before proceeding to watching everything on the channel, I feel like I have some research to so. I don't anything about these drills, manuals, projectiles, and the weapons of the Victorian age themselves. Will you be so kind as to help me fit in this new world by pointing me into directions? Thanks, and lovely channel by the way.
You might try an easy step from your ACW activities and branch into the Enfield in British Empire service. There are manuals (both the 59 and 61) online and can be found by googling "Field Exercise and Evolutions of Infantry (59 or 61/62).... These also contain the firing exercise for the Enfield in British service.
HI there. Point taken but,.....my comments must be taken in the right context... The first in a long line of British and Empire service Lee rifles..... The 45/70 being an American cartridge was never used in mainstream British service weapons....Cheers.
![ร้อยพ่อพันแม่ - WanMai [Official MV]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/XY2pNYASEbg/mqdefault.jpg)
This guy deserves the subs. for how much work he puts into these videos. and putting wear n tear on the gear and equipment. It wouldnt hurt to subscribe you guys!
Thank you.
That is a fine specimen. Absolutely beautiful.... One day, hopefully soon, I will own a fine example of the Metford Mk1 as well.
It's not what a collector might be drawn to with it's restored stock and reblued metal, but as for someone who wanted it to shoot, I couldn't have asked for a better example. Best of luck in finding your rifle. Depending on what your criteria are, IMA sells examples of the Mk I*…. Don't know any details about them though… Mk I or I* are rather hard to come by…. Thanks.
Thanks for posting this video. I love the whole "Lee" family, and the MLM is a very beautyfil rifle! Personally I owe two Smellies (Mk III and Mk III*) and a Nr. 4 Mk I*: fantastic weapons!
Greetings from Italy
You're welcome. You are right about the beauty of the MLM/MLE. Something about the extra length I think. Glad you liked it.
Would love to try out this rifle!
And the Martini-Henry of course.
+Fredrik Häll Hopefully, these clips give a decent enough representation of the use of these fine rifles... They are a joy to shoot for sure. Cheers.
I wish I could like this everytime I watch it! Bloody marvellous!! 🇬🇧🏴
Thank you!
I love the sounds of the leather ammo pouch and the clinging of the cartridges while you load. This video is a joy to watch. I would watch your introduction video but I guess I can't in this country, which is weird. Nevertheless, I love your videos and your Lee-Metford is in excellent condition.
Thanks... I'm sorry about the visibility issue... There might be some music that I inadvertently added that is causing a block...
I love this channel
Thank you very much!
Theres nothing better than working that bolt action on a beautiful and archaic rifle such as this, ejecting that spent case, seeing that smoke and the smell of burnt gunpowder :)
It's great rifle for sure.
The numerous differences im models is hard work. You have the side safety. I have a safety on the firing pin. Thats a mint looking stock too.
They all follow on in a logical sequence. Like any series of items whether they be rifles or tanks, there are modifications done to them and designations made to their name.
Video quality to be proud of.
I really like your vids, thankyou,
+The42Petes No, thank you for your kind words. Glad you are enjoying the channel! Cheers.
I have seen quite a few people shooting various Lee action rifles (Lee-Metford, Lee-Enfield, and Ishapore) and when firing from the magazine while standing, I often see this technique of unshouldering the rifle to cycle the action. Do you have any documentation on whether that practice was actually taught or prescribed in British or Empire manuals of the time, or is it just something you find yourself doing naturally? Whenever I shoot my Ishapore 2A1 standing (always from the magazine of course, as they're sadly not provided with a magazine cutoff) I have always found it most natural to lift my cheek up off the buttstock, cycle the action without shifting the position of the rifle, then drop back down and sight in for the next shot. Would this have been considered incorrect technique in service?
What great questions... The Metford manuals (Rifle Exercises 1892, 1896) give standard positions for the standing... left hand on the fore stock, left elbow not tucked in.... There is no mention of any "technique" beyond "magazine fire" and no details what so ever... There also aren't any position tidbits for rapid firing as late a 1914... What I do have is an interesting book from the 1920s on competitive SMLE shooting and therein is described techniques for rapid shooting like not removing one's cheek from the stock while cycling the bolt among other points... A point about the cutoff... It was kept on the SMLE from 1903 as a safety feature, not having anything to do with loading and fire control aspects that those on the earlier MLMs and MLEs.... all SMLE ammo was charger loaded... All in all the Musketry and Rifle Exercises of the 1890s were still very much an evolution of those from earlier in the century... Some of the same practices and similar targetry last right up to the Boer War... After the Boer War, targetry changes and musketry (and the manuals prescribing them) becomes much more "field" oriented... Cheers.
Nice rifle and nice drills!
+SamEEE12 Thanks!
What is the music playing in the background of the beginning shooting segment?
Land of Hope and Glory.
Love this channel but also like the background music. Where did this music come from?
It comes from various sources.. some of the early stuff is just recordings... with the record company keeping any revenue...
Since IMA is sold out, where would you recommdend I get the Slade Wallace Equipment? Also love your videos
There are some other places that stock various valise equipments... The Kit series has them listed.
How did it hold up compared to the other rifles at the time? Such as the Lebel 1886 and Schmidt-Ruben 1889? And thank you for all that you do.
I think that the answer lies in the eventual series life of the rifle.... into the 1950s... with modifications of course... the Lebel was outclassed almost immediately and the SR, well that had almost a similar life to the Lee Series.. The K31 being the last of its line.
Yeah, France got ahead of the game with the Lebel but two years later just about every country came up with a better rifle. Well, except for the US, they used the Krag which is nice and they adopted the 1903 Mauser. I mean they designed and adopted the 1903 Springfield which looked awfully a lot like the Mauser.
Since you do everything by the book, I wonder if it was period correct to disengage from the shoulder for each shot when cycling through the magazine.I've always seen this as a bad habit, but was it military doctrine?
+PoppaSquat Haha,... I would say I do everything "by the book" when I am demonstrating,.... "the book"....Here I was not. The book stated that the weapon was brought to the "ready" after every shot. That said, it also stipulated that "Magazine Fire" was to be delivered in as rapid a way as possible (while still maintaining the proper aiming drills). Cheers.
Thanks to your videos the "historical shooting bug" has bitten. I recently picked up a Lee Enfield Mk1 and I can't wait for spring to try it out. It has the offset front sight and according to one of your other videos I can expect it to shoot to the right. Is that correct? Also when you fixed the bayonet in this video, did that change the point of impact? And thank you for all of the historical notes you include with your videos.
Hi there. The sights are offset either way. It's just a matter of how much.... I'm away from my references right now so I can't comment on the marking that will let you know if the mods have been done..
@@britishmuzzleloaders Thanks for getting back to me. I appreciate your knowledge on these old rifles.
Say Rob nice work! Seems to take a lot effort I your presentations! But say is that a period correct pencil in your Bush Jacket?
rimsdad Thanks you,. and yes,....... it's 100% authentic.... :-) I think that I was doing some grouping and zeroing work that day,... data recording, you know. Cheers.
Love your videos. What bush jacket is that?
+dutchy7712 Thanks for the kind words. It's a Canadian pattern used from the 1950s to the 1970s.
Another question if you please....I've noticed that several of your pieces appear to be in excellent condition. Have any been refinished or restored, or have you been fortunate in finding weapons in excellent/unissued condition? I'm aware of the differences of opinion when it comes to that question. Your Lee Metford looks beautiful!
The Metford has been restored,... not by me... but I have made the acquaintance of the fellow who had it done,.. about three owners ago. Wood, bluing, barrel,...the works... It is just fantastic work. The remainder are all either original or PH repros from the 1970s. I have been lucky to have one across some good examples. As for the differences in opinion, I am not a "Collector".... I am an historical shooter.... for me it is the functionality of a given weapon rather than it's collector value or provenance... The crown and rifling beat out rare markings or pristine finishes anyway of the week...
you need to show how to use the volley sights. I've seen anyone use them and i'd lke to see that
Someone "needs" to watch the video on the Lee Metford Firing Exercise...
@@britishmuzzleloaders Great!!! i will look for it
@@britishmuzzleloaders oh yeah I did see that before. Gave you a thumbs up. I guess my real question was the position of the head. Can't rest it on the butt stock like normal. So many countries has long range sight that I guess they were trained on how to stand to use them.
By the way, did you do some shoots of your Lee-Metford MkI with the load of black powder?Indeed, I saw in an other video that you load your cartridges with smokeless powder.
I have never used BP with 303. Always smokeless.
Would not the Remington Lee rifles be the older ancestry of this line of rifles, such as the Remington Lee 1885 and 1899? Or do you set the starting point at the ones that Britain manufactured?
I suppose so, but I tend to deal with British and Empire service rifles (with some exceptions, of course). Cheers.
Touche', suppose I should have expected that kind of answer when British is in your channels name. Its just at the front of my mind since I have a rifle in my possession Im appraising right now. Turned out to be a Remington Lee 1899 chambered in 30-40 krag, one of the 2001 ordered by the Michigan Milita, Its very interesting to see the genetics of that rifle compared to the Mk-1 Lee-Metford.
What was the standard combat load of rounds carried by infantry?
+jasonyama333 The initial marks of pouches held 90 rounds... one 40 and the other 50.. in the late 1890s this was changed to two of the 50 rounders and eventually a different pattern was introduced (again in the 1890s) that held 50 each.. These later versions are the ones that are shown here, in this clip (all be them reproductions with some flaws) During the Boer War, infantry equipment became incredibly ad-hoc... with ammo carried in bandoliers and other pouches... But it was 100 rounds with the later Slade Wallace pouches, as issued. Cheers.
Do you use Smokeless or Black powder; and if it's smokeless how do you avoid the rifling being stripped with the Metford rifling?
+The Canuck Redcoat HI there... I use smokeless.... "Black powder and Lee Metfords" is a complete red herring... They were made for smokeless........ Smokeless powder has no effect on whether the bullet will strip out of the rifling. If the rifling is decent, it will shoot... (kind of like any rifle). You can not replicate the black powder 303 round anyway... No way to compress 70 odd grains of powder into the case... The whole Metford rifling issue was specifically due to cordite and its peculiarly hot burn temperature. This burnt out the throats of so rifled weapons.. Medford rifling was actually preferred by contemporary marksmen... Cheers.
Ahh, why thank you good sir! This I did not know!
stupid question but is that 303 brit or did the 303 come much later
+Jackey XM8 303 is "303 Brit"... there is a 303 Savage but the 303 that everybody identifies with is 303 British. (Mostly an American term I think).
this is a rather old video! But I love it lol
Hey, we all had to start somewhere... :-)
britishmuzzleloaders indeed
I just bought a modern in-line muzzle loader in my quest to learn my way around black powder before I buy an expensive replica. I want to get into casting my own conical ammunition, do you know of a good source of information about this topic? Safety is my primary concern, accuracy will be my second.
I don't have any experience with modern muzzleloaders, sorry.... Casting has some generally common characteristics but also some very specific-to-rifle/calibre ones... I have covered casting for the Martini and Snider in the Ammunition playlist if those will be of help?.... many modern inlines are commonly shot with bullet and sabot combinations with modern materials... their twist rate is intended for these modern bullets.... I suppose they'll shoot roundball but again, I have no experience... What kind of reproduction muzzleloader were you thinking of?
I believe a percussion Hawken would be an ideal choice for me. The rifle I have has a1:28 twist, 7 grove rifling in .50 cal. It fires patched round ball just fine, but I suspect that the rifling is not ideal to "grip" the patching, resulting in torn patches.
My main concern is the sizing part of the process(casting conicals), I have watched your videos and have a fundamental understanding of what should be happening, but do not want to pay for a press just for the sizing process. Is that step truly necessary, or is it done for accuracy's sake?
Ah I see... yes, sizing... it depends on how big the bullet is... if it is a tad large, then sizing will be a requirement... that said, you don't want a bullet that is any more than 1 or 2 thou smaller than the bore.. so it's not simply a matter of finding a small bullet... you need to get right up to the bore size... less a thou.. for that reason, I have always (when I used Burton style, American minie bullets way back when) used a mould that gives you a slightly larger bullet and then size it down (we are talking only about a couple of thou) to what I needed.... That's the conventional wisdom regarding these bullets, anyway... lots of good shooters will tell you the same thing... Will a really small bullet work? It will fire, yes.... will it be accurate? Not as much as a proper size one.. hope this helps. Cheers.
How did you refinish the leather? Those IMA leather goods are so stiff.
+gmkmd The Slade Wallace stuff is particularly stiff.. I sanded off the finish down to a sort of buffed appearance, then whitened with shoe-white. Without the sanding the whitening just rubs off. Cheers.
So you literally just went over the whole set with a sanding block? How coarse, like 100-grit? Must have been a lot of work, and hard to avoid fraying the stitched areas.
***** Actually I used a belt sander. The kind mounted on a pedestal. I think it was 120 grit. I used a Dremel with a wire wheel for in-between the stitching on the front of the ammo pouch. Yes it was a lot of work but the ghastly taupe finish that it came with was worth getting rid of.
Indeed. Now if we could only find a way to make that Indian-made leather more supple. It also makes more verdigris on contact with brass than anything I've ever seen.
***** You could always make your own set, if you're into projects. the pouches aren't that hard to make (the later, forward opening ones anyway) and the belt and braces are pretty basic too.
I have the Speed-Lee 1904. I shoot 303. I see your ammo and now wonder if 303 WW2 is too hot??
Are you are shooting Mk VII? No, it should be alright. The chamber pressure of the original black powder round (Mk I) was actually higher than the cordite (Mk I-VII). The ammo I made was just loaded with the most accurate load (it happened to be of a similar MV to the early marks with the 215gr bullet). Is your Lee-Speed a sporter or a military version?
britishmuzzleloaders it says
BSA & M pattern
Lee Speed **09
TAM. And it's in military style
Alvaro Lopez Very nice. What kind of accuracy do you get from it?
very good still at 200 yards
Alvaro Lopez 4 inches, 8 inches, 12 inches? Mine will shoot a shade under 4 " at 100m. Just wondering how that stacks up.
Why linotype? Wouldn't you be better served with something closer to Lyman #2 alloy?
I came by a lot of it... I mention in the reloading video that it is rather "high end"... yes #2 would work just fine. "Better" served? I doubt that as far as performance goes... "As well served" yes. Now,.. is making #2 cheaper? by the ingredients, yes. Just a little context, that's all.
Beautiful piece of art, that rifle. Would love to get my hands on one. After browsing through your channel, I noticed I stepped into a new world of expertise. Before proceeding to watching everything on the channel, I feel like I have some research to so. I don't anything about these drills, manuals, projectiles, and the weapons of the Victorian age themselves. Will you be so kind as to help me fit in this new world by pointing me into directions? Thanks, and lovely channel by the way.
You might try an easy step from your ACW activities and branch into the Enfield in British Empire service. There are manuals (both the 59 and 61) online and can be found by googling "Field Exercise and Evolutions of Infantry (59 or 61/62).... These also contain the firing exercise for the Enfield in British service.
well the lee metford is technically not the first in the lee family the remington lee was the first in the but was chambered in 45/70 government
HI there. Point taken but,.....my comments must be taken in the right context... The first in a long line of British and Empire service Lee rifles..... The 45/70 being an American cartridge was never used in mainstream British service weapons....Cheers.
ah i i misinterpreted and took it out of context my apology
There was nothing gratuitous about that bayonet shot.
Eamon Honan It certainly adds a "look" to the rifle when fixed... Long and elegant, in my mind... Cheers.