A genuine Jungle Carbine?
Printed From: Enfield-Rifles.com
Category: Enfields
Forum Name: Info for New Enfield Owners
Forum Description: Are you new to Enfields? Check out some of the how-to's submitted by our members!
URL: http://www.enfield-rifles.com/forum_posts.asp?TID=14321
Printed Date: March 26 2026 at 3:31pm
Software Version: Web Wiz Forums 12.07 - https://www.webwizforums.com
Topic: A genuine Jungle Carbine?
Posted By: MarkF
Subject: A genuine Jungle Carbine?
Date Posted: December 14 2025 at 3:11pm
|
Hi, some years ago I bought a rife called "Jungle Carbine, Enfield No.5" by the seller - and it looked like a JC should look AFAIK. In this time I did not know anything about fakes and so I did not care that the rifle did not had any stamps or marking that say "No.5" or else and that it was obviously "refreshed". Meanwhile I have learned that a lot of "Jungle Carbine" are fakes and so I checked every detail of my rifle to know, whether it is a "real" Enfield No.5. As far as I can see - please see the the linked pics - the rifle has every detail a genuine No.5 should have - with exception of the marking/stamp at the left side of the receiver. And also the stamp of ser.no. on the left side looks differtn from all other I have seen. On the other hand - would not be everybody, who makes a fake in this way, add at least a stamp/marking, which says "No.5"? Regards, Mark https://ibb.co/MxGhrrJC" rel="nofollow">  https://ibb.co/3YcFKPXn" rel="nofollow"> https://ibb.co/vxkFYPC5" rel="nofollow"> https://ibb.co/Kz6xnSsZ" rel="nofollow"> https://ibb.co/hRw3GG8L" rel="nofollow"> https://ibb.co/xKGwX524" rel="nofollow"> https://ibb.co/qFMJkGbb" rel="nofollow"> https://ibb.co/Zp5cq5J6" rel="nofollow"> https://ibb.co/3YcXjHkt" rel="nofollow"> https://ibb.co/Kj36M1b3" rel="nofollow"> https://ibb.co/LHG0wWs" rel="nofollow"> https://ibb.co/p6TktcFQ" rel="nofollow"> https://ibb.co/rGdkWLsB" rel="nofollow"> https://ibb.co/fzB5sRK1" rel="nofollow"> https://ibb.co/4w0ddvZr" rel="nofollow"> https://ibb.co/5XYM0XZP" rel="nofollow"> https://ibb.co/d0rmQPMt" rel="nofollow"> https://ibb.co/tMwvGWx3" rel="nofollow">
|
Replies:
Posted By: Canuck
Date Posted: December 15 2025 at 2:59pm
|
Welcome to the site! That rear sight is stamped steel and the first I have ever seen like that! I own 2 No.5/MK1's with the milled steel rear sights. (CORRECTION: This sight in his photo is a milled rear sight. I don't know why I thought it was the stamped steel rear sight but I stand corrected.). ------------- Castles made of sand slip into the sea.....eventually |
Posted By: britrifles
Date Posted: December 15 2025 at 4:42pm
|
Looks like a machined (milled) backsight to me? I’m no No. 5 expert, not a No. 4 expert either, but I’m seeing the typical No. 5 features including the scalloped cuts to the chamber reinforce. If it’s a fake, someone went thru a lot of trouble. If it’s genuine, someone scrubbed the markings. |
Posted By: Canuck
Date Posted: December 15 2025 at 5:12pm
|
Britrifles, I read not long ago about a stamped steel No.5 rear sight being made.  NOTE:the center sight is stamped steel and graduated up to 800 yard increments. Must be quite scarce as I have never seen one before and I have also seen many No.5's. I'd love to have one in my sight collection!
------------- Castles made of sand slip into the sea.....eventually |
Posted By: A square 10
Date Posted: December 15 2025 at 5:34pm
| the left receiver should be marked this appears devoid of markings , the left wrist of a BSA should have markings , that also is decoid of markings , so im warry of this one |
Posted By: DisasterDog
Date Posted: December 15 2025 at 11:50pm
| With the star over the chamber & transverse screw through the forearm, it’s been to India. It looks refinished and I can’t say if that was done in India, though they certainly scrubbed, remarked, and refurbished (and not necessarily all of those things, or in that order) plenty of these. |
Posted By: Bear43
Date Posted: December 16 2025 at 6:14am
| It has been massively polished so edges are rounded and overall it makes the rifle look odd. It is a genuine No 5, though. |
Posted By: paddyofurniture
Date Posted: December 16 2025 at 7:23am
|
I have seen a Indian reworked No4. It was completely remarked and had the screw through the forearm. |
Posted By: gilgsn
Date Posted: December 17 2025 at 12:50am
|
he!!o. I've owned two, still own the second one. It looks real to me, though the rear sight does look weirdly rounded. The lightening cuts on the barrel are hard to fake, and usually "they" don't bother since it is hidden by the forearm. Gil. ------------- check out my post-apocalyptic novel: https://www.amazon.com/dp/B0FXH75VYT |
Posted By: MarkF
Date Posted: December 17 2025 at 8:48am
|
Thanks a lot for your comments. Yes, the rifle has been refinshed, that much is clear. However, I don't know by whom or when. Since all the known features of the genuine No. 5 are present, including the “lightening” on the barrel and under the trigger (deep inside the receiver), it is unlikely to be a fake. But it's not just the absence of any model markings that gives me pause, but also the serial number on the left side of the receiver, next to the stock. It is four digits long and begins with “K.” Charles R. Stratton writes in his book about the No. 4 and No. 5 (British Enfield Rifles Vol. 2) on p. 171 in Table F-14 that only ROF Fazakerley used single letters. On p. 169 in Table F-7 (ROZ Fazakerley No. 5), however, the letter “K” is not listed. But on p. 166 in Table F-1 (BSA No. 4), the letter “K” is listed among the No. 4 rifles from BSA for 1944. Very, very strange: All hardware features prove that it is a genuine No. 5, but the serial number proves that it is a No. 4. Translated with DeepL.com (free version) |
Posted By: DisasterDog
Date Posted: December 18 2025 at 3:06pm
| Stratton is far from comprehensive, Fazakerly K-prefix No.5 would be approximately 3/1945. |
Posted By: lance
Date Posted: December 19 2025 at 1:59am
| A complete listing of ROF Fazakerley serial numbers is located on page 216 in my new book, A Collector's View: The Lee-Enfield RIfle No. 4 and No. 5, Part 1 1931-1945, along with a detailed view on all the different rear sights that were factory and later armorer installed. |