Kia Ora Misha, Chris from NZ here. Great video. There were many JCs sold ex army surplus here. I've had a minta Early version in the 70s. The gun was very impressive to a young fella then. But I had trouble putting a deer down 1st shot after 100 yards & sold it(FOOL) Investment wise... thinking now days. But then I was thinking of the animals on the other end of it. Bought an BSA .270 light gun as well & really accurate at 400 yards. I used to shoot open sights ( still do) I have another JC nowadays. Real mix mash of stock parts cocking lever looks to be off a long Tom??? Matching bolt, & receiver but bolt has no hole? All the Knox cuts all there. Many British service stamps & out of service stamps. Real odd ball. But well used battle rifle. & its actually much more accurate than the mint one I sold 50 years ago. I think that some armorers knew how to bed these with a bit of work? I use the JC for wild pigs .perfect gun for getting through the bush & delivery of a kill one shot rifle. Kind regards Kisha Ata Marie Nga mihi Chris.

Where did 'jungle carbine' come from... In 1943, although the European war was not yet won, it became obvious that things were, at last, going in the allies' favour. However it was thought that if we were successful in Europe there would be more fighting to be done in Asia. To this end it was decided to re-equip the army with equipment more suited to that theatre. This equipment included: • New clothing • New ('44 pattern) web equipment • New pattern helmets • A new light machine gun (the BREN Mk3) and • A new rifle (the No5) This may, or may not, be the explanation, but it fits 😊

Great content as always Misha! But this one is a special topic for me. The first rifle that I ever owned was a Faz No5 MkI. It was a terrible shooter, but I didn't care 😆. Love Lee Enfields! 🤗🤗🤗

The British bolt action Enfield rifles earned a reputation for being rugged, reliable battle rifles exhibiting good, if not superior accuracy. That award went to the German Mauser 98K and the Mauser-derivative, American bolt action, M1 Springfield. The Yanks had to pay royalties to Mauser for using the Mauser bolt and cartridge clipper strips. Yet the Enfield rifles were ugly for the mass of machined steel at the breech. Take a look for yourself. There were no smooth lines like the Mauser 98K and the M1 Springfield. The rest of the Enfield rifles looked pleasing enough at the buttstock and forearm. The Mark 1, No. 5 British Jungle Carbine managed to earn the good looks award for being attractive due to its shortened, somewhat sporty-look which impressed many British soldiers. Plus the carbine was a light 7.5 pounds and much handier to carry and use. As a result, the 'wandering zero' issue seems to have been tolerated by most British soldiers, happy to carry a short, light, handy carbine as a reasonable, acceptable trade-off.

Very informative great video!!!

Great video as usual sir! Please do a full review and history on the zastava M76, thx

@misha5670

2 жыл бұрын

That's one need to get out shooting. No worries, while I did sell the M91 last year, i definitely hung onto the M76 and also PSL.

Hi misha n Jay great channel

The No5 actually didn't ever see combat in Burma despite the perpetuated myth that it did. As for the wandering zero, it had nothing to do with the design but the wood did seem to be prone to moisture changes and some soldiers still trying to sling up to shoot. The latter, with this placement of swivels, completely throws off the zero of the firearm. The same thing happens with barrel mounted front swivels.

Thin barrels and long wooden stocks that exert pressure on the barrel as the metal heats up. = ‘ wandering zero ‘.

@misha5670

2 жыл бұрын

But interestingly, when some armorers swapped for a standard No.4 receiver, they claimed the issue disappeared. Also others removed the flash hider and reported similar results. Frankly, i think it was simply too many weight savings measures and a rather ridiculous stock configuration.

@hosedragger-204

2 жыл бұрын

I've got one that was made in 1945 and I slugged the bore to see what the internal diameter was so I can cast lead bullets for it, and instead of being 0.311" or 0.312" it came out to being 0.319". The rifling just barely touched the bullets, but does so just enough for it to be accurate at 100 yards for about 10 shots before the heat causes the metal to expand and make the shots disburse quite a bit

@bobbydazzler4141

Жыл бұрын

Panama - These are fully floated receiver bedding setup. (No barrel contact at all). The only enfield to have no barrel support for bayonet use. Regular bayonet practice would have to upset the bedding - critical for this setup. A likely cause for inaccuracy problems.

Great video, Misha. I have a Jungle Carbine dated 7/45 by Fazakerley in just about excellent condition. Whatever the reason(s), mine DOES have a wandering zero.

@misha5670

2 жыл бұрын

Obviously it drank too much over the 4th.

@hosedragger-204

2 жыл бұрын

Howdy Rick, I also have one that was made in 7/45 by Fazakerly. Mine shoots decent for the first 10-20 shots, and then the groups begin expanding. I found that it has an oversized bore, and as a result, accuracy drops off as the metal expands due to heat. You might want to slug the bore and see what the inner diameter is with a set of calipers or a micrometer.

@RangerRickNRA

2 жыл бұрын

@@hosedragger-204 Thanks, I'll try that.

@hosedragger-204

2 жыл бұрын

@@RangerRickNRA no problem, let me know what it measures out to. I'm kind of curious lol

I would prefer to purchase a modern replica of the Mark 1, No. 5 Jungle Carbine. Not only would it be cheaper, I would be firing a new firearm and not a seventy-year old weapon that might be questionable. Now if I were a serious collector, I would want the vintage No. 5, but I'm not a serious collector. I would like to see a modern reproduction chambered for 7.62 x 51mm (.308) or even 7.62 x 39mm. There is a modern bolt action that seems to have been inspired by the Jungle Carbine. That is the Czech CZ 575 bolt action chambered in 7.62 x 39mm. It has a detachable, five-round magazine that lends a slight military look and feel to the carbine. It is very lightweight, probably around 6-lbs or so and that's because there's no military attachments nor need for thick, beefy wood furniture. I would have liked a clipper strip notch machined into the CZ 575.

@GeorgiaBoy1961

3 ай бұрын

Re: "I would prefer to purchase a modern replica of the Mark 1, No. 5 Jungle Carbine. Not only would it be cheaper, I would be firing a new firearm and not a seventy-year old weapon that might be questionable." Any of the scout rifles out there would be pretty close to a Lee-Enfield No. 5 Mk. 1 in concept. If you want 7.62x39 then the CZ you mentioned. If you'd prefer .308 Winchester, then any of the scout rifles by Ruger, Savage or Mossberg would do. The Ruger Gunsite Scout, based on the late Colonel Jeff Cooper's concept, has a 16.5" barrel with flash-hider and a 1:10 RHT. It can be fitted with either a scout-style forward mounted optic or a scope in the traditional position. It also has iron sights for those who want them. It is magazine-fed as well. The Ruger GSS has a recoil pad and a wood laminate stock with slight Monte Carlo cheek rise. It fits with Cooper's idea of a general purpose carbine capable of taking a 400 kg animal out to 400 yards. Suit yourself, of course, but you're missing something special in not trying out one of the vintage Lee-Enfields, not not a jungle carbine, then one of the earlier variants. One of the most-important military arms of the 20th century, and the late 19th, too. Oh, and one more thing: The Indians used Lee-Enfields as their standard service rifle well into the 1970s, and they converted it to work with 7.62x51mm NATO at their Ishapore armory, by upgrading the steel and a few other changes to allow the rifles to function with the newer and different case. They included some convrted No. 5 Mk. 1s in this process, and sometimes, if you look around, you can find an Ishapore jungle carbine for sale, chambered in .308. Cabela's Gun Library has them on occasion, and probably some other on-line sites. Since these are considerably newer than the vintage jungle carbines in .303 British, maybe they'd do the trick for you.

1/16/24. Hi Mishaco , just a question about an early / correct,matching # Number 5 mk1 Fazakerly Production date is 9/44 serial # B805. The only part that is different is the rear sight. It has a B ( BSA) stamp graduated 0 -13 yds. Was wondering if it being so early that it might have came through with a BSA 0-13. Instead of a 0-8 Sight. Thanks

Hi Misha, I have one of these that was imported by Century. Does that mean this rifle came from Malaysia, or did Century import them from other sources too?

Go to 20:00 to hear about the problems.

I really want to get my hands on an Ishapore 2A1 7.62 nato Enfield. Great video as always

@misha5670

2 жыл бұрын

Actually just had one go on GB last week.

You have the best in depth videos on practically everything! I just picked up what i thought was a faked "Jungle Carbine" just to find out after watching this and doing a little more research on markings that it is actually an indian Ishapore refurbished gun! Thank you again for the video and that tidbit about how some of these went through indian refurbishment.

The rifle No5 mk1 was originally designed for Airbourne use and was used by Para's in 1945 operation varsity .

Thanks!

Military historians are at a loss to explain why ao late in World War Two, Britain adopted a new, shorter bolt action rifle while the Soviet Union adopted the M44 bolt action carbine. The course of the global conflict had clearly pointed to the self-loading infantry rifle as the future.

@GeorgiaBoy1961

3 ай бұрын

Re: "Military historians are at a loss to explain why ao late in World War Two, Britain adopted a new, shorter bolt action rifle while the Soviet Union adopted the M44 bolt action carbine. The course of the global conflict had clearly pointed to the self-loading infantry rifle as the future." Actually, the explanation is rather simple. We here in the present have the benefit of 20-20 hindsight, so it may seem odd that it took some time for post-WW2 armies to adopt semi-automatic or select-fire SLRs (self-loading rifles). Remember, armies everywhere are rank-conscious, and the senior brass making decisions of which arms to adopt are often older men in their forties, fifties or beyond. Younger personnel may be able to see what is coming in the future, but they still have to convince older and often more-conservative superiors of their views, which isn't always easy. But in the end, since these younger personnel are junior in rank to their older superiors, they usually don't push matters too hard. These senior officers naturally tend to view the present through the lens of their past experience, even though it may not be up-to-date in every respect. Rear-area personnel, even qualified ordnance personnel, often had trouble grasping some of the cutting edge innovations developed during the war, and their effect on small arms design and usage. There are U.S. Army documents from as late as 1960 which refer to the AKM/AK47 as a submachine gun. They did not yet understand or fully-grasp the differences - technically, as well as in terms of operational use - between SMGs and assault rifles. The other factor in play was that after the war ended in 1945, the world was awash in cheap military-surplus small arms. Even outstanding new designs were a tough sell in an environment where dirt-cheap surplus weapons were available for next to nothing. The Germans and Soviets were the leaders in terms of grasping the utility of battle carbines/assault rifles. Since the Germans were defeated, their innovations were consigned to study by the allied victors post-war. The Soviets pushed ahead and eventually came up with the AKM/AK47, but it still took them time to manufacture them in sufficient numbers to equip their vast military, and then to do so. The Americans, British, French and Belgians came along more or less at their own pace individually-speaking, but since the U.S. was the leader of the NATO alliance, the U.S. Army Ordnance Dept. carried the day - which is how the British .280 cartridge and their various modern designs, bull-pups, etc. didn't make it far past the prototype stage. The Americans were by no means the only ones whose senior brass were somewhat stodgy and lagging behind the times; the British Army had them, too, which is why it took them a decade after the war to re-equip with the FN FAL or SLR. The U.S. took until the 1960s and the AR15/M-16 to finally join the ranks of nations issuing battle carbines/assault rifles, as well as SLRs in full-power cartridges and not intermediates. It is easy from today's vintage point to mock those senior officers as being old-fashioned and stodgy but their attitudes were quite pragmatic in their own way, namely, 'we won the war with weapon X and if it was good enough then, it ought to be good-enough now,' and so on. Militaries can be quite conservative in that way. What works tends to be retained, even sometimes to the detriment of new developments. And of course, miscalculations can cost lives and lost battles, too.

I’m guessing they called it “jungle” anything because it’s easy to maneuver in bush? Idk 🤷🏼‍♂️ sorta fits imo Ahhh ok Santa Fe Arms :) that’s why I watch your channel, sir

2 lbs lighter? That's no small cucumbers.

'Rifle, No. 5'...any relation to the Mambo of the same number???🙂🙂🙂

I have owned several No. 5’s, two of them were horrible shooters, even though one was in virtually new condition. The one I have kept (1945 M47/C) is one of the best shooting Lee Enfields I have ever owned. It’s in far from perfect condition. Go figure…. 🤷🏻‍♂️

Hello Mr. M If you are interested in answering my question about a rifle you posted. Maybe you can DM me. Thanks again, Matt

I have a lee einfield jungle carbine rifle bayonet which was probably brought by the British army to Indonesia

@ddaman5764

6 ай бұрын

Sell it to me

@faredkipli2286

5 ай бұрын

Sorry, I don't have any intention of selling it because its history dates back to my nation's war of independence in 1945@@ddaman5764

My No. 5 has a bore that is 0.319" diameter instead of 0.311" or 0.312" so I'm sure that has a bit to do with the wandering Zero issue. Unfortunately someone removed the bayonet lug and cut the nose off the bottom handguard so it is now flus with the top handguard. I bought a replacement flash hider that still has the bayonet lug, so all I have to do is take it to a gunsmith and have them heat the old one up to melt the solder and loosen up the countersunk pins and take it off. From there, I'm thinking of using an epoxy to install the new one since the gun won't be fired enough to get too, too hot. Just 10-50 rounds at the range on occasion at most.

Completely unrelated PLEASE PLEASE come to Klash Bash!!! It would be great to meet you.

@misha5670

2 жыл бұрын

Honestly, how? You forget my situation. Not like i can drive myself lol.

@jamesray1439

2 жыл бұрын

@@misha5670 if I have to I’ll go and get you myself. If you’re serious between you and I, we can get you down there.