Thread: SMLE cocking piece dates?
Retrieved: 06/05/2014

Can anyone tell me what date the cocking piece at the rear of the bolt on the SMLE rifle was changed from the "teardrop" shape to the squared shape with grooves?

Garron
21 May 2008

I think 1916,

Gaz
21 May 2008

Yes, I think it was 1916, but I think some makers ran on into 1917 as stocks ran down.

TonyE
21 May 2008

The flat grooved cocking piece for the SMLE was officially introduced on 5th August 1916, but that is actually not very helpful. It was also authorised as a replacement for earlier cocking pieces and there was nothing to stop a unit armourer replacing a flat cocking piece with one of the older type if he had one spare.

Generally though you will find the flat type on Mark III*s and the older type on Mark IIIs.

Andy A
21 May 2008

I have a 1917 Mk 111* deactivated, with a 'teardrop' as you call it cocking piece and an 1918 Mk111* with a flat version. The 1917 has all the numbers on it the same so I assume it is correct for the rifle. The bolt number is all that's different for the 1918 rifle.

The 1918 rifle is about a half inch shorter than the 1917 one, I assume its because it has a shorter stock.

Cold Steel
21 May 2008

Thanks again Tony, that answers my question nicely. I have a 1915 Mk III which has a flat cocking piece. I am intending to change it back to the older style cocking piece and just wanted to get my dates right.

4thGordons
21 May 2008

I have a small collection of Enfields and as Tony indicates while the official introductory date is clear, what stocks were on hand and which was replaced by what by armourers or during subsequent FTRs means that there is no definitive "correct" configuration for a rifle in service (apart from: a rifle produced pre Aug 1916 would not have had a flat piece originally).

If it is assumed that the simpler to produce slab sided cocking piece became the most produced (as simpler and cheaper) once it had been approved, then in general one might expect later rifles to be fitted with predominantly flat/slab sided cocking pieces. It would appear however, from my anecdotal examination of the few 1920s and 30s dated rifles I have seen, production returned to using the round cocking piece during the interwar period. All the WWII dispersal rifles I have seen have slab sided pieces.

There are in fact four patterns of cocking piece:

1) the "round" button shaped one.

2) the 3-grooved slab sided one (Stratton notes that these "were also produced during WWII with alphanumeric production codes rather than the standard factory inspection stamps")

3) one produced at Ishapore (India) and Lithgow (Australia) during WWII which is very similar to the grooved (No.2) but "chunkier" in outline and more rounded.

4) a slab sided 1-groove (.5") version which was made in Ishapore for the 7.62mm 2A/2A1 rifles. (I have seen these installed on much earlier rifles)

Functionally I believe these are all interchangeable so in service whatever was on hand would have been utilised.

Old Tom
22 May 2008

Re Andy's point about length of stock. As far as I recall the No.4 was available with three lengths of stock to suit soldiers of different size. However my recollection does not include ever being measured for a rifle. I expect it was the same in the Great War.

59165
22 May 2008

Tom, on a No.4, I could see the point of longer/shorter stocks due to the rear sight. I saw a problem with rear sights in 1983 with the SLRs we used then.

Same as a No.4, the sight is right up against the firer's eye and if the stock was too short, you got 'red eye'.

Someone called it 'snipers eye' but that sort of defeats the object.

With the rear sight being so far from the shooter's eye, I can't see the need for varied stock lengths, unless it was just for comfort, like bantam against bloke of 6'2" unless, of course, the No.3 was fitted with say a Parker Hale or a Cooey on a Ross.

4thGordons
22 May 2008

SMLE No.1 MkIII buttstocks were issued in 3 lengths, "Short" (-1/2 inch), "Normal", and "Long" (+1/2 inch).

Normal length buttstocks are usually unmarked but Long and Short are stamped L and S respectively.

I believe that in 1918 a "Bantam" stock (marked B and a full 1 inch shorter than standard) was approved but I have never actually seen one of these. Perhaps TonyE can confirm this?

I have also seen buttstocks that appear to have been very skillfully lengthened by adding an extra inch or so of wood. Stratton suggests these were field modifications to make up for a shortage of "L" buttsocks.

In addition to the variation in length, there are several variations in how the lightening and storage holes (internal) were arranged and also in basic contour (some wartime buttstocks are heavier and thicker - especially noticeable where they overhang the brass butt-plate). These variations were to do with simplified production.