Here is my Jungle Carbine. I think they are the most attractive bolt action military rifle ever. This one is from ROF Fazakerley. Here are some of the differences from the No. 4 made to lighten them. The hole in the bolt handle is much larger and material has been removed below the sight. The sight 'only' goes up to 800 yards while the No. 4 goes up to 1200. My No. 4 is a Mk I* which means simplified war production. You can see one of the differences in the serrated bolt release catch on the No. 5 just to the rear of the back receiver ring. The No. 4 doesn't have the catch but instead has a very shallow grove in the right receiver rail just behind the bolt head. I think it is better and easier to use on the No. 4 and was surprised they didn't use it on the 5. Here is the No. 5 with the hand guard removed to show lightening flutes machined into the receiver. This is one of the best ways to check for modified No 4s being offered as real Jungle carbines. The stock, flash hider and butt pad are relatively easy to fake but the flutes are a a pretty involved operation unless you are doing a production run. I made the seller remove the hand guard to verify when I bought this one in 1991.
Thanks for sharing Dave. What's the recoil like? If my memory serves me right, a Gurkha officer I was friendly with described them as having quite a kick.
That's a lovely gun, Dave. In order to verify its authenticity, could you let us know whether the rubber 'bumper' on the end of the stock has hardened to something approximating stone so that it's now completely useless? We had some discussion and several pictures of them here: Malaya '48+: Photos & Weapon Analysis
It did seem to kick a lot. I only fired a box of commercial hunting ammo through it. I can't remember the details but they were probably about 180 grain soft points. Accuracy was 'okay' from padded rest. Around 4 to 5 inch group at 100 yards but I think I was probably flinching a bit. There is a lot of blast out of the 18" barrel and the rubber 'bumper' is hard as a rock and has less area than the No 4. butt. Kick seemed worse than .308 and 30-06 deer rifles of similar weight and just not a joy to shoot. I didn't shoot it enough to determine if it has a wandering zero. The barrel was warming up towards the end of the 20 rounds and the group didn't seem to be growing. Didn't fiddle with the sight to center it but just tried to keep a good group.
Yes, sounds like you've got an original with its original recoil pad, all right. Maybe tape some foam rubber to it or something? If it was me I'd hate to get a brand new pad and mess up a vintage weapon even for the sake of easier shooting. Your choice, though, of course. These things were not, I think, intended to match the range or even the superior accuracy of a No. 1 or No. 4, but to give the infantry in the Far East a lighter, handier weapon which would still be effective enough at the shorter ranges prevailing in the jungle. It's a little like our M1 carbine. You need to scale back your expectations.
A comparison of the No.4 and the 'Jungle Carbine'. Short version: he's not convinced by 'savage kick' or 'wandering zero' claims. You might want to jump the intro and start at 2:35.
Here is Bloke on the Range comparing a pair of No. 5s, and also offering his thoughts on the zero controversy:
FWIW The one I fired made a mess of my shoulder and I've heard it said that the rubber butt pad hardens with the passage of time
