I have noticed that alot of times in similar condition The No4 Mk I rifles will bring alot more money than the GRI No1 M III rifles. I myself like the looks of the No1 with the flush barrel. I have two of them. One was a all number matching wire wrap I got from BDL and the other was also a wire wrap with a stock in rought shape that I found on Gunbroker for $165 bucks that also is all number matching. Is there any reason why the No 4 rifles command a higher price or is it just more people like the looks of the No4 better?
I am intrested in everyone elses opinion.
Having owned examples of both since the early 60's, I find both exciting to shoot and remarkably easy to maintain. Personally, I think the difference may be that the No. 4 rifles were more difficult to get years ago and the price differences are still noticeable as Mk III's are often available in larger number and not such great shape.
My No1 Mk3 is a GRI also and I think in 5 years as the No4 (the most common one being sold now) start to crowd the market and younger people start collecting prices will rise for the No1 Mk3 as its going to be the earlier rifle that will be most searched for but a No4 will most likely be their 1st Enfield. Then they will get Enfielditis, and start looking for the earlier rifles which shop owners will raise the price on. I would give up a longbranch No4 way before my No1 with tons of history, know what I mean? They might have been made the same year but the No1 is the old design, and more collectable in my opinion. I also prefer the No1 with its flush barrel.