I shoot both - the K98 is not as accurate and kicks harder. It has a rimless case so feeding is more reliable. It is handy in a confined space The No 4 does everything it needs to do and extra rounds are always handy. ITs also more accurate and that always helps. If we could have them my choice would be an M1 Garand or and MP44 (or an L1A1)

The Lee Enfield because I am boycotting everything German since they have a "no-combat" clause in Afghanistan.

It has to be the enfield as after finishing the frogs the Germans are bound to get a tad uppity.

The Lee-Enfield, methinks (as long as it isn't a concrete filled monstrosity like we used for drill in the cadets).

Especially if you have the sword bayonet for it.

Like Splodge of Doom - I'm thinking 2 volleys and then in with the bayonet. The butt stroke with an Enfield would also be more robust.

Well, how commonly available are the ammo flavors, both on the Isle and the continent? (excuse me, flavours) If they are relatively equal the Enfield wins out, naturally. If .303 is mostly unavailable, I can't imagine the German stuff would be any more so, so Enfield is the choice, again.

If there is ZERO ammo available, I'd go with the Mauser. The French are used to seeing the Mauser and then devolving to Surrender-Monkey state. Not so with the Enfield. The Mauser may make a better club if you have nothing to feed a rifle. And I wouldn't want to damage an Enfield's stock on Gallic skulls, and care less for nigh pristine Mauser stocks.

Choose? What communist rot is this?

I've seen both on sale at the same time at big box stores like Joes and Big Five for under $200 each.

Oh ... you live(?) in England? my bad....

The Enfield has the best combat sights, twice the
ammo capacity, is faster in cycling, and has the
wrist of the stock reinforced with a steel bolt
running through it.
However, when the Boers introduced the Tommies to
the accuracy of the Mauser, the Crown almost got
rid of their SMLE's!
Each has its strong points. However, there is an
old saying that the Enfield makes the best combat
rifle, the Mauser makes the best hunting rifle, and
the Springfield the best target rifle...

Definitely the Lee Enfield.

The full wooden stock is positively gorgeous and having handled both, I'd say I find the Lee Enfield more comfortable in my hands.

Welcome back mr FM, I've missed your home reports. Looks like you've hit the spot with this one. Stout bulldogs - smle's for the froggies, Mausers for the collectors.

The Mauser was always a good hunting rifle, but the Enfield was the better battle rifle.

Lee Enfield, for me thankee sir! Unless everyone else on our side has gone metric, in which case.....

Depends on which bayonet is available for them. If it's the sword bayonet, I'll take the SMLE, if the SMLE has a spike bayonet, I'll go with the Mauser.
Part of me is concerned about the two-piece stock on the SMLE for a butt stroke, but considering that my own bayonet drill was with an M16A2, what the hell...

gotta be the Enfield, learned on one in Air Cadets, got one in the rack beside the bed with 10 rds ready to go. 60+ years old and still does the job if I do my part.

now if only I could find the sword bayo for less than an Alaskan politician's bribes.

Enfield No 4 for me. It cycles faster than any other bolt rifle, ever. I've got a Mauser action on one rifle and it doesn't compare to my No 4 for smoothness.

The legendary accuracy of the Boers didn't come from their rifles - it came from using them - frequenctly. The Enlishman had a good post on that topic the other day.

I have both.

The sights on the No.4 are infinitely better than those of the K98; the action is smoother and faster; and the No.4's mag capacity gives it the final knockout blow. The only bad thing about the No.4 is that silly and pointless spike bayonet (compared to the SMLE's splendid 18" sword type), where the 10" Mauser bayonet is slightly better. Caliber (7.7mm and 7.9mm) is a moot issue, as noted.

Now, if the choice were between a SMLE and a Gew98, the choice would be a little more difficult...

Gentlemen, gentlemen.... please!

I think this proves what some of us have known for years; Guns are like WOMEN.

Find one that you like, that does what you want, that you are comfortable with, and stick with it.

By all means, have two if you like.

Have more if you can afford them, but please don't try to convince another guy that yours is better than his because it will only end in tears...

The point about the Boers is well taken, and I would ask you to pause for 60 seconds and remember Sgt. Snoxall.

Its not what you've GOT; its what you can DO with it!

Lee-Enfield, hands down. 10 rd capacity, lovely bayonet, and besides, I have 5 of them already. (Dated 1916-1945). With the sword bayonet, it's damn near as tall as I am.

No. 4, no doubt about it. I also have a No. 1 Mk III, but I do love the sights on the No. 4.

I do take issue with some of the history mentioned here. The SMLE was introduced in 1904, so it is doubtful it saw use in either of the Boer Wars. It was likely that technical problems with new propellants provided the impetus for the switch to the newer short rifles. The 215 grain jacketed bullet was an effective killer, but didn't have a particularly "flat" trajectory. In 1910, the 215 jacketed bullet was dropped in favor of the 174-grain Mark VII--which we all know and love.

The Boers met the Lee Metfords and the Long Lee, both predecessors of the SMLE, the Metford had shallow groove Metford style rifling for lead projectiles and black poweder, the Enfield was the identical rifle with Enfield pattern rifling for copper jacketed smokeless powder.
Both the Metford and Enfields came in two flavours, the Long for infantrymen and the Carbine for the cavalry.
Then the SMLE came along and replaced both the long and the carbine with an intermediate length rifle.

I have an 1898 Metford action rebarreled in 1903 with an enfield barrel which I am restoring. I need to source some wood next, having collected a trigger and guard for it.

The spike bayonet (MkII and MkIII) certainly looks silly on the No 4.

However the original Mk1 was cruciform in cross section and it certainly has some elegance.

The No7 and No 9 are more like sword bayonets, but somewhat shorter than the SMLE's.

The Kar98K! Because it is handier in close combat, due to it's shortness. Acuraccy isn't heavily affected by the reduced length, and with a bolt action rifle, 5 or ten rounds difference does not matter. You have to load the enfield with two stripper clips anyways. (Could do whole mags but that would be silly) It has been my experience that German engineering and quality is ussually better than non-German designs. The workmanship is better, and if I'm to crack a frenchman over the head, I want a single-piece stock.

As usual baised opinions it seems, are you all members or the LERA club ?
They are both equally great rifles, id take either into battle.
Down to opinion, the no4 is not "more" accurate than the K98.
Also about the usual 10 rounds jib jab, google "20 round trench magazine" and you will see that a 20 round capacity was around for use with the german rifles, in fact I have one for my Gew98 and K98's, the germans were not stupid and chose thought that round capacity wasn't the priority.

Yes the Lee bolt is better for rapid fire, cant argue with that.
The LE rear stock can be changed to suit the shooter, yet again annot argue with that.

The mauser bolt (1898 design) which is still used today unlike the lee bolt, was so good that was copied by virtually all nations and also rendered the near enough SMLE obsolete so the Brits asked the U.S to make a rifle that is LIKE THE MAUSER(hence production of the P14 and P17 which was a modified mauser system)

The 7.92x57 cartridge is still being used today (Yugoslavia)And a much more powerful round.

Both are good in their own way, those who think no4 is more accurate need to shoot a K98 again, I would say they are equal.

Gonna have to argue with you on that one Dave, the Enfield is stll in use worldwide as a hunting, sporting, and yea, even a battle rifle. Over a hundred years since they're first made ad they're still in the thick of it. Just ask the Tamil Tigers and Tibetan seperatists, and one hears tht a few mk.IIIs are even being lifted off the dead by the lads in Khyber...

K98 is probably the finer of the two, but it doesnt compare to the SMLE in all round ruggedness. You can drag an Enfield through mud, sand and rain and will fire every time in any environment. It can be difficult to get the same kind of long range accuracy as the Mauser design, but is possible with a bit of work (Annual Bisley shoot comes to mind here). I wont elaborate any further on the advantages of the SMLE as previous posters have already covered more or less everything, but I'll add that there is no practical differences in the power of the rounds. Differences observed are almost always down to maufacturing quality. The only real mystery is why the .303 round is rimmed, since there wasno real problem getting rimless cartriges to work even then.

On a side note, if Britain had actually adopted the P14/17 before the war we would probably have lost. The P14 had a cock-on-closing mauser type bolt and was designed with colonial duties in mind, rather than than total war against a superior opponent.