Canadian Military No 4 Mk 2 ??

I recently learned that the Canadian government has been buying up lots of Lee Enfield rifles on the world market for the Rangers. I heard they bought Long Branch rifles and No 4 Mk 2 rifles.

I just bought this faux T sniper rifle. It is a No 4 Mk 2. I was expecting the normal Brit wood but lo and behold, C Broad Arrows on the wood, Long Branch wood, a very professional job of converting a LB forend to No 4 Mk 2 fitment...nice bedding job too. I wonder who did this? Could it have been a military armourer? The rear bracket is off the forend and a cross screw is installed as per No 4 Mk 2. The guy I bought it from doesn't know any details, he just installed the sniper scope pads. Another Cantom bubba mystery...kind of like Monster Chiller Horror Theatre... :eek: :) ;)

https://www.milsurps.com/images/imported/deleted.gif
https://www.milsurps.com/images/imported/deleted.gif
https://www.milsurps.com/images/imported/deleted.gif
https://www.milsurps.com/images/imported/deleted.gif
https://www.milsurps.com/images/imported/deleted.gif
https://www.milsurps.com/images/imported/deleted.gif
https://www.milsurps.com/images/imported/deleted.gif
https://www.milsurps.com/images/imported/deleted.gif
https://www.milsurps.com/images/imported/deleted.gif
https://www.milsurps.com/images/imported/deleted.gif
https://www.milsurps.com/images/imported/deleted.gif

As I understand it, when the supply of LB rifles suddenly dried up, and after the EALs were issued, the first surplus ones were purchased commercially. LBs were the first choice. Subsequently, others were acquired, including Mk. 2s. I doubt that this rifle has anything to do with Ranger acquisitions.
LB wood could have been used in 1/3 conversions, in the UK, but the conversion on this one isn't done in the arsenal fashion.
The dowels in the recoil seats,added pad under the barrel breech, the centre bedding, and the non-standard conversion to Mk. 2 (or 1/3) pattern suggests that a LB Mk. I* forend was used to make up a range rifle on a UK Mk. II barrelled action. Who knows about the C/l\ mark on the beech buttstock, with non Canadian origin brass buttplate.
I think that the rifle is a made up shooter, a composite specimen, and therefore a decent candidate for a faux sniper. It should shoot just fine.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by tiriaq

As I understand it, when the supply of LB rifles suddenly dried up, and after the EALs were issued, the first surplus ones were purchased commercially. LBs were the first choice. Subsequently, others were acquired, including Mk. 2s. I doubt that this rifle has anything to do with Ranger acquisitions.
LB wood could have been used in 1/3 conversions, in the UK, but the conversion on this one isn't done in the arsenal fashion.
The dowels in the recoil seats,added pad under the barrel breech, the centre bedding, and the non-standard conversion to Mk. 2 (or 1/3) pattern suggests that a LB Mk. I* forend was used to make up a range rifle on a UK Mk. II barrelled action. Who knows about the C/l\ mark on the beech buttstock, with non Canadian origin brass buttplate.
I think that the rifle is a made up shooter, a composite specimen, and therefore a decent candidate for a faux sniper. It should shoot just fine.

---

The stock set is already installed on my 42 Long Branch. Tonight my wife will install (that's the plan anyway) an AIA teak cheekrest on the buttstock which matches the colour of the butt quite closely...
I wonder why they bothered doing all that work to fit a No 4 Mk I forend to a No 4 Mk 2 rifle? Why not just use the right forend? That's what makes me wonder if our army wanted Canadian furniture on a Brit rifle. They even filled in the king screw bushing hole so the screw actually serves as the bushing.

Are there any C/l\ marks on the barrelled action? I suspect that someone had the furniture, had the barrelled action, and put them together.

Put together by someone, actually MKII wood was quite rare at one time and MKI common. Today its the other way around, new MKII wood is about all that is available at the different US parts suppliers.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by tiriaq

Are there any C/l\ marks on the barrelled action? I suspect that someone had the furniture, had the barrelled action, and put them together.

---

I don't think so. I'll have another look but it would have jumped right out at me if there was.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by tiriaq

Are there any C/l\ marks on the barrelled action? I suspect that someone had the furniture, had the barrelled action, and put them together.

---

There is no C/|\ on the action, so I suppose that confirms it wasn't Canadian military. There is a Broad Arrow though.
One thing I noticed is the front sight base has the Long Branch style screw for adjusting the front sight...did No 4 Mk 2's use that system? I thought it was only our rifles that had that and the Brits always used the tool to move the sight l&r tight in the dovetail. Possibly the same person who built this up swapped that as well.

The lack of the C broadarrow doesn't mean much on a postwar production rifle. The C broadarrow was officially discontinued in 47, and while it still showed up to a lessor degree until almost the mid 50s, lack of it does not mean much.
Even so, my moneys on a mixmaster.

From what I recall, the first no4mk2s were purchased around the 1999 timeframe for Cdn service. If so, they were not subject to sale anyway.