long branch sniper ?

[Peter Laidler]

Fitting/re-shaping cheek rests was a common feature for No4T snipers - as was the rounding of the grip of the butt to suit their individual needs.

I wouldn't go along with instruction 89 in thread 79. I'd call that a walk into stupidity. After all, you only need to get a rifle with an illegible or indistinct master number into an Armourers shop with a boilt from another rifle in it. Yep...., put there by the Arms storeman (not usually the brightest of storemen.....) simply because the rifle number is indistinct! The Armourer follows the instruction to the letter and numbers the rifle to the bolt.

THEN a week later, the Arms check reveals TWO rifles bearing the number ABC-1234. And two of the remaining rifles have the wrong bolts......... Don't say it couldn't happen chaps. Believe me, as Tankie, Skippy and Son will shortly testify, that if anything can go tits-up with WOCS, (War Office Controlled Stores) it definately WILL, big time followed by a Board of Enquiry!

There was a set system plus the bleedin'obvious way to deal with weapons with illegible or indistinct master numbers

[paul87buick]

My latest parts .I have not had the hart to cut the sight blade of yet.Attachment 55879Still looking for a Canadian forend.

[Surpmil]

That T stamp looks totally legit .The real deal. Jmoore do you have a pic of the top of your cheek rest and the other side of it .

Ah, sorry, it's not. Not correct for a Long Branch rifle, and I just deleted the 5 or 6 lines which explained why. Nice try on someone's part, but I'll let them learn their tricks elsewhere.

My latest parts a Canadian pantographed cheekrest copy in walnut with a Holland And Holland beech cheekrest for comparison,with A Canadian rear hand guard ,both thanks to Roger Payne.and a Canadian Sling screw.

Doesn't look like a H&H cheekrest to me, looks like a C. Moon & Co. copy. The front profile of the originals was much more carefully shaped and complex.

[paul87buick]

There always doubters . six lines that could get shot down by the experts

[Surpmil]

There always doubters . six lines that could get shot down by the experts

We're not talking about religion Paul; the facts are easily demonstrated. Look at the previous posts in other threads, and the photos.

LB No4(T)s in 1944 had a different "T" stamp and they all had one AFAWK. There was no brazing used on the pads. The top of the rear pads lined up with the shoulder on the receiver etc. etc.

You may have noticed that no one has come out and said they think this is a genuine rifle and lots of questions have been raised about various points. It's probably not a coincidence it sold that cheaply on a public auction site!

I always assume people want frank and honest opinions about their items; since they're asking!

[Roger Payne]

I think the 'H&H' cheekpiece Paul shows is indeed an original wartime example not a Colin Moon job, but it has in the past been sanded to within an inch of its life......

I've seen quite a few that have ended up looking like that.

ATB.

[paul87buick]

You were saying something surpmill.in post # 14 Roger Payne states that he does not think its a fake.and there is any brazing on this rifle any where.also jmoore rifle has the same offset pads.

[Brian Dick]

My '44 Long Branch doesn't have the "T" stamp. It's sn 71L0396, legit and very well used. It sports a mismatch REL bracket numbered 71L0314 and C No.32Mk.2 scope, sn. 508-C. The original scope was 505-C as numbered on the buttstock. The "T" stamp on yours is of British origin and added during it's service at some point which was typical. My uneducated guess would be that your rifle was culled at some point, stripped of it's original pads and then pieced back together again at some point post service. Just my 2 cents.

[Cold_Zero]

My 1944 LB sniper does not have the T either. 71L0303

[Cold_Zero]

Sorry I don't recall what woodwork came with the rifle. Look under the hand guards and cheek rest. What do you see?