Mystery Marking (WLH/10/56)

[RJL2016]

Hi...I just purchased a 1943 Maltby No.4 mk1. I've really enjoyed investigating the markings and sort of sad that it's coming to an end. I'll post some pictures and would appreciate any comments or advice you offer. I have a few questions. First, I can't find an explanation for WLH/10/56 that appears to be stenciled on the butt. I'm wondering if it's history worth preserving or maybe I should attempt to repair it (any suggestions on how to repair?).

The wood looks like a walnut grain to me .... what do you think? Were they still using walnut in 1943?

There appears to be a wood patch near the butt plate ... any ideas on how that would be damaged in the first place?

I can't find where this rifle was ever subjected to an FTR (can you?)

I also see a ZF engraved in the wood. I found a list of armorers marks that says that this is a symbol for a rifle that can not be repaired locally. I'm not sure what that means since the serial numbers match and are even engraved in the wood.

Thanks for any response.
Bob

Information

Warning: This is a relatively older thread This discussion is older than 360 days. Some information contained in it may no longer be current.

[Peter Laidler]

You've told all these marks but shown us nothing or relatively nothing in relation to the marks and questions about them in the photos! As for the wood, it looks like beech that's been stained brown in a stain bath that we used to have bubbling away in a corner of the workshop

But ZF stamped in the wood is exactly what you have said. It is the end of the line - and life - of your rifle.

[RJL2016]

sorry I failed to upload the most important picture. Here it is showing the marking.
-Bob

[Peter Laidler]

Those marks originate from 18 Commanmd Workshop at Bovington in Dorset. September 1956. And that's the distinct ZF mark that you don't ever want to see. I'd start reading some of the old threads. Oh, and incidentally....., contrary to what some dealers might tell you and want you to believe, this ZF does NOT indicate Zimbabwe Forces!

[Enfield Novice]

Peter, I have followed the various posts about the DP and ZF Marked rifles over the last few months and read some of the earlier threads. Thank goodness the knowledge is being passed on so that unwary buyers can protect themselves. The question that pops into my mind is how does a rifle marked ZF in England in 1956 end up in the USA in what appears to be it's original state?. Now the DP I can understand and all the brightly colored paint marks. Also the drilling and cutting of receivers. If the next stop for a DP was typically for cadets etc then what was supposed to be the next stop for a ZF. Kind of makes you stop and think... How did potentially lethal (to the shooter) rifles get surplussed by the army without being disabled? Did they mark ZF in more than just one place? Of course it's many years ago and who knows how many hands the OPs rifle has passed through. Well I guess I am thinking too hard but it will make me redouble my efforts to be very careful when I look at potential purchases. By the way when did the DP and ZF Marking practice start? Thanks again for all your info and contributions. They certainly help all of us.

[Beerhunter]

How did potentially lethal (to the shooter) rifles get surplussed by the army without being disabled?

Simples! The British Government is exempt from the Gun Barrel Proof Act and therefore relies on the private sector (which is NOT exempt) to have military surplus firearms Proofed before onward sale. This has happened in the case of your rifle as is evidenced by the London Proof marks on it. And, so in this case the system has worked and the ZF mark is trumped by the civilian GP (Gunmakers Proof).

[jmoore]

And, so in this case the system has worked and the ZF mark is trumped by the civilian GP (Gunmakers Proof).

There's logic for you! The rifle may not have been fit for continued military use, but was't generally dangerous at the time of it's sale in this case.

[Thunderbox]

Its back to that old circular debate, isn't it?


Does the fact that a rifle exceeds military gauging limits in some way actually render it "dangerous" to fire, or indeed unusable for a long further life?


What happens if you go on shooting a ZF? Well, apparently nothing really, based on the fact that that there are a lot out there and no-one has reported an incident. IIRC even in the list of "Enfield broken parts" compiled here, there is no incident linked to a ZF rifle - or even a DP rifle for that matter.


I think at least part of the conundrum is due to the nature of military gauging limits: they are intended for the maintenance of a pool of weapons that are "war ready" - i.e. with a significant amount of service life left, or that can be kept going by simple parts replacement at unit level. Perhaps the design authority added a margin or error?


You have to take some things with a pinch of salt when it comes to the military. I am reminded of decades of chemical warfare training given to me, and the repeated drill to discard any items outside their printed shelf-life date "otherwise you have no protection". Come the day of an actual war in 2003 with a chemical weapons threat, we discover that UK government hasn't actually bothered to buy any chemical warfare supplies since the 1980s. No problem: the chain of command simply sends out an instruction: "ignore the out-of-date dates; everything is officially in-date"....

[Peter Laidler]

Mmmmmmmmmm. Not sure about that argument TBox because we KNOW of at least one serious accident that I have repeated here several times. The out-of-date argument isn't really comparing like with like. It's really a case of you pays your money and takes your chance if you ask me.

Look at it like this. A rifle condemned to ZF, CAST or DP status is a bit like my old but soooooooooo reliable, trustworthy, 178,000mile good friend of a VW 16v GTi Polo. IT IS AT THE END OF ITS SERVICEABLE LIFE

[RobD]

Thunderbox, I hear you about out-of-date being brushed aside when expediency demands - here's my tale - when HM Govt wanted Smallpox Experts just before Gulf War II, I received a dose of smallpox vaccine dated from the 1950s. Got paid £££ official "danger money" for receiving it.