-
Contributing Member
Originally Posted by
Brit plumber
Its one of those things I suppose ....... How do you cost up something like this, its highly subjective and it will appeal to interior designers as well as collectors ..
Interesting to know how much it goes for in the end and I still think it would be great to see it reunited in a National collection with its twin ... in my humble opinion.
They would look stunning displayed butt to butt !
-
-
08-15-2014 10:53 AM
# ADS
Friends and Sponsors
-
The apprentice master who oversaw the project is still alive and living in Somerset. At least he was when I last saw the Lockies.....
-
-
-
Two of these guns were produced by apprentices at Enfield for the Empire Exhibition at Crystal Palace in London in 1948. Unnumbered and now residing at the Small Arms School at Warminster
Is that class workmanship - or what.........!
Last edited by Peter Laidler; 08-20-2014 at 10:16 AM.
-
The Following 2 Members Say Thank You to Peter Laidler For This Useful Post:
-
Regarding the Bren Mk3 above, here's a thing you ought to take note of if you are a Mk1 Bren fiend..... In pic 2 above, look at the flash eliminator and note that for 1" forward of the foresight block you'll see a parallel tubular part before the eliminator flares out.
This was said to add a 'strangulation' effect* to the most violent parts of the burning propellant that overtakes the projectile and therefore escapes to atmosphere before it. Nope........ I didn't understand it then and don't now either but there's more...........
The same 'strangulation' scenario was tried on the earliest Mk1 Bren barrels with the stepped cone flash eliminator. The problem there was that this portion of gas caused a ripple effect and set up distinct ribbed ridges in the stepped flash eliminators of the Mk1 gun. This is the reason that the Mk1 combination had a scraper/reamer cutter incorporated in it, to scrape these ripple rings of carbon out. If the rings weren't scraped out and the eliminator not cleaned, the gas that was escaping first, before the projectile would upset the stability of the projectile. The problem was that when the guns first went into real action, they were required to work with only cursory cleaning - and if you didn't have the combination tool, accuracy soon went out of the window. Mind you, very soon, so did any recognisable sort of reliability on the Mk1's too....... But I digress
This choked or strangulation farce was a purely British
invention and not a ZB - or anyone elses..........
Anyway, the straight flash eliminators followed on the later Mk1's and 2's but............. The clown with this wonderful theory hadn't died in the blitz so when the Mk3 idea came across his desk, he went back to his original theory and incorporated a similar dopey idea into the Mk4 barrel (the shortie barrel for the Mk3 Bren). on the grounds that it would further choke the more violent flash from the Mk3 Bren. Nobody told him that in deep green jungle, the ONLY way to hide the flash from a Bren Gun is to not shoot it!
Anyway, that's why the Mk4 barrel/Mk3 gun has a strange flash eliminator when it could have just used the well tried and trusted almost identical Mk2 type
* strangulation effect. It says this in the Mk2 lightweight/Mk3 trials papers but doesn't elaborate beyond the usual blurb.........
Another bit of useless Enfield info.........
Last edited by Peter Laidler; 08-20-2014 at 10:40 AM.
-
-
Legacy Member
Would I be correct in assuming that (After looking at the Warminster Example) that the 2 guns were meant to be butt to butt, or muzzle to muzzle to show both exposed sides? I'd just assumed they were identically sectioned.
-
-
I never thought about that but never saw the other one either. But the pair could have been made to be presented like that. Go on then chaps, marks out of 10 for the quality of the craftsmanship on the Bren in thread 13........ Good eh! Don't you wish that it was sat in your display cabinet?
-
-
I'm just a bit suprised at the total lack of any sort of enthusiasm except from Gary, for the Bren shown in thread 13. I thought that there'd be loads of enthusiastic oooooh's and aaaaah's over this Bren porn....... but sod-all! Incidentally, there is no chrome there. It's all polished, very lightly oiled bare steel
-
Thank You to Peter Laidler For This Useful Post:
-
Legacy Member
I think all this stuff is brilliant and really enjoy reading about it. Everyone here are the best sources we have.
-
-
Legacy Member
I'm just a bit suprised at the total lack of any sort of enthusiasm except from Gary, for the Bren shown in thread 13. I thought that there'd be loads of enthusiastic oooooh's and aaaaah's over this Bren porn....... but sod-all! Incidentally, there is no chrome there. It's all polished, very lightly oiled bare steel
I was getting excited at a bit of leg (bipod) Peter!..............
-
-
Maybe there's a forumer out there with a bent towards computer wizzardry could set the photos in thread 3 and 13 together/end to end. The skeletonisation isn't quite the same on each.
Anyone else considering doing such a job on a gash Bren?
-
PM
