Canadian No.7 .22 caliber lightweight sporting rifle

[Lee Enfield]

In a Martini-related vein..

I once had a .22 target rifle built up in a BSA "Cadet" action. The barrel was substantial, to say the least.

The interesting part was that the barreled action was fitted with an equally substantial, one-piece stock.

The "bedding" was interesting in that it was the barrel that was bedded, with actual clearance (small) around the action. The lever was reshaped to curve down the front of the "thumb-hole" pistol grip.

With Eley "Match" it would produce nice, tiny groups, once you got used to the trigger.

Eventually sold it to a collector of small-bore target rifles.

Anyone seen anything else like that?

And then there are http://www.blaser-r8.com/?lng=en#home these.

Yes, when I saw the first collet locked Blaser, I asked "why the heck didn't I think of that"...sheer genius of simplicity and using existing technology in a new field.

I had a BSA CFT which was "glued in"; ie) there were no screws holding it into the stock, and the trigger guard was only attached to the stock.

[stencollector]

It is a Canadian Long Branch No.7 Mk1 .22 rimfire rifle from the first production run receiver markings, (1Lxxx).

Are you saying this number is on this receiver or on the bolt handle? Anything 1L with 3 digits would fall into the mid 45 range of serial numbers, where your receiver is marked as a 1944. As a general rule of thumb, the break point is somewhere around the 0L7000 range, although of course with Enfields you never say "always".

[breakeyp]

Skennerton lists unique serial ranges for the three groups of Canadian .22 rifles. This is in the first group and consistent with the list he posted. The serial on the socket is naturally missing because the sides of the socket were removed to fit the one piece stock.

Can't anybody just look at it and say, "that's neat--you don't see ones like that every day==someone must have put a lot of work into it to get it that way."

[Warren]

A long deceased chum of mine, an old Warrant Officer in the RCAF for many years, did numerous one piece stock conversions of the Lee Enfield, doing about one a year.
Everything he did was totally reworked, re-blued and of unmatched quality. If this one shows signs of having been refinished it might be one if his.
Lines will be square, sharp and the polishing will be of superb quality.
We are going back about 40 years here............

[stencollector]

Not when someone takes a rifle that today will easily sell for $1100 to $2500, and turns it into an oddity worth a fraction of those prices. There were not a lot of Cno7s released, and there very likely will not be any more.

Apologies if I come across a little harsh on this rifle, but the Cno7 has always been a favorite of mine, along with so many Canadians who learned to shoot on these rifles through the cadet corps.

My query on the serial number was two fold: to find out if there are highs beyond what I have traditionally seen for a 1944, as well as to help determine if the rifle was a factory release or a post factory put together. I do note that the windage screw for the rear site aligns perfectly with the corresponding mark on the body. That is a feature missed on many of the post-factory put togethers.

[Peter Laidler]

I would like to say the things Paul suggests in his thread 13 but my sentiments lay entirely with Stencollector in his first two paragraphs in thread 15.

Maybe I am as guilty as the butcher of Pauls rifle. In the 80's we would occasionally scrap UK RAF Cadet No7 rifles just so that they would get a replacement No8 rifles that were easier to mantain.

[jmoore]

Can't anybody just look at it and say, "that's neat--you don't see ones like that every day==someone must have put a lot of work into it to get it that way."

I thought I did, but it's the serious shorthand version of hitting the "thanks" button. Didn't have much to add otherwise.

Said the same the other day to the woman with the sported 1889 Belgian rifle which she inherited from her father. Very few 1889s of any sort in these parts. If the workmanship is good, then the rifle has to be considered relative to when the modifications were done. You do that sort of thing now? Whole 'nuther sentiment!

[limpetmine]

Indeed, there are those that will take a saw to one and put it in a single piece stock. I have an Envoy butchered as such.
May attempt a resto someday.

A certain faction of the target rifle crowd here were fans of the one piece stock. As far as I could find from questioning some of the suspects it came down to a belief that two piece stocks were inherently prone to flex at the joint causing inaccuracy. I suspect that at times it was a symptom of a Mauser prejudice and an emotionally-driven determination to make the Lee Enfield, whose compensation and long range accuracy they could not afford to ignore competitively, more like the rifle they preferred for its supposed mechanical superiority!

Interesting little rifle that; someone making something useful out of the surplus stuff that was once so plentiful they were at times just throwing it away.

Your comment on the Tokarev Ridolpho reminds me of the Ross MkIII stock wrist: awful in a word. Odd since the Ross sporting rifles (and the MkII rifles) had such superbly formed stocks, but with a front locking action, the amount of additional metal required to provide for a two piece stock is hard to justify, though the advantages are many: ease of maintenance, use of materials, fitting of the rifle to the soldier etc.

[Surpmil]

Indeed, there are those that will take a saw to one and put it in a single piece stock. I have an Envoy butchered as such.
May attempt a resto someday.

Ouch! I felt bad when my as new ENVOY came with a bubba'd bolt knob.