Lee Enfield SN

[Seaspriter]

Thanks for the interesting insights on Wartime RRs.

While Savage was a private company, (as I understand it) one of the reasons why the US government interceded into the contract Savage had with Britain, was to guarantee payment for all production. If there was no cooperative agreement, it begs the question: "why?" Especially considering the M-1 Carbine parts exchanges between the 9 prime contractors for M-1s. According to an newspaper article I found on the internet, the Lee-Enfields shifted to using Canadian Maple for the stocks (neither beech nor birch was mentioned) due to a shortage of walnut in Canada. ( LONG BRANCH FACTORY Photo Gallery by mrclark at pbase.com ) Was there a similar shortage of walnut in the U.S. for the Savage/Stevens Enfields?

The article also highlights the large proportion of women that actually made the LB Enfields.. (26683779 photo - mrclark photos at pbase.com) (maybe this is why so many men are attracted to the LB Enfields!) Does anyone know if the Savage/Stevens Enfields were made by a largely female workforce?

I'm also interested in how the rifles got to Europe. Obviously by sea, but was it by cargo or ammunition ship? Did the ships leave from U.S. ports (such as NYC or Boston), or did they leave from Halifax?

FYI -- I'm collecting information to write a story about how the Enfields were conceived, journeyed to war, and returned into the hands of collectors to be preserved for history -- thus the questions.

Thanks to all, Robert

[Mk VII]

The shipments of Thompsons to Britain of which I have found records (which exist today because the ships were lost) mostly departed from NYC via Halifax N.S. or Sydney, Cape Breton Island or St Johns N.F. The manifests show a wide variety of general cargo - no ammunition. Some No.4 furniture was among the losses, but I would have to review my material again as I wasn't focussed on L-Es at the time.

A quick plug for our book, which has been recently published GREAT BRITAIN - THE TOMMY GUN STORY - Thompson Submachine Gun Message Board - MachineGunBoards.com Forums

[Warren]

I have documents regarding HCF (Hill Clark Francis) of No.15 chest fame and maker of chests for MG's, ammo and other assorted shipping crates that state huge quantities of "billet wood" was shipped to the UK. The HCF mill produced mainly what we call "softwood" (SPF) in Canada however HCF also did runs of hardwood from some of their southern timber limits. HCF timber limits covered almost 1/3 of north eastern Ontario and Booth Lumber had the rest.
Apparently trainloads of "billet wood" left HCF from New Liskeard Ontario on a weekly basis, all destined for the UK.

[SpikeDD]

Would a cocking piece that bore both Savage and Canadian Arsenal markings lend any assistance here?

[Seaspriter]

Would a cocking piece that bore both Savage and Canadian Arsenal markings lend any assistance here?

Yes David, especially if it were obvious the gun had not been altered or undergone Field Repair.

The Savage/Stevens discontinued production in June 1944. Long Branch continued production well into 1945. If you have a Savage/Stevens with Long Branch parts, or a 1942/3 LB with Savage parts, it would contribute to our quest for understanding the relationship between the two facilities.

Thanks, Robert

[SpikeDD]

The cocking piece lives on a 88L1520 1945 dated Longbranch that I relieved the burden of space it was taking up on one of Bran Dick's racks many years ago. It is in pristine condition apart from years of small storage dings, obviously not having seen any war service. I have since checked the 49' and 50' dated ones I have, also from Brian, with no Savage parts openly present.

[SpikeDD]

Found the rifle I was speaking of....

[Lee Enfield]

Found the rifle I was speaking of....

If that's Savage, it's a variant marking which I've never seen.

I've blown your picture up and do not believe that to be a "Savage-Stevens" marking. In fact, the machining of your cocking piece is definitely not Savage pattern.

I've attached examples of Savage markings from the MKL:

First issue is that the "S" is not squared,
Photo 132 of 165, 1942 No.4 Mk1*(T) Savage Sniper Rifle
Photo 81 of 82, 1943 Savage No.4 Mk1* (Enfield) Rifle

Second is that the "box" is not complete, nor the common pattern.
Photo 40 of 82, 1943 Savage No.4 Mk1* (Enfield) Rifle
Photo 24 of 82, 1943 Savage No.4 Mk1* (Enfield) Rifle

[Peter Laidler]

Was just going to add something similar but LE has said it all - and much more

[Badger]

Can anyone tell me about it?

Hi ....

If you want to compare your Savage Enfield against an "all correct" as originally issued one, go to the United Kingdon - Milsurp Knowledge Library (click here) and view the 82 picture photo gallery montage for the 1943 Savage No.4 Mk1* Enfield Rifle (click here).

With thanks to Advisory Panel member Lance, there's also a rare "all correct" 1942 No.4 Mk1*(T) Savage Sniper Rifle (less scope) (click here) .....

Lance's article, accompanied by a detailed 165 pic photo montage, speaks to this example as being one of approximately 3,400 Savage rifles converted by Holland and Holland and re-barreled with an Enfield 5 groove barrel, however, it was never fitted with a matching No.32 scope.

Hope this helps...

Regards,
Doug