1941 Lithgow No1 MK3

[shoto2758]

This Enfield is new to me and i'm looking for alittle info,the holes behind the rear sight,are those there for a reason,or is that Bubba's work?Attachment 39465Attachment 39473Attachment 39472Attachment 39471Attachment 39470Attachment 39469Attachment 39468Attachment 39467Attachment 39466Attachment 39474

Thanks for any input.
Jack

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]

If you mean the 'holes' as in those in photo 6, then they're the recesses for the two rivets that hold the spring that clips the rear handguard to the barrel. If it ain't those, you'll have to explain a bit better!

[barbarossa]

I presume you are referring to the two holes in the lower handguard. These are the heads of the brass rivets which retain the handguard spring in place. Perfectly normal, certainly not a bubba job. Looks like you have a good clean example. You rifle has been through factory thorough repair, hence the "FTR" marking and the phosphate refinish to the metal. Original finish for the SMLE's made in 1941 was a blackish tinted rust blue. Safety spring and nosecap are of a later post 1942 pattern. Magazine cutoff slot is milled but such an appurtenance was likely never fitted when the rifle was new. Stock furniture has not ever been sanded as you can see turning marks from when originally finished--a real plus. Pretty much a simon pure rifle. All of which is meaningless but cool to know.

[shoto2758]

Yes thats the holes i was speaking of.Thanks,just wanted to make sure it wasn't an ex bubba scope job.
Thanks again.
Jack

[Homer]

Nice rifle Jack.

Just a couple points to be made in response to Barbarossa's post. This rifle doesn't have a cut-off slot and the cut-off was deleted from Lithgow production during mid 1941 around serial number B75000. I'm not sure why there is a suggestion the cut-off wasn't in fact installed into MkIII production in 1941. It certainly would have been re-parkerised at the time of the FTR but the original finish for this rifle would have been the same, and this parkerised finish came into effect at the same time as the MkIII* with the deletion off the cut-off and cut-off slot during mid 1941, approximately.

[barbarossa]

That will teach me to answer late in my day. Yep, missed the lack of machined cutoff slot in my quick look at the photos. My personal Lithgow III/1941, s/n B74659 is rust blued and has a mag cutoff (likely retrofitted) in place although I am given to understand, the cutoff was fitted to the rifle where required and was not a standard issue item for land forces. My knowledge on the finish was based strtictly upon personal observation plus an article I read previously stating Lithgow SMLE's were rust blued through 1941. So, my apologies for any bad info I may have unwittingly provided.

[5thBatt]

That will teach me to answer late in my day. Yep, missed the lack of machined cutoff slot in my quick look at the photos. My personal Lithgow III/1941, s/n B74659 is rust blued and has a mag cutoff (likely retrofitted) in place although I am given to understand, the cutoff was fitted to the rifle where required and was not a standard issue item for land forces. My knowledge on the finish was based strtictly upon personal observation plus an article I read previously stating Lithgow SMLE's were rust blued through 1941. So, my apologies for any bad info I may have unwittingly provided.

If it didn't have a cutoff fitted at the factory, it would have been marked as a III*