-
Legacy Member
Longbranch No.4 Mk1*
Hello. First post here. Thought I'd share some photos of the Enfield I acquired recently. It's not in the greatest of condition, but the bore is good, and it's quite accurate. The buttstock wood appears to be beech, while the forestock and handguards are walnut. The cocking piece is unlike most others I have seen. Whats the story on that? Very interesting site you have here.
Thanks.
Attachment 43250Attachment 43251Attachment 43252Attachment 43248Attachment 43249
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. |
|
-
Thank You to Littlejohn For This Useful Post:
-
05-18-2013 08:40 PM
# ADS
Friends and Sponsors
-
Legacy Member
Early 1942. 1st variation cocking piece found on 1941 and early 42"s. Is the sight marked "LB". If so you have quite the find. Ron(Canada
)
-
Thank You to rgg_7 For This Useful Post:
-
-
Contributing Member
That is an interesting one.......and I don't normally give No.4's a second glance.
-
Thank You to muffett.2008 For This Useful Post:
-
Legacy Member

Originally Posted by
rgg_7
Early 1942. 1st variation cocking piece found on 1941 and early 42"s. Is the sight marked "LB". If so you have quite the find. Ron(
Canada
)
Thanks for the information on the cocking piece. Here are the rear sight markings.
Attachment 43253Attachment 43254
-
-
Legacy Member
That looks like a ROF Poole marking?
-
-
Legacy Member
It most likely had a mk2 sight and someone changed it. Wasn't Poole post war?
-
-
Legacy Member

Originally Posted by
gsimmons
Wasn't Poole post war?
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk 2
I think it opened in the early '40s but I'm not sure what they did at that time - maybe making sights was one of their things then? They seemed more prominent after the war when they started making bayonets - No.5's, No.7's & No.9's which is maybe why they are more often associated with post war production?
-
-
Legacy Member
I just had a look at the Knowledge Library
at the Pakistani no4 its rear sight is a p in circle so I would say Pakistani ordnance factory .A seen them with just a p no circle,Poole or Pakistani I don't know ?
-
-
Legacy Member

Originally Posted by
paul87buick
I just had a look at the
Knowledge Library
at the Pakistani no4 its rear sight is a p in circle so I would say Pakistani ordnance factory .A seen them with just a p no circle,Poole or Pakistani I don't know ?
This one is definitely a Poole marking - the F3B marking just above the circle P, that's one of the inspection marks that is found on Poole made bayonets.
-
Thank You to Time Bandit For This Useful Post:
-
Advisory Panel
That is a very interesting rifle, and as your probably know, a very early one for Long Branch: first 30,000 made.
The alignment of the number stamps looks like it was done by machine, but it wasn't.
If you could post a few photos of the muzzle area and other side of the rifle and receiver, we might be able to tell you a bit more.
It would probably have had the two position peep sight (300/600) as production of the MkI backsight fell behind production of rifles fairly early on.
Looks from this distance like it was probably restocked in UK
service, and painted, so your call whether to leave it "as found" or "restore".
Two groove barrel or five groove?
Last edited by Surpmil; 05-27-2013 at 10:00 PM.
“There are invisible rulers who control the destinies of millions. It is not generally realized to what extent the words and actions of our most influential public men are dictated by shrewd persons operating behind the scenes.”
Edward Bernays, 1928
Much changes, much remains the same. 
-
Thank You to Surpmil For This Useful Post: