No 5 Mk 1, 1945 Fazakerley - stencil paint markings question

[Duck750]

I just picked up my first Enfield, a "Jungle Carbine", March 1945 Fazakerley. Looks to be in pretty good shape for a 75-year-old rifle - bolt, wood, barrel, and receiver are matching, country-of-origin stamp on the left wrist, bore looks great, everything looks to be where & what it should be. I took it partially apart *carefully* to inspect & gently clean things; gentle surface wiping with Ballistol, a little bit of artist's linseed oil rub on the wood, a tiny smear of grease here and there where recommended.

So what's piquing me is the removed lettering on the stock... On the right side is pretty clearly the remains of a stenciled "S", but on the left is something more that's been more heavily removed.

I took a look at it under a black light bulb and with a blue laser pointer to see if anything more was visible... My best guess is something like:

RAP
9 / 36

I have no clue what might have been painted there. I've read the threads about "BLR" and "ZF" and I've seen pictures of unremoved stencils that look like dates the rifle was removed from service. The receiver serial has been scratched at, but the scratching looks half-hearted, like someone dragged once or twice through the numbers with the tip of a nail or a pointed file.

Does anybody have any notions about what the markings might have been?

Attachment 110764Attachment 110765Attachment 110766Attachment 110767

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.

[Alan de Enfield]

It most certainly is not the year as No5's weren't even a dream in the designers eye in '36.

It is most like likely the Regiment and Battalion it was issued to - just as an example (because the letters fit) it could be

Royal Artillery Police
3rd Battalion
36th Regiment

I have looked down my (incomplete) list of battalion codes and cannot see an 'RAP' but it could be interesting to do some research and add to its history.

Could the S be a 5 ?
In which case it could be the rack-number in the armoury.

[GeeRam]

So what's piquing me is the removed lettering on the stock... On the right side is pretty clearly the remains of a stenciled "S", but on the left is something more that's been more heavily removed.

I took a look at it under a black light bulb and with a blue laser pointer to see if anything more was visible... My best guess is something like:

RAP
9 / 36

I have no clue what might have been painted there.

Its likely some sort of rack number or storage number from its later service after being handed over to a former colonial police force or armed service, as many No.5's were in the late 50's and through the 1960's.
The chances of working out what it was is remote.

Here's the marking on the side of my No.5 butt hard stamped in, and likely for a similar reason, what though is anyone's guess!

[oldfoneguy]

I also have a 3/45 Faz with no such markings on it. What does strike me is that yours has a cap on the fore end and mine does not. Could it be that No5's sent to tropical climates had the end caps retrofitted or the fore ends replaced by the individual countries own armories?
If only they could speak! How much different a life did these 2 carbines have made at the same factory in the same month.

[Gil Boyd]

I'm going to put my 50 pence worth into the pop. I did have a NO5 in the past with similar numbering and it was rifles numbered by the Kings Royal Rifles Corps, who much late became part of the The Rifles, as the Green Jackets and others disbanded.
If you contact them on this link: The Rifles Museum The Regimental Museum of The Rifles explain the situation, I am confident they have a number of their rifles marked like that. Let us know how you get on, as the Kings Rifles were a very famous Regiment WW2+.

Added:
Just as an aside if you look at page 38 of this document on the Kings Royal Rifles, you will see mention to the unit who most probably marked their No5's in this way:

https://www.army.mod.uk/media/6558/b...-emergency.pdf

[Alan de Enfield]

I also have a 3/45 Faz with no such markings on it. What does strike me is that yours has a cap on the fore end and mine does not. Could it be that No5's sent to tropical climates had the end caps retrofitted or the fore ends replaced by the individual countries own armories?
If only they could speak! How much different a life did these 2 carbines have made at the same factory in the same month.

A post by Peter Laidler on the old Jouster forum in 2008


No 5 Capped Forends

It was pointed out to me that originally, the fore-ends were left OPEN for the tropics (Malaya etc) but would be closed off for temperate climes. This didn't work in practice because we saw hundreds of 'capped' fore-ends in service there. And as sure as night follows day, they'd rot out underneath so, if the fore-end was still sound, we simply removed them and make good the woodwork by rounding off. And once they'd been rounded off, you couldn't tell whether they were originally 'capped' or not. This didn't happen to the No4 of course because the fore-end caps were open at the top while the No5's were enclosed if I remember correctly.

DO NOT varnish the woodwork as it does indeed seal in the moisture. Just leave it open and well oiled with linseed. Even the jungle couldn't defeat a well linseeded fore-end (well, it did occasionally, but after many years.....) My dad always said that a polish with French polish or button polish did allow the wood to breath if you wanted a bit of a shine or even good beeswax furniture polish. Anything that leaves the pores clear

One further point was that most of the big armouries had the No5 rifles muzzle down in the racks to prevent the oil attacking the old rubber butt pads. Later ones seem to fare better as they had a high neoprene (?) content. I suppose being muzzle down didn't help when the wet fore-end was draining down into the cap

Well, it's rambled on a bit but hope it's answered the Q.

[Duck750]

It might also be “RMP 9/36”, but traces are faint so it’s hard to tell. It has wear in expected places - the paint is worn on the barrel ahead of the cap, and I found traces of grease exactly where recommended - on the metal at the stock “waterline” and at major mechanical meetings, but other than that, very clean. The rubber buttpad has a twinge of give too, it’s not a rock. The whole gun looks to have been lightly used and stored well. Not any time in the Malay peninsular jungle, from the looks of it!

[Havenot]

I looked at the stock markings on my No.5 Mk.I....maybe a bit more legible on the left side of my stock but not all that legible....could be 'A 41' painted in what looks to me like a white grease pencil.

The left side has a stamped 207 in the sling groove with the numbers white filled