-
Legacy Member
Longbranch No4 Mk1* grip mark
Hi; first post and I'm at work so it'll be a quick one.
I'm looking at a 43 Long Branch No4 Mk1* and the picture he sent has "CANADA" stamped on the underside wrist. I can't find any info, or discussion, about this marking, but I have found it on an auction site
"303 British caliber., 25" barrel, S/N 36L6101. Parkerized finish, walnut stock, 1943 dated receiver. Spike bayonet. Original sling. Stock marked "CANADA" on the bottom of the wrist."
I don't suppose somebody here knows anything about it?
Attachment 121185
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. |
|
Last edited by doca; 11-04-2021 at 12:14 PM.
-
-
11-04-2021 11:44 AM
# ADS
Friends and Sponsors
-
Legacy Member
-
-
-
Legacy Member
None suggested, but I've also read that import marks were stamped on metal, not wood. I'm also a little curious as to why an importer would stamp it, if there was no requirement to do so until 1968. It couldn't have been stamped 68+ because it's missing the mandated data.
Last edited by doca; 11-04-2021 at 01:08 PM.
-
-
Advisory Panel
I've seen them stamped on both wood and metal.
-
-
-
Thank You to Brian Dick For This Useful Post:
-
Legacy Member
Yeah, that Cowan listing is the sole example I’ve found of CANADA marked on one, but that does not suggest it’s an import mark. Also, that is not the rifle in question.
@Brian Dick, it’s not British so there won’t be Brit proofs. It’s also not marked as a factory refurb. Still haven’t seen a wood stamped, US import mark. I’d like to learn, I don’t suppose you have a link?
I have seen many pre-68 US imports being stamped ENGLAND, even though they’re Long Branch. I haven’t yet seen a single US imported Long Branch marked as Canadian. Early research has suggested that is because pre-68, it was about origin of design, not manufacture. Doesn’t mean the stamper got it right and it doesn’t mean that my early research is correct either, lol. still don’t understand why a pre-68 importer would stamp it, other than boredom, and why they’d have a Canada stamp in an age where there was no firearm import controls.
I’ve requested a few more detailed pics, should be in tomorrow, but here’s what I have of the muzzle.
Attachment 121187
Last edited by doca; 11-04-2021 at 02:44 PM.
-
-
Advisory Panel
-
The Following 4 Members Say Thank You to Brian Dick For This Useful Post:
-
Legacy Member
I learned a little more since my last; specifically about contracting.
Long Branch didn’t produce regular Enfields for the British. They only made the Sten and No4 mk2 sniper for them. I never specified that it wasn’t a sniper rifle. No mount holes. Saying that, there’s should have been none for their commercial market, less theft/loss. The exception is post-war UK factory parts bin refurbs. However, there no refurb mark. This British thought only complicates the matter because if it went to the US, it would have, or still would have, been marked ENGLAND, just like the rest I’ve found. If it came back to Canada from England, it wouldn’t need a stamp and why stamp it Canada?
I’ve only seen the broad arrow and LB, nothing that looks like a British mark. Still, I’ll note if the incoming pics show something different. I’ll have to ask for a specific shot or two.
I’m actually running down a theory. Every small arms in the Canadian Armed Forces identifies itself as being Canadian issue, in one form or another. We’ve been doing that for decades. Our Rangers had been using the surplus military No4’s until they got the C19, in 2018.
If we didn’t stamp CANADA on during production to battlefield identify our Enfield’s from the other nations’, or if it wasn’t some on-again-off-again wartime production thing and, the facts (thus far) are that we’ve only been able to find two of these on the internet (2019 and 2121), there’s a sketchy sounding import mark theory and, there’s no talking about or posting images of either; I’m willing to invest some time to investigate wether or not the Ranger’s rifles we’re stamped before issue.
Of course, that’s the one place that’s very hard to find a clear and close picture of, and a recently ex-neighbor would have known; bah.
-
-
Advisory Panel
-
The Following 7 Members Say Thank You to Brian Dick For This Useful Post:
-
Legacy Member
I don’t know where your getting your information from. You complicated it with some grassy knoll Brit thing and a repetitive, yet unsubstantiated insistence of import.
You’d think that if it was a common thing, there’d be easily found pictures, documentation or references online. There isn’t. There’s just you (so far). I already asked for a link, do you have one or, any pics to show me a verified pre-68 US imported rifle with a CANADA, one piece, stamp on it? I can’t even find where US legislation specifies that a country has to be stamped, pre-68; I have found third-party reference stating that there were no requirements to mark pre-68. If you have that piece, educate me, please.
I’d also like to see your reference for No4, non-sniper, wartime contracts to the UK. I’ve found none and all my sources cite wartime production specifically excludes the standard rifle. I also haven’t seen anything other than the submachine gun and MkII sniper in company or government documentation. I’m not saying your wrong, I’m asking you to prove it.
Regardless, my theory was correct. It was a Ranger rifle.
FWIW, the very first picture I posted has the Canadian acceptance mark, but that alone proves nothing. I’ve seen a British post-war pistol with a CDN broad arrow and a British proof on a bolt head.
Making friends the quick way, here on Milsurps. ��
Last edited by doca; 11-05-2021 at 06:18 AM.
-