View Profile
View Forum Posts
Private Message
View Articles
Note: After you click on images to ENLARGE them, you may find they automatically size smaller in your browser's window making them harder to view. The auto sizing is your browser's way of keeping images entirely within the screen size you have set. Move your mouse pointer to the bottom centre of the pic and you will see an options panel appear. There will be a small square box next to the large X, which will have a pointer arrow sticking out of it. If it's illuminated, it means the pic you're viewing can be enlarged, so click on this box and the pic will EXPAND and open to its normal size.
"A Short Tour Of Three Humped Enfields"
These rifles are, or were, a 1929 Enfield, a 1940 Dispersal Rifle and a 1944 Ishapore MkIII*. All of them are mostly what they once were, but all three have humped bolts and nosecaps and at least one bears evidence of a scraped-off import mark. My camera won't do Macro work, so some of the evidence photos are not what they should be---the polishing marks that are very clear at 12X magnification do not show well here. C'est la vie.
All three hump-jobs share three traits .....
1. An "almost" British MOD font for letters and numbers.
2. Small circular polishing marks where old numbers were smoothed off.
3. Rebluing where removals were performed.
First up, the 1929 Enfield.
Left PIC --- Bolt handle, notice the "2" stamp is damaged.
Right PIC --- Enhanced to show circular scratches from the Dremel. Mostly visible as sections of arc to the right of the number.
(Click PIC to Enlarge)
Next, we have the nosecap.
Left PIC --- Notice the "2" has broken off the tip of the upper curve.
Right PIC --- Zoomed in to show the arcs where the polishing tool dug in around the perimeter of the boss.
(Click PIC to Enlarge)
Next we have the import marks.
Left PIC --- Same arcs where the tool was used to clean rust off the Knox Form.
Right PIC --- The killer---showing where the import mark was scraped off the side of the receiver.
(Click PIC to Enlarge)
Further notes on the '29.
When I bought this rifle, there was a letter in the box from the previous buyer Hambone requesting a refund from AFAC, the seller. (Real name and address, there, Hambone.) Further, I got an in house Gunbroker message from HB, warning me off, which I ignored. Later on, I played Devil's Advocate when HB went on a rant about AFAC and his ethical infirmities. (I am damned sorry about that now, by the way.)
I was still willing to give the rifle and AFAC the benefit of the doubt, figuring the rifle had an Indian service stint and the renumbering may have been a result of that.
In an email exchange with AFAC, he confirmed this Indian service and said he had been present at Springfield Sporters when the rifle came in. It was packed in a solid block of Cosmolene with many other rifles and a couple dead rats yadda, yadda, yadda ....... and that's when I knew he'd been humping and went looking for the scraped off import mark. Found it, too !!
At that point, I had the 1940 Dispersal and this '29 and a firm desire to never buy anything from AFAC again.
So how did I get the '44 Ishapore? At a local shop, with no special examination on my part.
Recent investigation uncovered previous ownership by GregC&R (Greg was unaware of the rifle's humping history, no harm, no foul from Greg), a Gunboards member ..... who got it from .... wait for it! ..... AFAC.
Here's the '44 Ishapore, an otherwise extra-fine WW2 rifle, which is a scarce item from Ishapore.
Top Left PIC --- The humped nosecap.
Top Right PIC --- The humped nosecap (Close-up with arcs).
Bottom Left PIC --- The humped bolt.
Bottom Right PIC --- What the Ishapore font really looks like.
I think this '44 Ishapore must have been done after the '29 because the top of the "2" is already broken off here.
(Click PIC to Enlarge)
(Click PIC to Enlarge)
Next, the 1940 Dispersal rifle---advertised as "matching" and the "only one I've seen in thirty years of collecting".
Well, AFAC uses the word "matched" these days, as well as "matching" --- non-humped rifles for the latter, I believe.
A year or so after I bought the '40 Dispersal, the "only one"---he sold another one, too, so..."only one" is obviously up for interpretation. Had to put a bit of Chapstick on the nether regions right about then.
Left PIC --- Humped bolt.
Middle PIC --- Humped nosecap.
Right PIC --- The real MOD font.
(Click PIC to Enlarge)
(Click PIC to Enlarge)
Lastly, the trigger, with a little help (read: kick in the a$$) from "jrhead75", that got this article going.
A No4 rifle advertised by AFAC as a "rare A suffix" BSA with numbers and letters from the AFAC Studio liberally applied.
(Click PIC to Enlarge)
Bought by a Forum member and returned, as it is now back up on Auction Arms.
(Aside from the numbers and letters being all wrong, he put a Maltby serial number on it.)
Why does he do it? Love? Obsessive/Compulsive Disorder? (PCSpeak for "bat$hit crazy")
Well, my three rifles are all rather scarce and if they came from India in "relic" condition, they might have been missing chunks. Maybe AFAC always wanted to be a mortician? Putting wax and pancake make-up on corpses? There certainly isn't much money to be made humping Enfields, unlike 98ks. This guy is an author and his book is good and useful, but WTF was he thinking?
As an after thought, apologies to Hambone for doing the Devil's Advocate thing. My nose don't work well and I cannot smell cold blue.
Finally, who is AFAC? Sadly to say and it pains me to type it, the seller AFAC is Col. Edwards, author of the Indian Enfield book.
These rifles are, or were, a 1929 Enfield, a 1940 Dispersal Rifle and a 1944 Ishapore MkIII*. All of them are mostly what they once were, but all three have humped bolts and nosecaps and at least one bears evidence of a scraped-off import mark. My camera won't do Macro work, so some of the evidence photos are not what they should be---the polishing marks that are very clear at 12X magnification do not show well here. C'est la vie.
All three hump-jobs share three traits .....
1. An "almost" British MOD font for letters and numbers.
2. Small circular polishing marks where old numbers were smoothed off.
3. Rebluing where removals were performed.
First up, the 1929 Enfield.
Left PIC --- Bolt handle, notice the "2" stamp is damaged.
Right PIC --- Enhanced to show circular scratches from the Dremel. Mostly visible as sections of arc to the right of the number.
(Click PIC to Enlarge)
Next, we have the nosecap.
Left PIC --- Notice the "2" has broken off the tip of the upper curve.
Right PIC --- Zoomed in to show the arcs where the polishing tool dug in around the perimeter of the boss.
(Click PIC to Enlarge)
Next we have the import marks.
Left PIC --- Same arcs where the tool was used to clean rust off the Knox Form.
Right PIC --- The killer---showing where the import mark was scraped off the side of the receiver.
(Click PIC to Enlarge)
Further notes on the '29.
When I bought this rifle, there was a letter in the box from the previous buyer Hambone requesting a refund from AFAC, the seller. (Real name and address, there, Hambone.) Further, I got an in house Gunbroker message from HB, warning me off, which I ignored. Later on, I played Devil's Advocate when HB went on a rant about AFAC and his ethical infirmities. (I am damned sorry about that now, by the way.)
I was still willing to give the rifle and AFAC the benefit of the doubt, figuring the rifle had an Indian service stint and the renumbering may have been a result of that.
In an email exchange with AFAC, he confirmed this Indian service and said he had been present at Springfield Sporters when the rifle came in. It was packed in a solid block of Cosmolene with many other rifles and a couple dead rats yadda, yadda, yadda ....... and that's when I knew he'd been humping and went looking for the scraped off import mark. Found it, too !!
At that point, I had the 1940 Dispersal and this '29 and a firm desire to never buy anything from AFAC again.
So how did I get the '44 Ishapore? At a local shop, with no special examination on my part.
Recent investigation uncovered previous ownership by GregC&R (Greg was unaware of the rifle's humping history, no harm, no foul from Greg), a Gunboards member ..... who got it from .... wait for it! ..... AFAC.
Here's the '44 Ishapore, an otherwise extra-fine WW2 rifle, which is a scarce item from Ishapore.
Top Left PIC --- The humped nosecap.
Top Right PIC --- The humped nosecap (Close-up with arcs).
Bottom Left PIC --- The humped bolt.
Bottom Right PIC --- What the Ishapore font really looks like.
I think this '44 Ishapore must have been done after the '29 because the top of the "2" is already broken off here.
(Click PIC to Enlarge)
(Click PIC to Enlarge)
Next, the 1940 Dispersal rifle---advertised as "matching" and the "only one I've seen in thirty years of collecting".
Well, AFAC uses the word "matched" these days, as well as "matching" --- non-humped rifles for the latter, I believe.
A year or so after I bought the '40 Dispersal, the "only one"---he sold another one, too, so..."only one" is obviously up for interpretation. Had to put a bit of Chapstick on the nether regions right about then.
Left PIC --- Humped bolt.
Middle PIC --- Humped nosecap.
Right PIC --- The real MOD font.
(Click PIC to Enlarge)
(Click PIC to Enlarge)
Lastly, the trigger, with a little help (read: kick in the a$$) from "jrhead75", that got this article going.
A No4 rifle advertised by AFAC as a "rare A suffix" BSA with numbers and letters from the AFAC Studio liberally applied.
(Click PIC to Enlarge)
Bought by a Forum member and returned, as it is now back up on Auction Arms.
(Aside from the numbers and letters being all wrong, he put a Maltby serial number on it.)
Why does he do it? Love? Obsessive/Compulsive Disorder? (PCSpeak for "bat$hit crazy")
Well, my three rifles are all rather scarce and if they came from India in "relic" condition, they might have been missing chunks. Maybe AFAC always wanted to be a mortician? Putting wax and pancake make-up on corpses? There certainly isn't much money to be made humping Enfields, unlike 98ks. This guy is an author and his book is good and useful, but WTF was he thinking?
As an after thought, apologies to Hambone for doing the Devil's Advocate thing. My nose don't work well and I cannot smell cold blue.
Finally, who is AFAC? Sadly to say and it pains me to type it, the seller AFAC is Col. Edwards, author of the Indian Enfield book.
Collector's Comments and Feedback:
1. Mine's a MkI** I.P., very obviously in relic condition before all the "lipstick" was applied. It immediately set off alarm bells and I very nearly sent it back, but like Krinko, I decided to give the benefit of the doubt, for the same reasons ... bad decision on my part.
Although my photography leaves room for much improvement, here are a couple of quick pics of my Mk!**I.P. that illustrate some of the issues pretty well...
In the left picture, the arrow points out some serious grind marks (also present on the back face of the bolt handle, but not as evident), plus the blotchy cold blue job. The right picture shows the font clearly for comparison to Krinko's rifles and the "Shaltby" (Shirley/Maltby) No.4. The splotchy blue job is clearly visible, the grind marks a bit less so, but there nonetheless.
(Click PIC to Enlarge)
The theme continues on the underside of the backsight leaf. ....... (Feedback by "jrhead75")
2. I have bought two firearms from him and sent them both back. The first time I gave him a positive rating on AA because he was very apologetic and even refunded my shipping costs. However, I noticed that a couple of days later it was relisted and still billed as "all matching," which it was not, this being why I sent it back. (I pointed out to AFAC exactly where it was not matching, but this was ignored.)
The second item was a cobbled together Lee-Enfield carbine with all too perfect bluing (even on the sliding surface of the bolt shank!), a sheared-off lug, a SMLE bolthead and a miscellany of other defects. I sent it back of course, though this time AFAC would not refund the shipping.
I gave him a neutral on AA because that is what you have to do if a seller refunds your price (not shipping), even if the item was sold under false pretenses. All the seller has to do to earn nothing worse than a "neutral" is to take it back.
I love how every gun is billed as "minty." I didn't know there were that many minty guns left on the planet!
Here are photos of supposedly “fine” Lee-Enfield carbine, mk. I* (no clearing rod provision). The first photo (top left) is from the AuctionArms auction. The other photos are mine. Remember, to be NRA “fine,” a gun is not permitted to have any replacement parts.
(Click PIC to Enlarge)
(Click PIC to Enlarge)
(Click PIC to Enlarge)
(Click PIC to Enlarge)
(Click PIC to Enlarge)
Submitted without further comment, except to say that the auction did say that the nosecap was an incorrect LEC mk. I nosecap (true), but that the foreend was a correct mk. I* foreend. Draw your own conclusions. ....... (Feedback by "Coggansfield")
3. Rifle humpers prey upon the emotion of denial. We want so desperately to believe that behind the carnival barked description, alleged expertise, hazy pictures, and disclaimers, is that wonderful "mint" "matching" Enfield (or K98k or M1911, etc.) that the huckster says it is. If we were thinking straight we'd know those were warning flares. By the time we get the piece we're really excited. However, particularly with the friggery that I got from AFAC, I was awakened from denial by the sharp scent of wood treatment, puke brown of pimpshine (coldblue) and sight of obviously renumbered parts. The guy must have literally cobbed up the rifles he sent to me before he boxed them. Probably made to order "oh yeah, I have a 1941 dispersal, matching and mint".
Of the three rifles I got from the guy, all of them were humped garbage and I sent them all back. After being a K98k collector for 25 years, I can usually "feel" the slime of boinkery on a rifle from about 10 feet away. IMHO, he is Enfield collecting's David Buehn (of Colt collecting (in)fame). Buehn's ads below are why he quit listing serial numbers in his ads. Frankly, I'm shocked that Enfield collectors are still getting hammered by this guy after all this time. I even remember getting hooted at by some for raising this issue here years ago so it was never raised by me here again. "Denial" and "Benefit of the Doubt" are different words for the same affliction. I think Krinko has done you all a great service. Whether people choose to learn from it or ignore it is in their hands I guess. ....... (Feedback by "Hambone")
(Click PIC to Enlarge)
Note: The opinions expressed herein or statements made in the article and collectors comments are solely those of the authors, and do not necessarily reflect the views of the Military Surplus Collectors Forums, or the ownership and moderation group of this site. MILSURPS.COM accepts no legal liability or responsibility for any claims made or opinions expressed herein.
Countries
Categories
Recent Article Comments
