Marking on a No.5 Mk 1

Several years ago I bought a non-import marked No. 5 Mk1 from a dealer for $30. He said it was only good for parts and was rusted out. The "rusted out" gun proved to be in very good shape once the light surface rust was removed with steel wool and oil. The only problem was that I had to drift the front sight all the way over to the left in order to get it to hit center target. It's a Fazackerley with a serial number of AA5851 and a 1947 date. There is a marking on the wood underneath the wrist that could either be someones initials and pants size or a base workshop indication. Which one?

R
BW
40

Pattern14

It's definately the old REME Workshop markings of 40 Base Workshop at Rowcroft lines in Singapore. Are you sure that the letter R isn't a S? If it is a R, then it's REBUILD or REBUILT. Later, these ,arks were moved to the left side at the rear of the butt

Next question...........

It is most certainly an R. Any idea who would have been using these in 1947? Someone once told me that the No. 5 was discontinued in 1947- if so, this could have been one of the last. BTW, my mind must have been wandering off because the serial number is AA5940 not AA5851.

Thanks Peter

Peter, A large number of No.5s remained in Malaysia and Singapore following WWII in government and police service.

Brad

Okay Peter, so R indicates rebuild.

You mention S--so what does it indicate? best, p.

Thousands upon thousands of No5 rifles remained in Ordnance stores in Singapore and Malaya up until I left there in December 1969. We overhauled many thousands of these and No4's and everything else in huge Crown Agents programmes The S on an ex Malaya rifle, when found with the BW or 40 mark indicates Singapore. So you'd have BW-S or 40BW-S and so on. If you have that, you know it's been there, done it, seen the film and got the tee shirt

Many years ago I passed up an Argentine Carbine that had a bore so far off center at the muzzle that it was clearly visible, the crown had been turned on center. Near as I can figure the barrel was a replacement made from a cut down long rifle barrel. Mauser bores are known to wander a bit.

Since at one point it was found that perfect straightness of the last six inches of bore governed the rifles accuracy potential, and for a time at least straightening of bores was limited to the last six inches to speed wartime production, could this rebuilt No.5 have been fitted with a cutdown No.4 barrel?
That might explain why it would shoot so far to one side. If the original bore wandered a bit that is.

If cutdown No.4 barrels that weren't straightened full length were ever used that could contribute to Wandering Zero as the barrel heated up.

If I had to guess it would be the barrel is under torqued a bit and the front sight base assembly is not centered over the bore center line. Look to see if there is contact between the top of the extractor on the bolt and the top edge of the cut out on the back of the barrel. If so or very, very close this would indicated the barrel is not indexed all the way. This is my guess but I will defer to Mr. Laidler.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Alfred

...could this rebuilt No.5 have been fitted with a cutdown No.4 barrel?
That might explain why it would shoot so far to one side.

---

Negative on the No.4 barrel. It has a correct No.5 barrel with all the scalloped areas but now that I look closely at it, I think JBS has hit the nail on the head- it seems the barrel is not indexed properly. Thanks to all.