Printable View
hi there, I am just wondering if someone could give me an estimate on how much a fake no.4 T LB would possible go for, if it were done with an original Lyman Alaskan scope and mount. Also I have seen two examples of LB's with the alaskan that had the scope painted green. Were all painted? I would appreciate any insite into this. Thanks
I wouldn't automatically assume that a khaki painted Lyman and rifle is a fake because I know an ex wartime - until the very early 60's RAF Armourer called Stan Payne who had a real McCoy many years ago, before these things were generally known about, certainly in England. His was spattered with khaki paint and it came from the Dutch Army in Java or Batavia (?) somewhere over there in the 50's. He got it because the RAF and RNZAF in Singapore used to share shipping and rescue patrols with the Dutch air force. He got it off a Dutch Marine when they used to refuel in Java as the Dutch were pulling out of those places. Forgive me if the dates aren't historically dead right........
Later I learned that these non standard stop-gap No4 snipers were supplied to the Dutch and Belgian armies at the end of the war when they were rebuilding their post war armies. It stands to reason that they would have been taken back to these former colonies. Strangely, he also had a Vickers marked luger from there too that had a bit of history (documented too......) attached to it which before he died, he sold to my friend for £400. And he's still got it!
Sort of like this one?
https://www.milsurps.com/images/impo...DSC01896-1.jpg
https://www.milsurps.com/images/impo...DSC01906-1.jpg
https://www.milsurps.com/images/impo...DSC01905-1.jpg
Not mine, but caught a bunch of photos of it a while back. Odd duck it is. Interesting, but was more than I wanted to pay- which I'll have to ask how much it was at the time...if you want me to investigate further.
Interesting Lyman telescope JM. It doesn't look like ours at work but looking quickly, I can't seen to click what the subtle differences are!
same mount, but the cheekpiece was correct. The rifle is a '44 LB that was taken out of grease and is hard to tell from an original other then the serial number. That butt is one odd looking one for sure. If its not to much trouble I would be interested in knowing how much the guy wanted for that. Thanks
The one above was US$800-900.
That sounds about right, but in the example above, the whole package was so ugly and full of dramas that it was returned.
Basically, figure out what the parts cost, discount the labor to assemble and deduct the devaluation of the rifle (as it's now got ugly holes in the receiver that can't be returned to original), and that's what a reasonable selling price ought to be.
I do believe the Canadian purchase Alaskans had screw on caps over the drums.
My guess would be that there was a quantity of these SAL bases and mounts held as spares in the Canadian stores that were left over from WWII production. (We also know that semi-finished examples have turned up, presumably from the final clearout at SAL/Long Branch) Probably quite a few from both sources got 'liberated' and fitted up ad hoc by whoever got hold them afterwards, and perhaps some were fitted up for service use. We have heard that RCEME/CF storeskeeping regulations were quite lax by UK standards in terms of what was a controlled/recorded item and what was not
Speaking a gent who was an RCEME/CF armourer from the early 50s to mid 70s, he said there were mounts & scopes being fitted to rifles at the Montreal workshops of the RCEME. This was in the early 50s.
The Long Branch cheekrests were available through the CF stores system right into the 1980s and not at all uncommon.
Given the ease (ostensible at least!) with which the SAL mounts are removed and replaced, perhaps it was SOP to simply refit the mounts & scope to a new rifle rather than overhauling one sentenced for serious defects?
Several No4s with Lyman Alaskans in SAL mounts turned up issued to the northern Rangers some years back, and for some unknown reason, the combination is illustrated in the 1980s CF manual for the No4; along with a No32 Mk1 or 2!
The mount illustrated above was a casting, and not a well filled out one at that.
https://www.milsurps.com/images/impo...DSC01908-1.jpg
https://www.milsurps.com/images/impo...DSC01904-1.jpg
What is really sad is that this particular rifle could have brought about the same money, and been of far greater interest BEFORE it was "improved".
https://www.milsurps.com/images/impo...DSC01894-1.jpg
Sorry for the high-jacking of the thread. But it's another reason NOT to go making "snipers" out of any old rifle too slow to escape the evil clutches of certain folk.