Enfield No. 4 Brass Buttplate

Out of curiosity, was there any specific Enfield No. 4 manufacturer; BSA, Long Branch, Savage or others that solely used the brass butt plate instead of the steel buttplace? Any mfg's who did not use the brass butt plate?

gbalke, I'll take a shot at your question. Strictly from my own observation over the course of the past forty years. As you know, the buttplates were provided by a number of manufacturers during WWII and were interchangeable and thus were likely swapped around willy nilly during reburbishment or overhaul. After all, a buttplate is a buttplate is a buttplate. However some generalities are in order.... Brass was the preferred material for domestic production No.4 buttplates. Savage used zamak buttplates to the exclusion of all other materials on their production of the No.4, as likely did Long Branch, though I suspect Long Branch and Savage both manufactured brass plates for their earliest production No.4 rifles. Steel buttplates were strictly a Long Branch item. I do not believe that zamak was used for any English manufacture buttplate, strictly North American production by either Savage or Long Branch. Brass seems to have been the preferred buttplate metal for BSA, Maltby and Fazakerley production rifles throughout their period of manufacture. Once again, be aware you will find steel or zamak buttplates fitted to English manufacture No.4 rifles which likely originally left the factory with brass buttplates. What I have said may well be subject to some dispute but what I have observed can certainly be considered a general overview subject to further input and disputation from other forum members.

The british used a lot of Mazak, their term for zamak. Brass was a valuable commodity during the war, so substitute material was used wherever possible.

I've got an unissued '43 Maltby with a Canadian produced steel buttplate.