.303 Lee Enfield No4 MkI* rifle | Trade Me
Whats the verdict, made up or? unusual serial number I think, something odd looking about the pads, and now I'm wondering how many grooves the LB snipers had, were they all 5, or all 2, or a mix? Not dunning the seller or auction, just curious about the grooves number.
Doesn't inspire me with confidence.
As far as I know there were never any two groove T rifles. This longbranch doesn't look right, screws out of whack, pads don't look comfortable on the receiver...I had one of these years ago that came straight out of military store and I was the receiver in the military. By that I mean I know it hadn't meen messed with as it was still in our system. It had blonde wood and was new and perfect. Virtually unfired. Is there a scope number across the top of the small of the butt? Is that the right safety on it?
Mounts are in the wrong position. Front mount should be butted up almost to the receiver ring and there is no evidence of fitting...just screwed on.
The screws are probably SAE thread and just in the 2 1/2 to 3 turns that you get using SAE threads in a BA tapped hole.
I know this answer doesn't directly relate to the question but..... The original spec for the No4T was that it should conform in every respect to the standard service rifle which they did. But as soon as the standard of the standard service rifle started to deteriorate (?), such as two groove barrels, mazak butt plate, solid foresight block bands and any other relaxations in standard you may care to name, then what? Each and every one of these 'relaxations in standards' was tested, sanctioned and approved by the Ordnance Board. So while the standards were relaxed, the rifle remained 'standard'
And at BSA, all they were interested in was X amount of 'standard of the day' rifles that had passed a higher than the laid down accuracy criteria ready for conversion to sniper rifles. In fact we now know that there were some 2 groove No4T's although post war we would always rebarrel with 5 groove 'new' barrels. I can't speak for Canada or 4 or 6 groovers but to have been fitted, they WILL have been approved by the Ordnance Board and become a standard, albeit for the period of the war.
To the op: I have never seen an (original condition) Long Branch sniper without a war dated 5 groove.Quote:
Originally Posted by Peter Laidler
LB 5 groove "MkI" barrels are found dated for each year of production: 41/42/43/44/45/49/50/51
I have never seen a Long Branch 4 groove .303 barrel, nor a war-time 6 groove .303 barrel. The earliest LB 6 groove barrel I have seen is dated '49.
However, I do have a Savage marked (sporterized sadly) wartime 4 groove .303 barrel and 6 groove .303 barrels are known to have been fitted to early Savage No4MkI rifles and Savage No4MkI(T)
https://www.milsurps.com/images/impo...DSC00023-1.jpg
We (Canada) made 6 grove .303 barrels during the war as a picture of the broach is attached above. I have both the broaches for the 5 and 6 grove barrels and both were "liberated" during the war. Whether or not the barrels were used in Canada or shipped to Savage is another point of contention, but the broaches exist for the 6 grove barrels and were used on a Longbranch production line. Disposition of the barrels...pure speculation
I once had one of those lowish serial numbered savage Ts that was one of those made up but not scoped, it had a 6 groove barrel, stamped PH, which I think was parker hale, just fyi. It was suitably accurate when cold and clean, but being new to enfields and rifles I didn't appreciate that the accuracy dropped right off as it sooted up, around the 10-15 shots mark. Oddly, cleaning wouldn't restore the accuracy until the rifle cooled right off again.
That's very interesting...I had always heard the opposite towards their accuracy. Peter...what's the poop on these?Quote:
Originally Posted by RJW NZ
I only know about the two groovers as we used these for barrel testing and the two groovers were as good and accurate as the 5 groovers. If I could go back into the archives, I think that we all concluded that when it came to just the rifling, it was the twist and depth that counted and nothing to do with the number of grooves