1944 No4 Mk1 (T) - Has a 1943 OS466A No. 32 Mk1 scope?

Hello all,

In the quest to own my own No4 Mk1 (T) I came across this rifle for sale. Totaly over priced IMHO at $3,995.00 starting bid for just this rifle. I was thinking of making a lower offer as I wait to see if the seller will provide better pictures of all the stuff that needs to be verified to make this an authentic rifle.

Enfield L32055 Photos by bsdncorco | Photobucket

There are a few things that bother me about this rifle. One is that it has a 1943 OS 466A No. 32 Mk1 scope? Should it not have a No. 32 Mk3 scope instead? As per the scope number on the wrist of the butt stock I think scope serial number 22612 would be for a Mk3? Plus the crosswire is bent/broken, the scope hardly has any ware on it and the mag is not the original. (besides the Mk1 only has 2 moa clicks where I would prefer the 1 moa clicks of the Mk3 scope)

The scope can be fixed however the mag can never be fixed. How does a mismatched magazine affect a rifles short term/long term value?

One positive that I hardly have seen is a matching scope mount! Also the scope rings are low numbered 72 and 73. I thought that was odd as well.

I looked in the forum and I came across these posts but nothing conclusive about the scope.

Difference in between a n°32 mkI and mk II scope

My No 32 Mk2 Scope

Thank you in advance.

Corco

Nothing jumps out at me at first glance. Except odd to have a matching bracket and mismatched scope. But better than the opposite, from a practical standpoint. Put an un-numbered mag in it, it that bothers you. They generally weren't numbered until Post WWII, as far as i can tell. But given the numbered bracket and such, the mag was probably numbered in service at some point as well.

Amazing......... I own L32053 but it has a Mk2/1(W) telescope

What on earth do you mean that the mis-numbered mag can never be fixed...................? You can fix it just like real Armourers fixed them every day for a hundred years Corco! Just get another magazine that either a) fits well or b) you adjust to fit well. Then you function test it with 10 drill rounds. Then you bar the old number out, put it on a suitable mandrill and re-number it to suit. That's how I did hundreds of them, day in and day out for years! It might not be as it left the factory but there again, neither is ANY No4 or 4T or ANY weapon that came through my/our hands. Because by definition, every weapon that came through our workshops came in because there was something to a greater or lesser extent, wrong with it. So we fixed it!

Whatever are you thinking about?

telescope 7809 came across my desk late 1999

Ok. All of the individual major parts (rifle, scope, & bracket) are genuine. The rifle looks pretty honest to me. Frankly I wouldn't have given the mis-matched mag a second thought. I'd just fit an un-numbered brand new replacement. As JM pointed out it looks like the bracket is mated to the rifle, suggesting that at some point the original Mk3 scope has gone missing. The 1943 dated Mk1 is clearly a replacement. The damaged grat is not a big issue if you blow in the right ears on this forum.

The low (two digit) numbers on the cradle caps are perfectly ok. They started numbering them at 1,2 then 2,3 then, 3,4 etc. Consequently three digit numbers are ten times more common that two digit numbers, which in turn are ten times more common than single digit numbers. But they all exist. I used to have a bracket with the cradle caps marked '6' & '7'. Never found a '1' & '2' yet, but I'm still looking!!

Yes, the serial of the original scope to this rifle is a Mk3, but 1944 rifles are strange beasts in that they can conceivably be found with Mk1, Mk2, Mk2/1, or Mk3 scopes! Most will be found with Mk2, 2/1 or 3's, but William Watson were very late changing over from Mk1 to Mk2 scope production as the factory was bombed, & they were still producing the Mk1 scope into 1944. I've owned three 44 dated Mk1 Watsons over the years, & still have one of them. The few I have seen have all been in the 14,000 serial range.

Sorry, I'm starting to ramble.........!

ATB.

Than you for the replies and letting me know that the scope was serviced in 1999. As far as I am concerned when it comes to these works of art in my eyes there is never any rambling.

That is a good point about the magazine. What I ment by "fixed" is that the original being gone can't be found, most likely.

I was trying to find how hard it would be to replace the crosswire. I ordered the No 32 scope book Peter wrote yesterday. The Internet does not show how that is done. Is that something a layman like myself can do? Or does it require special equipment, special wire and or course the special talent of Peter.

It's not a special talent at all. It's just a relatively hard (?) learned knack that doesn't ever seem to go right the first or second time. And that's even when I do it now!!!!! Finding the wire now is a problem too. Some people use superglue but I prefer to stretch and solder just like I was taught!

Don't forget that this can be done by repairers in the US too

We used to have a big box of part used/worn magazines that we'd try first. If there was one that fitted well and tight then it'd be used and the old one put back in the box for possible re-use. Every few months someone, usually Mr Robbie Robinson the examiner would sort the wheat from the chaff/crap. Scrap the crap and any with badly worn back straps would be re-strapped, finished to new and put back on the shelf

It was 7809 that I rebuilt in 1999. Not your, 7807. Close! Especially as the two rifles are virtually brothers!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by corco

Is that something a layman like myself can do? Or does it require special equipment, special wire and or course the special talent of Peter.

---

No and yes in that order.....