EAL Type Longbranch Experts Weigh In

'02' serial number prefaced by two 1's laid short-short over each other. Marked Long Branch No4 Mk1 1941, no other serial markings, all metal I have seen on rifle is stamped Long Branch.

https://www.milsurps.com/images/impo...sav2B004-1.jpg

Broad arrow/LB stamp on wrist of EAL-style butt with Jostam pad, forend also EAL style, none of the 'snug' marks usual on old rifles like this that have been pulled apart 87 times.

https://www.milsurps.com/images/impo...sav2B009-1.jpg

Full rifle shows EAL style 200-400 sight inset, front sight as per EAL specs, a bit buggered. Barrel pristine.

https://www.milsurps.com/images/impo...sav2B005-1.jpg

So what do we have here? If it's a Bitsa rifle, then it's a very good bitsa rifle. The serial number doesn't add up, and it looks like they spot annealed it so it would take a stamp, and it has no trace of serial number anywhere else on the action. Barrel is Longbranch. It has every styling of the EAL rifle, front to back, except the charger bridge is intact. Further, it has the Longbranch stamp on EAL wood. And it's marked -02.

No need to spot anneal or anything there as it's just plain old mild steel. In fact the butt socket is the place where Armourers are TOLD to mark the rifle

Do you have a picture of the left side of the body?

https://www.milsurps.com/images/impo...sav2B033-1.jpg

Thanks!

That's not an EAL body. It could possibly be assembled at LB by a factory worker and taken home or by someone in the civvie world from surplus parts. Interesting, especially with a 1941 body. Lots of parts were sold at the auction in the 1970's so it's anyone's guess.

Thanks Brian. I'm wondering, though -- and it's reasonable -- whether this is an EAL body before being ground down? What about the stock stamp where it has 130 over broad arrow over what looks like MK 1?

-- No proof marks or .303 stamp
-- No4 Mk1 but no normal serial number
-- Serial of -02
-- Inside butt socket unknown mark, circular, looks like machining but could be writing.
-- Stock stamp of 130>MK1?
-- All Longbranch parts
-- Every single part is consistent with EAL, except for the stamp and unmilled receiver, but the myth behind the legend is that EAL used surplus Longbranch receivers.

I recognize that there are no tolerance differences consistent with letters being ground out of the action at EAL. But would it make financial sense to manufacture new No4 receivers for a few thousand rifles, in a world where rifles built on surplus receivers were almost literally a dime a dozen?

Can we see a picture of the top of the action looking down?

https://www.milsurps.com/images/impo...ZH12qD8N-1.jpg

https://www.milsurps.com/images/impo...XlLdFpSv-1.jpg

https://www.milsurps.com/images/impo...sR8kClxA-1.jpg

https://www.milsurps.com/images/impo...pSfsIUs4-1.jpg

Bolt is electro penciled 2, bolt head 3, with 2 properly stamped opposite the head. Had/has a Mk111 LB ladder sight on it. Noticed just now that there's an absence of machining on the back of the charger bridge. In the interests of this bit of archaeology, someone busted out the hacksaw at one point and very lightly scored the barrel in the knox form underneath the wood, as if they were planning a relief cut to remove the barrel. Let me know if the pics work as I didn't know the url went to the smaller version.

Clearer shots of first two pictures above would be helpful.

Maybe with a flash.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Brian Dick

That's not an EAL body. It could possibly be assembled at LB by a factory worker and taken home or by someone in the civvie world from surplus parts. Interesting, especially with a 1941 body. Lots of parts were sold at the auction in the 1970's so it's anyone's guess.

---

I think you're right on the money. Some learner screwed up the grinding of the charger bridge and the action went in the spares box. No serial number and original finish seals it IMHO.

Whatyadoin' with that Ross by the way?;)