Printable View
I picked up a nice No.32 MkII scope with an unusual serial number for what I believe is a Kershaw. The number is 16,546. Kershaw were given the serial number block of 16,500 - 18,299 to produce MkIII scopes. I can only conclude that they were using up surplus MkII scopes from their 8,000 - 9,599 serial number block. The scope came with a nice Rose Bros. bracket.
Greetings Nigel
Congrat's this is the highest Kershaw Mk II scope s/n I have on record. Kershaw had two Mark II serial number blocks with the second running into their first Mark III serial number block. Your scope 16546 is the highest Mk II I have on record with 16561 being the lowest Mk III. Details on the other manufacturers and their observed serial number ranges are forthcoming in the new books.
Happy for you to use the pics in your book.
This interface in the changeover from Mk2 to Mk3 production is fascinating, & I suspect there is more to it than we generally suppose. The photo's of the enclosed scope (it belongs to a friend in SA) show clearly that it is a very early (low serial no) Mk3, & it is of course, one of these 'different' Mk3's which some suppose are the product of Bubba. Another identical example was seen & photographed at a UK arms fair a year or two ago, & photographs were posted on Facebook of it. It was absolutely identical to the scope shown & was serial number 16559. My example is unserialled & bears no OS number. It also appears to have been made most likely by William Watson, not generally associated with Mk3 scope production. However, there are two known examples that are attributable to Kershaw & which sit right in this interface.......
I still haven't yet got to the library at the NFC in Leeds, but I shall do so. If there are records surviving from Garland Road anywhere, they'll be there.
Only 115 from my T's 32 MkIII AK & S 16684
Just make sure you speak to me regarding telescope serial number batches before you put to print Lance I have overhauled/rebuilt well over 2,000 since I started in the game. That isn't as many as some others but it is a fair few I suspect! And have recorded the basic details of most. Incidentally KL is KODAK Ltd at Welwyn Garden City and I have them (butt-ending the 14XXX WATSONs) commencing again at 155XX or so.
Also worth remembering that the first person who reads your book IMMEDIATELY knows MORE than you. That's because he knows all that YOU have written PLUS the tiny bit he knew before. And that the first people who contact you aren't complimenting you........ Nope, they're telling you what you've got wrong!!!!!!!!
Many thanks. Other authors also gave me the same warning about future readers. My response to them is I cannot wait to see the correction in THEIR book. I will drop you a PM with the pre-print list for your input.Quote:
Originally Posted by Peter Laidler
You are right Lance. For example, people STILL tell me that they've read that the EN in Sten is ENfield and not ENgland. Now I just nod my head. The archive records and family archives state quite firmly that both Shepherd and Turpin agreed that the EN was for ENgland
Indeed someone suggested that STEN was a combination of both manufacturers....... ST for Sterling and EN for Enfield. You just can't win!