Inglis Bren MkIIM

Is anyone familiar with a Bren MkIIM?

Interesting pictures from a Regimental Museum in Quebec....

IMG_2576.jpg Photo by dauph197 | Photobucket

IMG_2578.jpg Photo by dauph197 | Photobucket

IMG_2650.jpg Photo by dauph197 | Photobucket

IMG_2654.jpg Photo by dauph197 | Photobucket

IMG_2638.jpg Photo by dauph197 | Photobucket

Currently wearing a "7.92" marked barrel. The receiver is also marked 7.92 just behind the barrel nut.

It's a 1945 dated Inglis.

The mag well has a new feed plate riveted in.

CanadianGunNutz.com

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Lee Enfield

Is anyone familiar with a Bren MkIIM?

Interesting pictures from a Regimental Museum in Quebec....

IMG_2576.jpg Photo by dauph197 | Photobucket

IMG_2578.jpg Photo by dauph197 | Photobucket

IMG_2650.jpg Photo by dauph197 | Photobucket

IMG_2654.jpg Photo by dauph197 | Photobucket

IMG_2638.jpg Photo by dauph197 | Photobucket

Currently wearing a "7.92" marked barrel. The receiver is also marked 7.92 just behind the barrel nut.

It's a 1945 dated Inglis.

The mag well has a new feed plate riveted in.

CanadianGunNutz.com

---

Well it started life as one of the post war 7.92 guns so I'd hazard a guess at it being a trial gun for some other calibre like .280

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Brit plumber

Well it started life as one of the post war 7.92 guns so I'd hazard a guess at it being a trial gun for some other calibre like .280

---

Actually it didn't start as an 8mm gun, because that would be a "7.92mm BREN MkI" not a "BREN MkII", and if post-war, it would also not be "Inglis" marked...

I'm still pretty confident the gun started life as a 7.92mm gun, It's just my opinion but the body is likely to be an unfinished/un assembled Mk2 body assembled into a 7.92mm gun post war as part of that sterile Bren contract for the CIA??? (And subsequently rejected maybe due to markings) The serial number is certainly in that format. That may explain the replacement magazine well insert too.

I have on record several serial numbers of Inglis mk2 Brens assembled after the last serial number recorded by Inglis. When was the last Mk2 supposedly assembled? I don't have my books to hand.

We had an intelligence Officer at the Infantry HQ at Warminster who always expressed grave misgivings - to the point of ludicrousness - about the notion of 'sterile' weapons. Arguing that even the average gun enthusiast armed with 20 year old copy of Janes could identify the source of a weapon. Once you have the source, regardless of the serial number applied or not, at the time or afterwards made such a weapon immediately 'un-sterile' Just the opinion of a senior Intelligence Officer for what its worth!

And on a personal level, I remember the so-called Indonesian made Pindad Browning episode.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Peter Laidler

the so-called Indonesian made Pindad Browning episode.

---

Yeah...now you have another one to explain...?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Brit plumber

I'm still pretty confident the gun started life as a 7.92mm gun, It's just my opinion but the body is likely to be an unfinished/un assembled Mk2 body assembled into a 7.92mm gun post war as part of that sterile Bren contract for the CIA??? (And subsequently rejected maybe due to markings) The serial number is certainly in that format. That may explain the replacement magazine well insert too.

I have on record several serial numbers of Inglis mk2 Brens assembled after the last serial number recorded by Inglis. When was the last Mk2 supposedly assembled? I don't have my books to hand.

---

Sorry, my point is that an 8mm Bren is a "7.92 BREN MkI" even though it is built on what would be a "BREN MkII" if produced as a .303

I am inclined to agree with BP in the most part. What I think is that we shouldn't look for a complicated answer when there is usually a simple answer. These bodies were/probably/ left over bodies after production ceased - much like the left over bodies at Fazakerley when No4/5 rifle production ceased there. When there was a need at Inglis (or wherever - like the No8's and L39's for 'new' bodies) they just took what they had from store.

It isn't difficult to convert a .303" Bren to 7.92. Mind you, you can't say the same about converting a .303" Bren to 7.62mm.............. Sheer purgatory

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Lee Enfield

Interesting pictures from a Regimental Museum in Quebec....

---

Thanks for the great pictures,did the tag attached to the gun note anything ?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Peter Laidler

We had an intelligence Officer at the Infantry HQ at Warminster who always expressed grave misgivings - to the point of ludicrousness - about the notion of 'sterile' weapons. Arguing that even the average gun enthusiast armed with 20 year old copy of Janes could identify the source of a weapon. Once you have the source, regardless of the serial number applied or not, at the time or afterwards made such a weapon immediately 'un-sterile' Just the opinion of a senior Intelligence Officer for what its worth!

---

Source as in manufacture doesn't much matter,but source as from who supplied it does.
The principle of deniability in past arms trading to groups and factions in C & S America,Tibet etc and fake headstamps on ammunition is a well troden path.

Sam Cummings for one when working for the CIA and afterwards suppling them is covered in the book 'Deadly Business' which my be of interest and a bit of light reading for the 'senior Intelligence Officer' :D

ATB Kevin

On the other hand KevG and equally well documented AND closer to home ...............There is the case of the wartime European resistance groups we wanted drawings to make their own guns (Sten guns in particular), unmarked ammunition and unmarked weapons. But we said NO. Better to supply standard stuff so that the a) resiatance chain of command was less, b) fewer people were involved in the operation and c) the final 'blame' could be laid at one door and d), the interrogators WILL break the interrogees - eventually!

So there is definately a case for both points of view. The difference is that your man Sam wrote a book about it and thereafter, it ain't no secret. While the real intelligence world AIN'T not wrote a book about it! I was going to mention something else too but will PM you............

The idea behind my mentioning this was that usually there is a simple answer to a seemingly complicated scenario