Printable View
It appears the Maltby plant went to Pakistan in the early 1950's. One report of a 1952 No. 4 Mk 1 POF exists, and a 1956 Mk 1 is known to exist.
Any confirmation of when the Maltby plant was shipped out? Any other rifle data the community might have?
The Fazarkerly plant is supposed to have departed in the mid 1950's.
I have a 1957 No. 4 Mk II, and have seen a 1960. Any other data on these as well?
I own a 1961 POF Mk2 and have a Longbranch from the subcontinent with a 1963 dated POF cocking piece.
-----krinko
I have a POF No4 Mk2 dated 1958..arrived by post yesterday, a birthday present from my wife.
It's a bit "cosmoliny" right now but there are some stamps (on wood) on it I will photograph & post for anyone's guess's when it's cleaned up a bit.
The actual receiver stamps (more like engraving really) look just like my No5 Mk1 (stlyewise) which was made at Faz. in 1946.
Peter (Burlington, Ontario)
I have a pair of POF No.4 Mark 2's. One is dated 1958, the other is dated 1961.
In Edwards' India's Enfields, it is stated that initial production of the No.4 Mark 1 started in 1953 and that by 1957 it had switched to No.4 Mark 2's. It is further stated that it continued making new No.4's up to 1965 or 1966 with a 1965 rifle being the latest dated rifle so far.
Hello Limpetmine,
I'm posting a copy here of what I posted at GB... hope it helps.
Ok... As requested/promised. My older camera ended up doing the best possible job of it and it's still crap.... very faintly marked with a shiny finish causing me all kinds of issues. I had to mess with the light angles until it showed. This example, as Edwards states, has a mixture of british manufactured parts. (He also states 53' was the first year of manufacture so who knows where this one came from)... SM marked oval cocking piece and a Poole marked front sight protector. Savage front band, trigger guard, follower and a Faz marked magazine body. If more shots are needed.... just ask.
https://www.milsurps.com/images/impo...73356781-1.jpg
Should read Edwards.... not Skennerton... No edit function here ? Sorry
David
SpikeDD, the edit function only is available for a short time period after posting. I've made the change to your original replacing Skennerton with Edwards.
I'm a guest here, and will abide by the rules, but let me get this off my chest. I understand that the edit function is limited to 30 minutes or so, then a post is locked. From what I've inferred, this was due to some mud slinging and editing posts to "unsay" what was said. If that is a problem, ban the "problem person".
Not being able to edit my post, say, 30, 90 or 120 days later is an issue with me. I will post pictures and other data that I don't prefer to leave up forever. I understand it could be archived somewhere, but most folks don't bother with that. The limit on editing my posts limits my contributions here.
Hi limpetmine .... :)Quote:
Originally Posted by limpetmine
Your contributions and opinions are valued and I for one, always look forward to what you have to post on the boards. :thup:
Let's define what we're talking about, so everyone benefits from this discussion. Here's the two variables as defined by the system software that operates this site.
Actually, the current timeframe is set by default to 60 minutes, not 30 as you mention, but you bring up an excellent point.Quote:
Time Limit on Editing of Thread Title.
This setting is the number of minutes in which a user may edit the title of a thread that he starts, and have it apply to the thread listing screen (forumdisplay). After this time period, the change will only apply to the title shown in the first post of the thread. (Administrators and moderators with permission may always edit the title of the thread as shown on forumdisplay through the Edit Thread function.)
Time Limit on Editing of Posts
This is the time in minutes after the post was posted. If a user posted a post at 1:00 PM and this setting is set to 5, then that user will not be able to edit that post after 1:05 PM.
For almost 2 1/2 years, the time limit for a user to be able to alter his own post had NO time limit. We never had a problem that I can remember. Perhaps it was the nature of our membership and type of board we operate, but I really don't know. :dunno:
When we helped the Culvers salvage the disastrous situation they were having with their Jouster forums, Gloria insisted that the time limit be set to 30 minutes for editing which I felt was way too short, as people often make spelling errors, or wish to add content later they forgot. So, I compromised on 60 minutes, which is where it's been set for the past seven months while a lot of our guests from Jouster were visiting. Gloria said she had a lot of trouble with people posting comments, then going back and changing their meaning many times during the life of a thread, which in-turn created a lot of issues in threads because the context of what people were saying to each kept being altered. Simply put, history was constantly being revised. Kind of like what's happened recently. :lol:
I guess it's pretty simple. Thanks to a whole lot of really good people on here who donated to the Culvers, plus the CSP volunteer moderators led by Bill Hollinger who stepped in and did their best to keep it running, the CSP members have their home back, I assume with a 30 minute edit limit, however, we here at Milsurps.com can now get back to our own lifestyle. Upon reflection and in consideration of your comments, since we didn't have any trouble for years with a NO edit time limit, I've just re-set it back to no time limit to alter posts. I have left the thread title variable set for 1 day, which seems reasonable for permitting someone to change that field.
Let's see how this goes, however, because we don't see a whole lot of personality confrontations on our board and the ones that we do are usually dealt with quickly through the infractions system or time outs from the site, I assume this return to the old values should be as workable and comfortable as it always was.
Thanks again for the feedback and I apologize for hijacking your original thread content, but I thought it was important to address your question. ... :)
Regards,
Badger (Doug)
Thanks, Badger. I have always appreciated the maturity level here, and they way in which you run your board. Thank you for seeing my point.:thup:
Hi all,
I have a No4 MkI Pakistani Enfield marked:
52/P.O.F./A2###
Here is my Pakistani. The pics stink. Sorry. The stock is pretty dinged up, but then again I only paid $125 for it.
https://www.milsurps.com/images/impo...09092151-1.jpg
https://www.milsurps.com/images/impo...9092150a-1.jpg
https://www.milsurps.com/images/impo...09092150-1.jpg
A friend has a No.4 MK.2 from 54 i think and he has the F. and the P.O.F. electro penciled on his rifle.
Regards
Gunner
There is documentation around somewhere ( I think it's in store at xxxxxxxx so it'll take me a few weeks to hunt it down) that on the closure of the old ROF at Maltby, because it and everything there belonged to the Ministry of Supply, all of their rifle making equipment went into store at a disused RAF bomb store near to Aylesbury. It was then quickly got OUT of store and underwent a major refurbishment just prior to Korea as did the C-P ammunition making plant, in case it was needed again in a hurry. ROF-6, Fazakerley stepped up their rifle FTR and conversion programme just in case.......
What I'm saying is that I don't think Maltby rifle production facilities went to Pakistan, it stayed in store. But maybe it was the BSA No4 rifle production plant. I don't know but Maltby stayed here. If it did go, it wouldn't have been MUCH, much later, probably in the early 60's
That's interesting, (the BSA plant); and just goes to show that there is a lot left to learn about the history of these things, and internet rumors and ramblings gain a life of their own. Thanks for the insight! It would be great to know more. :super: Thank you!
Don't quote me that it WAS the BSA plant Limpet but it wasn't Maltby. That plant peculiar to barrel and rifle making was stored for many years. But BSA, who only made No4 rifles on contract to the MoSupply were a private manufacturer. Does anyone know if they made rifles NEW after wartime production ceased? And if so, who for?
Peter, I've never heard of Fazakerley referred to as ROF-6, an in-house designation?
The story I heard, and can certainly be false, is that Wah recieved at least some BSA-Shirley equipment, nothing from Maltby and later at least some equipment from Fazakerley, possibly for the Mk.2 (which, as I understand it is a bit different from the Fazakerley Mk.2).
Other than the post war No.5, some 'housecleaning' No.4s and some Mk.1/2 conversions it looks like BSA withdrew from the L-E manufacturing.
Brad
All of the old ROF's had a number and Fazakerley was always referred to by us as ROF-6. Just a little reference point among Armourers. I have no idea about the ROF6 kit going to Pakistan but the virtually unused L1A1 rifle making equipment went to Lithgow.
Don't understand the secnd paragraph about the Faz Mk2 being different from the Faz Mk2? Only FAZ made the Mk2! Clarify.........
As I understand it, BSA finished their wartime Ministry of Supply contracts plus the No5's and 8's and reverted back to COMMERCIAL FTR programmes for any foreign government who wanted this type of work. They did want to market the No8 commercially SO I HAVE BEEN TOLD. But this was stopped after a bit of hanky-panky (another technical term for you to inwardly digest) over supplies to - I believe - New Zealand with odd serial numbers that didn't show up or fall within the allocated Ministry of Supply lists. I didn't or don't understand it but has/can anyone in NZ with an odd serialled No8 tell us from the markings tell us where it was made? It'll be either BSA or FAZ of course. And on what body it is based on? The No4 or light No5.
Anyway, BSA were prohibited from post war full rifle production because the MoS wanted to keep their own rifle factories in business. Not a wise move thinking about Fazakerley!
They did supply the very last No1 spares plus any Mk1 and 2 Bren spare parts post war but only parts that they were already geared up to supply, such as butt slides, woodwork and fittings. As a result, they only got a few dribs and drabs from the 1944 onwards Mk3 contracts.
Peter, Now that I re read it, it isn't too clear, sorry. POF, as I understand it also made a Mk.2 action body, tho' slightly different from Fazakerley's Mk.2 action body and if rumor be truth, was made using Fazakerley's old equipment.
Brad
PS If rumor, now's a good time to blow it out of the water.
We didn't have, or if we did, I certainly didn't see a POF No4 Mk2 rifle in UK Military service! Maybe someone with one could do a detailed examination of a Fazakerley and POF Mk2 to see what the differences were. But if it was ROF6 machinery, then the POF's will (?) be dated after ROF6 ceased production
Maybe someone could do a similar exercise and examine side by side, an early POF and a BSA/ROF6/Maltby No4 Mk1 to help identify the source of the factory plant at the POF. It wouldn't be conclusive of course but it'd be getting pretty well towards it
I'll take this on. Now, I'm not the fastest guy on the block, but I'll giver a go.
I've got a 1952 POF Mk 1, and a couple of Maltby's to compare to; I've got at 1963 POF MK II that I'll compare to a 1955 PF.
As an oblique comment, does anyone have an Enfield data sheet like the M-1 nuts have and use? They are quite useful, and form a base of knowledge from where to start analysis. Perhaps we [ the Milsurp community ] should develop one.
Thank you .... :super:Quote:
Originally Posted by limpetmine
Regards,
Badger (Doug)
No4 rifle is all BA thread form. No1 rifle is threads over a diameter! We have a chart of what threads will clear out from that to BA sizes in order to use No4 screws. but if you do that, the rifle ain't original.....................
But, offhand, the band screws can be cleared out to 4BA............
This is indeed interesting.
BSA FTR's to Mk. 1/2, 1/3 have dates as late as 1957 on them. The dozen or so examples I have are all fitted with M47C marked barrels, bolt bodies, cocking pieces and stock sets. Then there is the M47C marked, 1958 dated cocking piece below. Does it make sense to say "someone" was doing something on BSA Shirley equipment as late as 1958 ?
https://www.milsurps.com/images/impo...75987642-1.jpg
I couldn't edit my original post with a new pic ( I accidentally moved the photo from picturetrail ) so I will re post the pic here.
https://www.milsurps.com/images/impo...75986360-1.jpg
BSA were certainly doing FTR and Mk1 and 1* to 1/2 and 1/3 conversions on contract to whoever needed them doing in the big commercial world. But not, as I understand it, for the UK military because the Ministry of Supply had enough problems keeping work for their own factories. But they weren't making NEW rifles.
Nice gun you're shooting in the side pic DD
Thanks Peter, Maybe you have shot it as well while visiting Brian ? Don't get to shoot them very often as they are illegal in New Jersey.
My post of the 58' dated cocking piece was to help support that the Shirley plant equipment couldn't have been in Pakistan making POF Mk.1's in 1952 and as you say, Maltby stayed in England so, that would help narrow down just what was sent to POF and by whom, in the early 50's.