New Long Branch 1941...

I couldn't help it. There I am, trying to sell off my stock of .303 ammunition (wanting to focus on 7.62 Lee Enfields), and I find another 1941 Long Branch No.4 Mk.1. This time, unlike a previous 1941 Long Branch I recently had, the bolt is original to the rifle. The barrel is also original and dated 1942 (so the rifle is one that probably sneaked through early in 1942). The rifle will not be with me for a week or 2, but I thougt I'd share pics that the seller sent me.

New Long Branch 1941 pictures by spinecracker - Photobucket

Comments would be appreciated.

Looks genuine and relatively unaltered, except what is most likely a replacement forend (and perhaps the rest of the wood of course)

Nice find.

Cocking piece as well is a likely replacement, but the upside is the '50 mark on the upper socket. No Bubba this time!

See what happens when you're "not" looking for something? Good find.

What exactly is the significance of the '50 mark? Year of FTR?

I swear I stumble into these things like a blind drunk...

Seems to me to be a viewing mark after a minor overhaul. I've a '46 mark on my 3L in the same location. Or it could be a Canadian FTR mark, but the Suncorite indicates otherwise... I hope to be "edjumacated" shortly, don't recall seeing it in print before, but the mind is going.

I put one bid on that one. I like the serial number but I'm scared of the rest of it, and the seller. Looks like it may have been a grenade launcher at one time. Good luck.

Don't know when I'll actually be able to really "see" pics. Work monitor is still poo. Probably won't even get the upcoming holiday off, so I won't be much help "destroying" this one for a while... Cruel lot we are!

Heck, it is not "destroying" - if this rifle is a load of donkey droppings, then I am not going to let them know my credit card info. Be brutally honest. This is why I ask for opinions. Thanks :). I haven't paid for this yet, so I have room to manuveur, and I can handle a little bit of negative feedback from the seller. Anyone else?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by jmoore

Cocking piece as well is a likely replacement, but the upside is the '50 mark on the upper socket.

---

I'm not sure we can asssume that. We all love those MkI 'button' cocking pieces, but no one really knows at what point they stopped making/fitting them.

Looking at the dirt, grease and overall patination (which does look a bit steel-wooled in places), I'd say the metal parts have been married for decades.

Hard to say about the forend of course, but as Long Branch tended to do things logically, I wouldn't be surprised if the MkI spec was dropped around the time the other MkI or "trials rifle" features were dropped from production.

On the other hand, if that "50" is an overhaul date perhaps it got restocked then?

Backsight is a UK-made one?

No idea about the backsight. I did ask, but they said that they could not see any markings (I specifically asked about any LB and "C.A.S." markings, and they said they could not see any). What is the significance of the holes through the lower band? Something to do with Indian service?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by spinecracker

What is the significance of the holes through the lower band? Something to do with Indian service?

---

I believe that the holes were used for the sight on a grenade launcher.

a) Maybe its been a grenade launcher and has been re-furbed - whats the barrel internals like ?
or
b) Maybe it has been re-built using parts from a grenade launching rifle ?

I won't have an idea until it is in my hands, and even then...

Madcratebuilder has me worried about the seller (TG International). I went out on a limb with this one, but at least they have a 3-day inspection period, and all I would lose out on would be shipping both ways (about $50), unless anyone else has had dealings with TGI and has other impressions. With all costs together, the rifle will end up costing about $425 to get into my hands (oh, how I need to sort out my C&R license), and I would think that is a reasonable price for a 1941 Long Branch, unless it is totally trashed.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by spinecracker

Madcratebuilder has me worried about the seller (TG International). I went out on a limb with this one, but at least they have a 3-day inspection period, .

---

Not saying this is a 'bad one' but TGI's reputation is appalling (cannot use the correct adjective on a public forum).
They have been selling dozens of Khyber Pass rifles as originals but needed 'to be checked by a gunsmith', several members on another forum have been badly, badly burnt by them.
After some serious letter writing and threats, naming names etc they now do put in their ads 'display - non shooter only' 'possible Khyber Pass copies'

No apologies issued tho'.

Here are a couple of pics of what they have been selling (No1's, No4's and No5's):

https://www.milsurps.com/images/impo...0/02/No1-1.jpg
https://www.milsurps.com/images/impo.../02/No1e-1.jpg
https://www.milsurps.com/images/impo.../02/No1j-1.jpg
https://www.milsurps.com/images/impo.../02/No4a-1.jpg
https://www.milsurps.com/images/impo.../02/No4b-1.jpg
https://www.milsurps.com/images/impo.../02/No5b-1.jpg
https://www.milsurps.com/images/impo.../02/No5e-1.jpg
https://www.milsurps.com/images/impo.../02/No5c-1.jpg

Well, I'm pooping myself now....I'm pretty sure that the Long Branch is not a Kyber Pass copy, but I wonder what will (not might) be wrong with it.

Oh ye of little faith...:D

I have faith and trust in God, but not in people lol

My choices are these -

1. Decline to pay for the item (the email they sent me says that if an item isn't paid for within 21 days, then it is relisted), and deal with the negative feedback and possible non-payor warning.
2. Pay for the item, look at it at the FFL, then decide whether to keep it or send it back, then have to haggle for a refund (may end up costing $50 for shipping and a relisting fee).

I am awaiting more photos from a forum member that may help in my decision.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Alan de Enfield

I believe that the holes were used for the sight on a grenade launcher.

a) Maybe its been a grenade launcher and has been re-furbed - whats the barrel internals like ?
or
b) Maybe it has been re-built using parts from a grenade launching rifle ?

---

Sorry Alan, I missed your question. I have no idea about the condition of the barrel, beyond the fact it is the original barrel and is described as "shiny" (a lot of bloody use, that is)

I will be phoning my credit cards info to the seller as soon as they let me know their biusiness hours, then will sit back in dread and anticipation. I am hoping for a nice surprise, but expecting a turd. I am consoling myself to the fact that it is a rare Lee Enfield.

Two questions:

How exactly would would a grenade launcher be fitted to one of these rifles that would necessitate the drilling of holes in the lower band?

And any idea of exactly what the "50" mark on the buttsocket may mean, and what country may have used such a marking?

If you are a pessimist you will never be disapointed !!!

Alan, I consider myself a realist with pessimistic leanings and a twist of optimism on the side when dealing with dodgy companies lol. I was initially elated to have located a 1941 Long Branch, but my glee nose-dived when I read your, and other poeople's, revelations regarding the seller (who is still getting bids on those awful Khyber Pass copies on GB - the mind boggles).

Let us say I am hoping for the best and praying to be spared the worst, which I believe is a common way to feel when buying via an online auction lol. The worst that can happen is that I send it back and lose $75 (shipping and a Brady check), and learn a valuable lesson.

spinecracker, No idea what that '50' represents, but suspect it is a maintenance/inspection stamp. The Mk.II cocking piece came online early in England and probably nearly as soon in N. America.

I don't feel it's 100% original as it shows hints of maintenance, but it looks on the whole to be a good example, worthy of inspection at the least.

Brad

Brad, I share your feelings regarding this rifle not being 100% original, but a 1941 Long Branch in any condition is still a rare bird, in my humble estimation, and the marks of maintenance add to the history of the weapon, if not the collector value. This firearm would not be a candidate for returning to 1941 condition due to the marks indicating later maintenance work, but I think it might just clean up nicely.

TGI swears the barrel is bright, shinny, free of any pitting. They told me this and I believe they told you the same thing. The receiver looks legit to me and that was all I wanted. I have the correct furniture and small bits. I guess we'll all know in a week or so.

Pretty much that is what they told me, Madcratebuilder :), although that does not address the rifling. I have a shotgun that has a bore that is
bright, shiny and free of any pitting lol

I assume you are holding onto the correct furniture and small bits for the right reciever and barrel to turn up. I will keep my eyes peeled for you (thinking about it, isn't that a disgusting phrase, or what?) as I seem to be attracting 1941 Long Branches at the moment.

Rifle turned up - new photos at:

http://s1016.photobucket.com/albums/...Branch%201941/

I did note the mark on top of the receiver indicating rust in the bore/chamber, but I gave both as good an inspection as I could and didn't see anything. Indeed, the rifling looks good all the way down, the bore is shiny, and the chamber looks smooth. Any comments regarding the 5 point star mark next to the "rust" stamp?

The bolt head is a Savage, and many of the small metal work appears to be from Fazakerley, and the woodwork has been replaced, but it looks like everyhing has been together for a very long time. The rear sight is a Fazakerley-made one. The good news is that the barrel and receiver have not been messed with, and still have what is left of the original finish, so I think that this rifle could be returned to the original 1941 configuration without raising too many eyebrows. The magazine is a replacement, and has been stamped with 2 other serial numbers (one of them a Savage serial number).

Comments would be appreciated. The test firing will be tomorrow morning - I also have 2 Mosin Nagants to check (one is mine, the other belongs to my father-in-law), and I am going to go for the last range visit with my Enforcer - my wife is expecting (woohoo!!!), but that means bills to pay (weeps bitterly), and the Enforcer has to go.

Looks like you have an SMLE buttplate on there. Otherwise looks very authentic and probably original. Perhaps even the forend too. Edit: scratch that, No4 buttplate with top ground down - or an Indian type?

Supports the theory that the "MkI" features such as cocking piece, foresight protector, hinged band etc. went out pretty early in production.

Good rifle as is. Although the Indian modified middle band seems a bit of of place- I might have to swap that bit for a non-drilled one. (Otherwise the fore stock needs fore and aft relief cuts- which I wouldn't do!)

spinecracker, Congrats on the baby news!

Waiting on the range report.

Brad

Happy news about the baby, Spinecracker! Say, you and RJW NZ at the same time- y'all conspiring or something?

"Say, you and RJW NZ at the same time- y'all conspiring or something?"
--jmoore

It's a race! My two daughters (always competed against each other) dominoed eight days apart in March but swear it wasn't conspired.

Brad

I just trying to take the US back for King George, one baby at a time....and I will be celebrating Colonial Day....errrr...Independence Day in my own special way (or, as I prefer to call it, "You kicked us out over 3 little taxes and now you're taxed up every orifice" Day) :P

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Surpmil

Looks like you have an SMLE buttplate on there. Otherwise looks very authentic and probably original. Perhaps even the forend too. Edit: scratch that, No4 buttplate with top ground down - or an Indian type?

Supports the theory that the "MkI" features such as cocking piece, foresight protector, hinged band etc. went out pretty early in production.

---

The buttplate is stamped on the inside with an "F", and so is the buttplate trap, is it is highly unlikely to be original lol..

I was looking at the bolt just a few minutes ago, and for the life of my I cannot find any indication as to the size of the Savage bolt head. Would someone please tell me where the bolt head size number should be marked? The only stamp I can see on the bolt head is the Savage "S" on the top.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by spinecracker

I was looking at the bolt just a few minutes ago, and for the life of my I cannot find any indication as to the size of the Savage bolt head. Would someone please tell me where the bolt head size number should be marked? The only stamp I can see on the bolt head is the Savage "S" on the top.

---

Just above the retaining groove on the RH side behind the extractor is the usual spot

That is what I thought, but if there are any markings, I can't see them even with a magnifying glass. I should be able to post a range report tomorrow evening, circumstances permitting.

Range report - weather sunny, slight 5-10mph side wind left to right on occasions, temperature 90 degrees F in the shade, shooting from seated position, rifle resting on a sandbag. The micrometer sight was used, set at 200 yards, and the ammunition used was 1969 Kynoch .303 Mk.7Z. I managed to get a 6-round 1 1/2" grouping 3 inches high and 3 inches to the right, so all I have to do is adjust for windage (3 inches high at 100 yards with the sight set at 200 yards with military ammunition is correct, according to my resources). Next time I will be trying the rifle out at 200 yards, after correcting for windage.

spinecracker, Better than average grouping, congrats.

Brad

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by spinecracker

The buttplate is stamped on the inside with an "F", and so is the buttplate trap, is it is highly unlikely to be original lol..

---

If you look at my post again you'll see I corrected myself, before your post above.

Compare to a normal No4 buttplate and you'll see how the heel is different from most No4 buttplates.

Surpmil, I did see your correction, but I was just adding extra information. The rifle is currently stripped down for the good ol' "black palstic bag and 30 feet of paper towels" trick to get the crud out of the wooden parts. I will be going over the rifle with a magnifying glass to find stamp marks. So far I have noted only a Savage "S" on the bolt head (no other markings at all - nothing, zip, nada), and the front sight protector has no markings whatsoever. Prepare for an extensive list later, hopefully with photos.

Brad - I am very pleased with the grouping. The conditions were almost ideal, the lighting perfect, and I wasn't being disturbed. Later yesterday the wind picked up, and I am sure if I had gone shooting then I would not have hit a barn door at 20 paces lol.

I managed to strip the gun down quite far, degreased and cleaned (what I, and some other people took for suncorite was just really thick, dried-on grease - it is coming off, slowly but surely), and now I can see some of the details better. My camera is not working at the moment, so bear with me -

Receiver - serial number 0L75XX correctly stamped on the buttsocket, with something that looks like "K1" with M" underneath stamped in small letters directly under the safety catch, and "50" stamped just to the right in numbers about the same size as the serial number. Left side of receiver wall stamped with "No 4 Mk 1", "LONG BRANCH" and "1941" . Magazine catch is stamped "LB", but I cannot find any markings on the sear (still has some gunk on it though - a job for another day). The breech bolt head catch plate (what a mouthful) is stamped "LB", so I think the entire assembly (sear, magazine catch, sear spring) is original. The safety catch looks to be stamped with a "B" and a board arrow. The rear sight is a Fazakerley Mk.1 micrometer sight. There is a "rust" star stamp on top of the receiver, just in front of a 5-pointed star stamp (the stamp is incomplete, so I cannot work out the lettering inside the stamp).

Barrel - stamped with serial number matching the receiver, dated '42 with the correct inspection stamps, etc. Importers mark at end of muzzle (fortunately not too noticeable). I cannot find any damage that would relate to the "rust" stamp mentioned above - must look harder lol.

Bolt - handle correctly serialed to the receiver and barrel (not a force-match), has "LB" stamp and "crossed flags" stamp in correct places. Cocking piece is replacement, stamped "N67 Mk.II". Bolt head is stamped with the Savage "S" and there are no other markings (I know that Savage helped Long Branch out several times with parts, and vice versa, including 1941, so the bolt head may be original, but we will never know).

wood - butt stamped with Savage "S", has arsenal heel repair. Cannot find any marking on forend, but it is an obvious replacement. The forend cap is stamped with "F" over "55" and maybe "O" over "21". The forend wood has some "tiger stripping" and has a red tint, so stained beech? Front handguard cap stamped with "S.M.", so obviously a replacement.

Magazine - stamped with broad arrow and "KO" on back of rib on back of magazine. There are some other marks, but they are mostly obliterated. The magazine has been serialed for 3 rifles, my rifle being the last. Magazine follower stamped with "F49"

Front sight protector, bands - unstamped - nada.

Trigger, trigger guard - trigger with Savage "S" stamp and some other stamps that look like inspection stamps, trigger guard has a big partial "B" (?) stamped next to, and under, the loop, and a "3" on the other side.

That is enough for one night. Opinions - who thinks that this can/should be put back to 1941 configuration?

In this case, I think a good cleaning is all that I would do. Leave it as is. Bubba doesn't seem to have messed w/ it, so it's just likely showing that it DID see a bit of use, and needed a military overhaul.

"That is enough for one night. Opinions - who thinks that this can/should be put back to 1941 configuration?" --spinecracker

I'm sure with enought time that the rifle can be restored to it's 'as assembled' condition, but I'm not sure that I would. Right now you have a sought after '41 Long Branch that has done it's job the world over and has survived mostly intact. Who, where and when repairs were made will likely stay a mystery, but are the history of the rifle. I'd clean her up and display/shoot her proudly.

The F/xx are Fazakerley over year stamps so in '55 or later the rifle was maintained.

Brad

This is why I am asking, Brad, as I respect the views of the other forum members here - and most of them have forgotten more than I will ever know lol.

I was considering, as an alternative, getting all the pieces to put the rifle back to 1941 configuration, but still keeping the parts the rifle came to me with - with a small amount of effort, the rifle could be displayed in it's original glory and, at will, changed back to the state it ended up in - a before and after montage if you will - and it would not involve making a single permanent change to the rifle.

Someone has already offered me an early forend, but I do not know what kind of wood would have ben used. So far I have heard that either walnut or birch were used in making early Long Branch forends - comments anyone?

Any idea what wood this might be?

Attachment 13792

My comment? Leave well enough alone. The rifle is probably quite original, perhaps even the forend too. AFAIK, we don't know where in the SN range the changeover to the "normal" forend occured.

Never heard of or seen early LB forends in Birch myself. Have seen them on early Maltby's, but nowhere else.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by spinecracker

The safety catch looks to be stamped with a "B" and a board arrow. The rear sight is a Fazakerley Mk.1 micrometer sight.

Cocking piece is replacement, stamped "N67 Mk.II". Bolt head is stamped with the Savage "S" and there are no other markings (I know that Savage helped Long Branch out several times with parts, and vice versa, including 1941, so the bolt head may be original, but we will never know).

wood - butt stamped with Savage "S", has arsenal heel repair. Cannot find any marking on forend, but it is an obvious replacement. The forend cap is stamped with "F" over "55" and maybe "O" over "21". The forend wood has some "tiger stripping" and has a red tint, so stained beech? Front handguard cap stamped with "S.M.", so obviously a replacement.

Magazine - stamped with broad arrow and "KO" on back of rib on back of magazine. There are some other marks, but they are mostly obliterated. The magazine has been serialed for 3 rifles, my rifle being the last. Magazine follower stamped with "F49"

Front sight protector, bands - unstamped - nada.

Trigger, trigger guard - trigger with Savage "S" stamp and some other stamps that look like inspection stamps, trigger guard has a big partial "B" (?) stamped next to, and under, the loop, and a "3" on the other side.

---

Looking over my previous post, I would have thought the stamps on the forend and upper hand guard would have indicated they were later replacements - I cannot imagine how they could be original (not making any comments as to when the change-over from early to later style forends happened, just that the forend is definitely not original to the rifle from what I can tell). The rear sight, safety catch, cocking piece and magazine are obviously replacements, and might/maybe withstand being replaced with LB parts at some later date, but that is a decision for the future. I am in no hurry to change anything lol.

Spinecracker,

You know my opinion from earlier PM's, I would leave it alone! Unless Bubba got a hold of one, I always leave mine as I get them!

I hear ya, Surpmil and tlvaughan. I reassembled the gun this morning after my last post, and had a good think. If the metalwork was in better condition (like the example in the knowledge library) and the "50" stamp was not present, then I think I would restore this rifle in a heartbeat. Right now, it looks right for what it has been through, so why mess with it (you can see from my earlier posts that I was ready to toss a coin on this one lol). I may even keep the lower band, even though it has been drilled for an Indian grenade launcher sight, but the forend does not have the cut-outs on either side that would be expected. Any idea as to where this rifle may have been in service? The 5-pointed star stamp on the receiver has got me befuddled, and I do not like beinf befuddled.

Besides, I have owned 2 1941 Long Branches since January 2010, and the 3rd might just be the lucky one (all matching, correct wood, seller doesn't know what he has......now that would be heaven lol)

spinecracker, With patience you may get an answer. Post the question every few months or so. It took a couple of years to learn why my Maltby twins looked the way they do.

Brad

Brad, you read my mind...I'm just throwing out questions that have popped into my head that may help with future 1941 Long Branches (you never know what might pop up at the next gun show). Contrary to public opinion, I can be quite patient lol.

Got hit by a big medical bill today, so the Long Branch has to go. I will officially be enfieldless in the near future, and will be slumming it at the gun range with a Mosin Nagant and a pea shooter....

Edit - when I got the bill, I gritted my teeth - I think I cracked a tooth - ouwwwwiieee!!!!

Gunbroker is your friend in that case.:ugh:

Makes me glad we've got the NHS here spinecracker - hope everyone's doing well in any case!

Official update - the forend suffered a catastrophic accident - is now in 3 bits and cannot be salvaged. I have therefore decided to at least tidy the little old lady up a bit (well, she is almost 70 years old) with an early LB forend and some other LB parts. Photos will be forthcoming in the near future. The only parts I am now looking for are an LB buttstock and lower hand guard.

Photos as promised. The replacement LB buttstock will be here in about a week's time, but I thought I'd try out my new digital camera. The rear hand guard colour does not match as well as I would like (has a hint of red that is missing on the rest of the wooden furniture), but it is a Long Branch part and may even be original to the rifle (we will never know). The rifle may have seen better days, but it just looks right with the early LB parts. The only part that is not LB-marked is the front sight blade (fat chance of me ever finding an LB-marked one lol). The magazine is unserialed and is solid on the underside, and has a slight plum tint that looks very nice. Calculating the cost of this restoration, I can only say that this was a labour of love lol (especially with the LB-marked hinged upper band).

Well used but looks very original. A nice find and that's probably the original "deep-drawn" mag as well.

Picture 3, top row. Is that a serial number stamped into the cocking piece? That's where the hardness meets the toughness and the snapping usually(?) occurs. I bet stamping that didn't do the cocking piece much good.....or the stamps!

Peter, that is an inspector's mark on the cocking piece (I checked in the knowledge library for the 1941 Long Branch - see photo 122).

MKL entry for 1941 No.4 Mk1 Long Branch Rifle (click here)

http://photos.imageevent.com/badgerd...20_Medium_.JPG(Click PIC to Enlarge)http://photos.imageevent.com/badgerd...20_Medium_.JPG(Click PIC to Enlarge)http://photos.imageevent.com/badgerd...20_Medium_.JPG

Surpmil, the only parts I did not change on this rifle so far have been the rear hand guard (which may be changed if I can find a good replacement), the bolt, the receiver or the barrel. The magazine is a replacement (but correct deep-drawn type), as is the bolt head, cocking piece, safety catch assembly, forend, front hand guard, buttstock, buttplate, foresight protector, upper and lower bands, rear sight, trigger guard and swivels (I think that is everything). As I said, it was a labour of love.

Thanks Badger for correcting the post. I didn't have time as I was in the process of rushing out of the door on an errand :)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Peter Laidler

Picture 3, top row. Is that a serial number stamped into the cocking piece? That's where the hardness meets the toughness and the snapping usually(?) occurs. I bet stamping that didn't do the cocking piece much good.....or the stamps!

---

Contrary to good engineering prctice, at least as of the 1960's, it seems many cocking pieces are stamped in that stressed location. Definitely a stress riser in an area subject to "fatigue failure". Esp. the "LB" marking- it's JUST behind the worst possible "don't do it!" zone.

Of the half dozen I've seen they all had those stamps. I've only ever seen one broken one, and that was because a rifle club type heat treated it to glass hard in the hope of improving his trigger let-off. The heat marks are clearly visible and were confirmed by the then owner - I got it as a loose part. It snapped right at the half-cock detent or whatever the proper term is.

For all the LB experts

In one post Spinecracker mentioned the wood, walnut beech etc, just wonder what would be correct for a Longbranch No4 Mk1* ? got one on the way with 2 groove barrel dated 1942.

I'm a bit confused about this type of cocking piece being used on a 41 long branch? Ae you guys saying its not normal? Im no expert, just curious.

The button-type Mk.1 cocking piece is correct for a 1941 Long Branch. In 1942 the design was changed to the flat-sided Mk.2 cocking piece. As there were still some stocks of Mk.1 cocking pieces left over, they got fitted to some later rifles as well. At least, that is what I have been told.

were longbranch parts dated?? I have a 42 Mk1* bolt with the button, of my factory bubba gun

As far as I am aware, they were not date marked (only the barrel and receiver were date marked). Your rifle was made at Long Branch in 1942, so a button-type Mk.1, although uncommon, would not be out of place.

thats what i thought, just got mixed up.....