Printable View
Maybe some of the forum can shed some light on this that sold for over 1700.00 on Gun Broker. Seller claims it is unissued. The serial no is in the Z series. It's not like this was never fired. I have a minty one in the early AA series that I know was issued and is comparable in condition to the pics on the auction.
British Lee Enfield No5 Jungle Carbine Unissued : Curios and Relics at GunBroker.com
Would like to know what the forum think of this No 5.
Some folk got more money than sense??? Now everyone will think their No.5 is gold. Could be shill bids, could be one-upsmanship, grudge match, who knows?
It's a nice rifle but not that crispy new!
No5's are regularly advertised here around the thousand dollar AU mark, but 1700 US sounds a bit over the top
Have I got this right? It appears to me that the finish has been applied OVER the London Proofs. Those marks can only have been made AFTER the rifle was sold out of service. Very odd.
I thought that too Beery..............
Looks to me like its been re-blacked. I've had a few "mint/unused" No5s, and they all had some degree of wear on the finish - usually on the portion of the barrel between forend and flash hider.Quote:
Originally Posted by Beerhunter
The Faz #5's I have are all pretty nice (used) condition and they all have 70 to 80% of the original Sunkorite finish remaining. On my rifles Sunkorite is a semi-gloss finish. Actually has a muted shine to it. That auction rifle has a very flat appearing finish which makes me lean toward a "restoration" job. Brian Dick knows Suncorite very well. Hope he might chime in on this one. Anyhow that seller did REAL well, cant say the same for the buyer.
More auction insanity. Like I always say, all those good deals are out there on the auction sites guys!
To my eye if someone faked it up they went to the trouble of polishing off the original electric pencil markings and redoing them after the paint went on. The proof marks on the barrel look like they went on top of the paint, but that on the receiver ring does not, though the ENGLAND stamp does.
Some loss of paint on the bolt knob, which would be commensurate with moderate useage.
Yon woodwork hath a soft and sanded look...however. I've got a new forend of that type and it looks quite a bit more crisp than that.
But that's just how it looks to me...
Pretty much what I saw too. I've got no explanation whatsoever for that price though. :madsmile:Quote:
Originally Posted by Surpmil
I see that it's a 1947 - Z serial number prefix. Anyone out there in Forumland know the last Fazakerley No5 serial numbers. I expect it's out there somewhere.
When we were overhauling them, although I didn't take that much notice, I quickly realised that they ascended alphabetically in line with the month/year dates.
Mine is a 4/47 and its AA2XXX. I have the number list somewhere. I'll look tomorrow.Quote:
Originally Posted by Peter Laidler
I can't agree. I have one of those engravers (as they are called now) and with a little practice I could follow the original marking under a re-finish to achieve exactly that effect.Quote:
Originally Posted by Surpmil
However to me it is the London Proof marks that are the clincher that this rifle has been refinished. The "Armed Arm" holding a Seax on the barrel is is part of the London Proof mark and it has clearly been applied prior to the current finish. There are just a few glints on some numbers on the rest of the Proof marks that seem to have been caused by loss of some finish.
I think the wood and numbers are all genuine - the numbers have that "look" to them common to mint rifles. I suspect that just the barrel and breech ring have had a coat of something to tidy up the scuff and scratch marks you find even on "mint" rifles.Quote:
Originally Posted by Beerhunter
Peter,
The last reported serial number prefix for Fazakerley No5s I am aware of is "AC", which ran at least from August to December 1947----I had August and October, Lewis Maynard had December.
-----krinko
Thanks for that Krinko. I knew that someone would know