Printable View
Does anyone over here remember anything about the horrible cut down No4 rifles that were marked as having been "converted" to No 5 rifles in Nicosia, Cyprus?
I know they were called out as fakes years ago, but have forgotten most of the details of the online discussion at the time.
Someone at Gunboards has posted photos of one of these things wearing a sorry excuse for a No5 bayonet copy and I would like a refresher course in the whys and wherefors, if anyone remembers them.
-----krinko
I thought that it was revealed that they were made up in Sidney, and that "NIC/CYP" were the initials of the individuals or gunsmith entities involved.
I was in Nicosia Cyprus when #4's were the thing to carry by affected parties. I seriously doubt they had ANY interest or knowledge about converting rifles to anything but serviceable. They simply wouldn't spend the time. They weren't gun people. Peter Laidler was there too, maybe he can back me up here.
I posted on a thread recently about the NIC/CYP rifles and from what I understand they came out of Cyprus in the 1980s. I got my NIC/CYP conversion in 1993. All this time I thought it was Cypriot, you learn somthing new everyday.
The carbines in question were purchased by a UK dealer back in the 80's. I'll check my travel doc's and give you a date, as I was there when the arrived at his warehouse. They ran from new to "bog standard" as was the expression at the time. IF memory serves me right, they came out of the east, and I am thinking India/Indonesia/Thailand area. If I have a chance I will call him and see if he remembers or will check his books, as this has been going on for a long time, trying to pin the damned things down as to origin. He gave me one at the time, so I will see if I can find it and post the markings. It was a "bog standard" but the price was right...free!!!! The days when you could bring something back on the airplane and they never batted an eye.
I am aware of a group of No.5s converted by Victoria Trading and sold by them with NiC markings and a story of them coming from Cyprus. We heard from Springfield Sporters that VT was buying up all the No. 5 unique parts they could find. Warren paid the right price.
Thanks to everyone for responses---Thunderbox has hit the memory button for me, the Sydney story was the one I heard, years ago. Wheaty has an interesting line, as does PB. More than one forger at work?
Anything more is welcome.
-----krinko
Can ANYONE post a pic of these ubiquitous pieces?
Lee Enfield Jungle Carbine No. 4 Conversion questions? [Pictures Included]
Here's a link to the Gunboards thread, I don't want to steal the guy's photos. In the first shot of the left side, the "NIC CYP" can be seen.
-----krinko
PauL The ones JR at Victoria Trading got were from my contact in the UK.... There was less than a couple of hundred which is the reason why none of the bigger dealers touched them. Too small a lot to advertise.
If anyone needs to copy the pictures or use them its ok for posting I am just curious as to the history of this rifle. So if I understand this right the ones in my photos are from possibly ones VT did.
Okay, I won't argue as I never saw one and never heard if they had import marks. VT pulled so many games, it is easy to believe the worst. If I remember correctly Springfield Sporters also told me VT bought No.5 parts from Numrich. I can't see them ever being collectible.Quote:
Originally Posted by wheaty
So, Wheaty, are they genuine? Suspect? A complete fabrication of two Australian gunsmiths?
It would be good to see photos of the proof marks on masterdiver's rifle---the British commercial proof and any kind of mark on the barrel.
-----krinko
From what has been stated above, they are completely fabricated, by whom is still in question.
"From what has been stated above..."
Oh, really, jona?
Where?
This bit seems to be the only first-hand experience---
"The carbines in question were purchased by a UK dealer back in the 80's. I'll check my travel doc's and give you a date, as I was there when the arrived at his warehouse. They ran from new to "bog standard" as was the expression at the time. IF memory serves me right, they came out of the east, and I am thinking India/Indonesia/Thailand area. If I have a chance I will call him and see if he remembers or will check his books, as this has been going on for a long time, trying to pin the damned things down as to origin. He gave me one at the time, so I will see if I can find it and post the markings. It was a "bog standard" but the price was right...free!!!! The days when you could bring something back on the airplane and they never batted an eye"---Fra Wheaty
---doesn't seem to be anything unequivocal in there, not even the highlighted part, which starts out with a big "IF".
Perhaps there's an implication there---but I don't know Wheaty well enough to make an assumption and draw a conclusion.
Sorry.
-----krinko
This one isn't mine, mine had a greek name carved into the butt (Unknown if its original or not)
https://www.milsurps.com/images/impo...01/50167-1.jpg
https://www.milsurps.com/images/impo...1/50167c-1.jpg
https://www.milsurps.com/images/impo...1/50167d-1.jpg
Oh no! They are back to haunt me again.
As to the origins of these conversions I can add nothing, but I do know a little about a batch of 28 of these things that VTC sent to California. Warren is correct, they did arrive in Vermont from the UK, through a British arms agent who supplied a lot of VTC's wares at the time.
JR told me on the phone that there were 145 of these conversions discovered in a warehouse in England which also held four or five hundred real No. 5 rifles. (Obvious question - why not buy those?) His possible origin theory, told with extensive qualifiers, revolved around British armorers stationed on Cyprus, but usually ended with, "Who knows?". Believe what you will about any of that, but what we do know, according to his newsletter/catalogs that I still have, is that his original, classic, "Pre-arrival" price was $275, then $350 after they got to Vermont, then finally rose to $399. A gunshop in the San Fernando Valley bought some of these and retailed them at $499.95.
As to the 28 I examined at length when they first got to California in early April of 1993, most had import marks, although some appeared to be lacking them. At this point in time, John Appleton of Fairfax, Virginia, since deceased, was handling VTC's UK imports, and, as my Envoy and Enforcer bear witness, Mr. Appleton's import stamp was, gratefully, very discrete and lightly struck, so perhaps the "unmarked" rifles really had instead, almost imperceptible, Appleton import marks.
The majority of these conversions were built on Longbranch No. 4 Mk I* actions, and, according to my notes made at the time, JR said about 20% of the 145 he imported were built on British receivers, which seemed to be the case with the ones I examined. My first thought after examining the 28 was that they certainly weren't the product of British armorers - a point not well received back in Vermont.
This group of conversions shared many characteristics. Judging by their condition, most seemed to have been built on well-used, No. 4 Mk I, No. 4 Mk I* and no. 4 Mk 1/2 actions, which had been re-barreled with newer, good condition, No. 4 barrels. None had matching bolts, although they had "supposedly" been re-headspaced. They all had brand-new locking bolts, (safeties), and new, Mk 3, or Mk 4, stamped rear sights. The new butt cap assembly was obviously an aftermarket product, but, if I remember correctly, the flash eliminators were new and genuine. All the wood had been converted to No. 5 configuration from No. 4 components. Some of the wood was walnut, but most was not. Although these rifles had obviously seen no use since conversion, the woodwork had obviously been converted from previously used components, with no new butts, fore-ends, or handguards, in evidence. All had the nice, fresh, "CONV No 5 NIC/CYP" markings stamped into the receiver wall.
None of this contributes to the origin answer, I know, and, although JR was a rather, "colorful" character, I saw his operation in Vermont at the time and he certainly didn't have the facility to make them there himself, so, with the evidence of the import marks, and Warren's statements, helping to corroborate the warehouse in England story, I think it is pretty safe to say that VTC got them from the UK. Where they were before that is anyone's guess, with Warren's view being better than most. It seems to me to be beyond the realm of coincidence for the markings to actually be, oh so conveniently, the initials of a couple of Aussie gunsmiths. Doesn't make a lot of sense economically either, as JR told me his wholesale price was only $150 each. That certainly couldn't leave much profit for two chaps in Australia to acquire at least 145 rifles and parts, spend the time, labor and material to convert them, then ship them all the way to the UK. A country with significantly lower labor and shipping costs than those of Australia would seem to be a much more logical candidate.
Of the 28 I saw in April of '93, I acquired three for myself - two Longbranch's, (33L3240 and 60L5245), and what had been a Brit No. 4 Mk 1, (F28946A), that had been converted to a No. 4 Mk 1/2 in 1952, so obviously the No. 5 conversion was done well after 1952, judging by the 1/2 conversion date and the well-used condition of the receiver.
These rifles instantly became the subject of much controversy on the forums at the time, and, together with being told at the San Fernando Valley gunstore I mentioned earlier, of the flash eliminator on one of these rifles chasing a bullet down range, my initial doubts about them came to a head, and, for the first time in my life, I sold rifles out of my collection. As a very famous collector had previously bought the last of the 28, (and consequently the worst example), I don't feel too embarassed to have been temporarily mislead as to their authenticity. Out of respect for the man, I won't mention the name of famous collector who was also taken in, but rest assured, he doesn't subscribe to any of these forums.
Before anyone asks, I sold the last of these three rifles at the Phoenix gun show just a couple of years ago. (It took that long to convince myself I'd made a mistake in putting them in the collection, and then quite a while longer to unload them.) When I did sell them, I told the buyers upfront as much as I knew of their history and showed them the original Victoria Trading Company catalog, as well as what I thought of the accuracy of the printed advertisement. Cautioning the buyers that these were not collectibles, but rather something that would make a decent, knock-around, truck gun, I sold them very reasonably - $200 for the last one. My conscience wouldn't allow me to sell something that is so obviously a put-together, unless the buyer knew precisely what it was. Sure enough, those that bought them said a truck gun beater was exactly what they were looking for, so, what was initially a depressing, 15-year long story, finally had a happy ending when these rifles found homes where they are now used and appreciated for what they are.
As to how I acquired some of this knowledge, I have a worthless VTC stock certificate to remind me of an early investment error.
Hopefully there is something of worth here.
Terry
If these rifles were put together in UK, it would explain why they bear the same style of pantograph engraving that appears on many other types of conversion and recreation....
First of all THANKS to all of you for responding and all the information that was passed on. I guess this will become a truck gun beater. I will be shooting it pretty soon so we see what kind of shooter it is. Special thanks again to Terry Hawker for all the background and Krinko for helping with this thread
I'm sure I wrote this one, earlier today but maybe I never hit the post reply button. But, the engraving on the top photo above of CONV No5 NIC/CYP has been done by what we call a 'scratchy pen' This is a diamond tipped pen, held in a panto frame but just scratches the surface. The sort of thing you'd use on jewellery or a present to the boss. These marks are probably not even .0005" deep at best. It is definately not a genuine factory or Base Workshop job where we used the real McCoy industrial pantograph engravers made by Taylor Hobson and these marked the steel as in the second photo (the commercial contract BSA FTR mark) with a high speed rotating cutter that cut fast and deep into the steel.
Anyway, that's my two pence worth!
But are you really certain that they were NOT made in a Cyprus jungle?
Im kinda new here, but I am picking one of these up tomorrow in trade so research led me here. After reading some info on numerous boards and seeing deactivated ones for sale in the UK, I fully believe these conversions were not done here in the US. With that being said, given the original sale price of these rifles I just don't see the benefit of some armorers doing this. Given the cost of the parts and labor, would it not just be beneficial to put them together in their original configuration for more profit?
I talked to a buddy of mine who collects high quality C&R stuff, and he loves his enfields and although he didn't know much about this varient, he believes it to be authentic.
I personally believe these are authentic.
Can I prove it, or will I be ever able to prove it.. Nope With that said, I believe there is more circumstantial evidence to say they are real than a "made up" rifles. :surrender:
I found this online:
SURPLUS SURPRISES
Previously unknown military surplus guns are showing up in the U.S., making the collectors drool and ponder.
(excerpt from GI94, "Surplus Surprises" article, by Charles Karwan)
* Cyprus Police No.5 Conversion
A good many of the surplus surprises have been well-known military models converted into interesting previously unknown variations or even new models. One of the more intriguing is a variation of the familiar British No.5 "Jungle Carbine".
On the surface, these rifles look pretty much like a conventional No.5. However, close inspection reveals that they are actually No.4 rifles converted into the No.5 carbine configuration. On the left side of the receiver they are pantograph-engraved NO 5 CONV-CYP/NIC.
The barrel was shortened to carbine length and fitted with a No.5 flash-hider assembly. The forend and rear handguard were shortened to approximate No.5 specifications, and the buttstock was fitted with a No.5 buttpad/sling loop assembly. In the process, the cut for the No.4 sling swivel base has been plugged with a piece of wood. The net result is a Jungle Carbine with a heavier barrel and without the lightening cuts in the action.
No one seems to know the exact story behind these carbines. Some research has turned up pictures of Cyprus police carrying No.5 carbines. It was a logical choice due to the paramilitary-type operations they have had to conduct, and the fact that there has been dtrong British Commonwealth influence there for decades, including the U.N. peace-keeping force located there since 1964.
Considering this and the markings on these guns, I am relatively certain that these No.5-type carbines were made by or for the Nicosia police on Cyprus. They probably tried to acquire additional No.5 carbines some time after gaining independence and found that none were available. Since parts to do conversions of readily available No.4 rifles were available, that route was taken. Regardless of the reason behind these conversions, they are an interesting and previously unknown field variation.
Taken from:
http://www.public.asu.edu/~roblewis/...IID2a11a5.html
Has anybody noticed that the gunboards Rifle is a 1944 Maltby but also a No4Mk1*? Do they exist?
Yes, Maltby No.4 Mk.1*s exist, but it was apparently a marking error - the rifles are No.4 Mk.1s with the separate bolt release catch, not the slot as seen on Long Branch and Savage No.4 Mk.1*s.
There was apparently a run of mismarked Maltbys in 1944. They're actually Mk1s but are marked Mk1*. From the s/n's I've seen posted, there could be quite a few (50k-ish?) about.Quote:
Originally Posted by XL39E1
But I cannot see a release catch were it should be, or come to that a Long Branch type Release either! Confused!!
What do you guys make of this one? Its a 1943 Long branch with a 1946 Barrel.
Attachment 31178Attachment 31179Attachment 31180Attachment 31181Attachment 31182
The marking I'm interested in is the ' No4 MkI " ' marking which I've observed on @10-12 Brit No4MkI rifles.Quote:
Originally Posted by spinecracker
Anyone have an explanation for the ' " ' marking?
Let me get this right Yellowsled........ I 'm slightly confused in your slightly ambiguous assertion a few threads up. And I suspect that a few others are too. Are you seriously suggesting that the 'Cypriot' No4/5 rifle hybrids are an official military or Police conversion?
I dont drink the Kool-aid of thinking that just because I cant explain it I believe it is a fake. Let me explain....
A perfect example is the Mosin m1891/59. (Link here for more on the M1891/59) No one knows who build these guns, or the reason but they are accepted as a legitamate varient of the weapon. I believe it is such for this NIC/CYP weapon.
The big question I ask myself, why would someone do this to these weapons? I am not a Enfield expert, but I would think a 1943 Long Branch unmolested would be more desirable than a hack bubba job, no? I have to use some common sense to believe these are a legit variant that was made for some reason. Maybe they weren't used in Greece, but there is definitely something going on here.
Do I not have one shred of proof these are legit, but I also don't have any proof that the m1891/59 is legit either. :surrender:
-Evan :thup:
Jungle? Cyprus? The place is practically a desert.Quote:
Originally Posted by villiers
Attachment 31204That´s why I asked (been there, in a DC3 on my way to Suez).
Here´s my absolutely genuine, one of a kind, Greek Jungle No. 5 with a .308 Bren barrel (to compensate the abhorrent `wandering zero´) on a No.4 Mk 2 action (to alleviate the well known weakness of the No. 5 `lightened´ action) made by Enfield Skunkworx to the exacting standards of the South Yemen Camel Corps
Gotta agree here with Yellowsled on this one. It seems an awful lot of bother for someone to go to to make a poor man's copy of the Jungle Carbine and sell it for a few more bucks than the standard going rate for a No.4 rifle. Bearing that in mind, I would tend to think some of kind of paramilitary/police connection such as the South African conversion of the Mark V SMLE to a police carbine or the bobbing off of Long Lees in New Zealand for game control. The sheer fact that someone went to the trouble to hunt up or modify parts off an existing No.4, tack on some J.C. bits and pieces and then to go to the trouble to engrave the receiver with fake markings all for a negligible profit margin boggles the mind and militates strongly against this rifle being merely a back alley bubba job!
Unless of course they hid a stash of them to bring out some time in, oooh 2012 for instance:)
The one I posted pictures of came out of a large private collection that was being liquidated due to the guy was up there in years and you cant take them with him where he will be going. His collection consisted of multiple hundred high end firearms.
Check out this thread I dug up from 2005...
Enfield issues - TheFiringLine Forums
"The British did alter a large batch of #4 rifles into #5 carbines after WWII.
Apparently, these were done for use on Cyprus after the war and were a valid British official alteration.
These were imported into the US about 15 years ago.
They still had #4 rifle markings, but also had some kind of British ordnance conversion marks.
However, most of the #4 to #5 rifles you see around were altered by importers."
"That would be the Cyprus Police No.5 Conversion. They are engraved on the side with NO 5 CONV-CYP/NIC. Its been given the number 5 butt sling swivel and the old one has been filled in with a wood plug. It had nothing to do with the British, but used for paramilitary police roles in the 50s-60s.
From what I have heard they don't have the wandering zero problem due to their extra weight since they have none of the lightening milling done on it."
That sounds like another long story to me...I was over there twice for extended periods and NEVER saw one. Everything but.
in the 50's?Quote:
Originally Posted by browningautorifle
Nope. I expected an answer like that. Sounds like you haven't been there at all. When I was there they were using almost exclusively Lee Enfields and the commonwealth equipment. If they were there before, they would have still been there. Nothing was thrown away.
Lets address this in 2 parts..Quote:
Originally Posted by browningautorifle
First, I saw my share of the world while serving in the Navy, and it did include Greece. It wasn't the mainland , but I was there.
Second, if they were converted for British forces for use over there, why are you so sure they didn't take them with them when they left?
to conclude, if you look at some UK websites, there is at least 2 right now that are selling these "fakes" as military firearms.
Here is one, and Ill try to find the other:
http://www.battleflagmilitaria.co.uk/ search for "Jungle Carbine" and you will see it
edit: here is another one..
http://www.gunshop-eb.co.uk/Military%20Rifles1.php
I am not going to convince anyone of anything they are dead set on not believing. Maybe Century Arms did all the conversions on the M91/59's too.
I odn't think anyone is dead set on not believing. We all want to find out the real story and enough of us have been burned by a story attached to a rifle to be cynical, plus there is also a fairly good percentage of crusty older types here too:). Personally I don't see either what someone would gain from creating these rifles at the time as they would have made no profit and it would probably have been a significant amount of work. I'd say that having Peter Laidler examine some of the workmanship up close on one of these would be a good idea to assess the standards the work was done too.
I think its fairly significant that the "Conv No5 NIC/CYP" is engraved in exactly the same font and manner as many other types of "rare Enfield" that have turned up on the market in recent years.....
My guess would be that they were made by someone like Charnwood at the time when they had a huge mountain of Enfield parts. Easy enough to screw together a couple of hundred No5s if you happen to have all the parts to hand; equally easy to dump them into the Trade so that they disperse around the world.
Anyone rediscover the story about the two Australian gunsmiths who made these up? Thought it was one of our own board members who provided some evidence?
I'm totally with T/box here. When I look at these supposed No5's, I think of the phrase '.............bent as a corkscrew' I mean that phrase as in the rifles and not to any person.
In terms of the quantity of these 'conversions', then if some nation, like Cyprus really truly needed this quantity, then they'd be able to source the real McCoy by the bucketfull. The Far East friendly Commonwealth/Allied nations were awash with them
Just because something cant be explained and some "internet guy" heard that they were done two Austrailian gunsmiths, and NIC/CYP is their initials, that must be the reason.:rolleyes:
Even though there is ZERO proof this is true. Its much easier to dismiss that what we dont understand the meaning. as a fake.
as Peter Laidler commented
"In terms of the quantity of these 'conversions', then if some nation, like Cyprus really truly needed this quantity, then they'd be able to source the real McCoy by the bucketfull. The Far East friendly Commonwealth/Allied nations were awash with them "
What nation right after a war can source all new weapons and rebuild their country at the same time?
Maybe its not that hard, Maybe the same sort of nations that would take time and money to rebuild Japan after defeat and rebuild and restart car factories in Germany to kickstart the local economy are the same sort of nations that would help out their allies aswell? In fact I'd say that they are definitely the sort of countries that would hand over surplus Enfields to help guard against any potential unrest in certain areas. Its cheaper to give arms to the right guys than to pay the price for the results of them not having them. (See also under 'Afghanistan : Invasion thereof', which is apparently one of the reasons that milsurp 303 disappeared in massive quantities in the late 80s).
Considering who the importer was here in the USA and the exporter in the UK, it's not rocket science as to the origins of these rifles. I've given them a wide berth since day one. Folks can believe whatever their little hearts desire but they aren't and never will be genuine military conversions. They DO make good shooters and pickup truck rifles but should be priced accordingly. Buy the rifle not the story if you want it.
What war are we talking about here? Cyprus was controlled by Britain until the 60's and if Cyprus is/was anything like the rest of the Nations we let go, they'd have been left with pretty much whatever they wanted........... and by the 60's, I'm not so sure that they'd have been interested in gearing up to produce mickey mouse No5 replicas! Like I said earlier, they're about as 'straight' as a corkscrew..........
Think all those dealers and enthusiasts with Sunbeam Alpine cars converting them into Sunbeam Tigers
Are you, perchance, casting an aspersion on my Greek Charnwood? (If so .... pistols at dawn!)
And digressing, I want a sunbeam tiger.... Was the difference just the engine?
I thought they had a 427cu in? All balls and no brakes??
Thats over a 6 liter engine... you'd need more than brakes, you'd need a parachute
Yes, but that's what I was told. I only know of one in this area. Are we off topic yet?
I think so. have a good weekend all.