Bitsa's - What to do with them?

Made up, put together from bits totally un-collectable (or are they)Lee Enfield rifles. What should we do with them?.
I now have two possibly three of these rifles and in order to keep them I have to shoot them at least 3 times a year each. What should I do with them?.

1)Dismantle them again, keep the spares that the law allows and give the restricted pressure bearing parts to a Registered Firearms dealer to use or dispose of?.
2) Keep them, improve them, modify and shoot them while allowing the preservation of the more collectable ones (for others to collect and make a profit on)?.
3) De-Activate them, make a profit and find some collectable ones?. (Not really an option!)
4)Sell them on .......

What do you do with the bitsa's you get stuck with?

I'd be interested in hearing from others in different parts of the world what type of gun laws/restrictions/prohibs are on the books in their respective countries. While Canada has it's share of nonsensical laws, it sounds like we are more fortunate than most. Thanks for your post jss, it's got me to thinking !

There's (almost) no such thing as uncollectable when it comes to man-made objects. Looking at the prices achieved in online auctions, it seems that the average bitsa is worth less than the sum of its parts. Sights, woodwork, buttplates, magazines, trigger guards etc - in short all the non-restricted components - can quite possibly be sold for more than you would get for the complete object. Because you are selling parts to some poor character who is absolutely up the well-known creek without a paddle if he does not get that part (about the most expensive way of getting a rifle is to buy a bitsa or a sporter with the idea that it will be no problem to put it back into its original configuration).

Regulations, time and space limitations, and economics, all say: part out the duds, hand over the restricted bits to a registered dealer, get them off your ticket, and sell the unrestricted parts online.

Patrick
:wave:

Here in Mauserland one can only purchase 2 long guns in half a year. Then there is a compulsory wait of another half a year before you can buy another. And you have to shoot them all to prove that you have a legitimate (sporting) need. So when I go to the range, I usually take more than one with me, to keep up the demonstrable training usage as recorded in my shooting book, each entry signed and stamped by the range officer.

As a result, one is reluctant to pick up any "strays looking for a good home", because when you have just used up your "2 in 6 months" allowance, Murphy's Law guarantees that the very next week you are going to find an amazing example of a type you have always wanted at a very favorable price! Tough!

But the positive side of this is that it forces you to think "Do I really want it.? And if I had it, would I really shoot it". It really puts the brakes on collecting for its own sake. And when I read of people in other countries stashing away hundreds of rifles, with multiple examples of the same type, with neither time nor inclination to shoot them, but merely the "dog in the manger" effect of preventing someone else (like me???) from being able to shoot one at all, while they post whining contributions about scarcity and increasing prices, well then I think - maybe a brake on sheer collecting isn't such a bad thing.

Think on't you hoarders who proudly boast that you have 99 No. 4Ts in the cellar. Are you 99 times a better shot than everybody else? Or have you merely prevented 98 others from having one?

Patrick
:wave:

I have bitsas that I have made / rescued from being bubbaified / sporterized. Disappointing to think that as I'm trying to get rifles back to military condition, others might be breaking them up for parts.

I love desporterising these things. My favorite rifle next to my Model 70 is my No.4 Long Branch that I unBubbaed. I don't think it will ever be truly finished and I've learned a lot from the experience. I am in the U.S. so I don't have the ownership issues a lot of you do so that plays a big part.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by jss

Made up, put together from bits totally un-collectable (or are they)Lee Enfield Rifles. What should we do with them?.
I now have two possibly three of these rifles and in order to keep them I have to shoot them at least 3 times a year each. What should I do with them?.

---

Hi JSS, The first question I would ask is were the rifles bought for "sporting / shooting" or as part of a collection? If the first is the case then you would be expected to use them to justify there ownership if the second is the case then shooting them is not necessary.
The law in the UK seems to split "shooters" as people with a couple of rifles that shoot on a regular basis either target or vermin/game shooting, and collectors as people with a collection but with no ammunition. There is however a third way that a lot of Police forces seem to ignore as it does not fit in with the way they want to enforce gun control. The "occasional" shooter is a collector that has a collection and shoots, this catogory is Home Office recognised and a full description can be found on the HBSA (Historic Breechloading Small Arms) website.
To be seen as a collector you must demonstrate that you have a genuine interest ie you have books on the subject can demonstrate your interest in reserch and history of your subject. Joining an organisation like the H.B.S.A. is also a big plus as it has members around the world. If your police force does not know about the "Occasional Shooter" download the document from the H.B.S.A. site and send it to them. I started out this way and now have an extensive collection of both full bore and small bore military rifles many of which do not get shoot from one year to the next.
I have a very good police firearms section here, I brought the "Occasional Shooter" document to ther attention some years ago and they have been very helpful ever since. I know that police forces differ from area to area especially in the way they interpret and administer the gun control laws, however the law is what the law is and not what someone wants it to be, if you are a genuine collector and can prove it then there should be no reason why you can't keep your rifles and enjoy them at the range as well.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by newcastle

Disappointing to think that as I'm trying to get rifles back to military condition, others might be breaking them up for parts.

---

No, not disappointing, just reality. Don't get me wrong newcastle. I have a couple of strays myself. I bought a sporterized No. 8 for peanuts, and took great pleasure in restoring it to its original configuration AND proving (on the RWS test range) than it shoots as well as the best modern .22s. And I brought a Belgian copy of a S&W Russian revolver in 44 Henry rimfire back from the dead to a state where I have actually used it in competition. But even I have to have a reality check every now and again, and a barrel that is shot out or badly rusted turns the typical milsurp into a spare parts source.

The restrictions mean that it is just not possible to acquire everything that takes your fancy - sometimes you have to make hard choices. I had a Schultz & Larsen 98-based target rifle from 1969. It beats a lot of modern stuff. But not the best. So when I found a wonderful Snider, it had to be bye-bye S&L, which I had not shot for several years. Time and space is limited.

This spring I saw a sporterized No.4 Mk1 and thought "hey, I've got all the bits to put that back to original configuration right here - I don't need to buy anything!". But the auction price rose to the level where I concluded that it did not make sense to buy it in that condition. Buying a sporterized beater at the price for which you could buy an unaltered beater just does not make sense.

The real shock came when it turned out that it had been bought by another member of the same club! Now he is trying to get the bits together, and is refusing to face up to the fact that it is going to cost him more than if he had bought an intact No. 4 to start off with. Even if I gave him all my bits at the prices I paid. I offered to do so, but that was still too much, and he continues to hope that the missing woodwork, foresight assembly, backsight, buttplate etc etc are all going to drop from the trees.

Yes it's fun. But does it make sense?

Patrick
:wave:

HA - nothing about this hobby makes sense really, but I understand absolutely. I'm also not subject to restrictions apart from overflow from the safe and my locked room. Current project is a nO.4 mk1/2 restoration. cost of inital sporter $185, cost of parts to make a bitsa - $150 value of bitsa - $200....fun had while doing it - priceless!!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by newcastle

HA - nothing about this hobby makes sense really, but I understand absolutely.

---

.........

I think that just about puts it in a nutshell!.

I'll keep my "bitsas" (if I'm allowed) simply because someone went to the trouble of putting them back together, possibly not for profit, and that is as much (if not more) a part of their history as anything else. In fact they are almost more interesting because of it, especially when faulty. Now I just need to get fit in order to cycle the100 mile round trip to Bisley every couple of days in order to shoot them, as the cost of petrol is starting to get prohibitive.
Anyone got one of those BSA bicycles with the SMLE rack for sale?.

At least all those US basements full of Lee-Enfields have saved many from the chop simply by keeping values up enough to interest the trade. If the trade wasn't interested then much of this old stuff would disappear. There should be some way of registering unshootable spare parts but the anti-gun agenda of most authorities would never agree a practical solution ... in my opinion.

How do you tell between a bitsza and field repair,SSA,NRF,Maltby or Lithgow with a FTR stamp and dont forget the rifles returned to Australia after WW1 From England that needed rebuilding just to work.( got new ones returned worn out older ones):D

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by jss

.........

I think that just about puts it in a nutshell!.

I'll keep my "bitsas" (if I'm allowed) simply because someone went to the trouble of putting them back together, possibly not for profit, and that is as much (if not more) a part of their history as anything else. In fact they are almost more interesting because of it, especially when faulty. Now I just need to get fit in order to cycle the100 mile round trip to Bisley every couple of days in order to shoot them, as the cost of petrol is starting to get prohibitive.
Anyone got one of those BSA bicycles with the SMLE rack for sale?.

---

Jss,

Dont be fooled into thinking you have to shoot a full bore rifle on a full bore range, you can download your ammo, there is plenty of info out there regarding this, and it allows you to shoot on indoor ranges, saves on powder, case life is extended and saves your shoulder.

As Patrick pointed out take as many rifles with you to the range, I do this when I go over to Bangor, in most cases I go to test out stuff I have worked on, but take a good selection of my own to give them a run out.

Regarding your bitsa,s keep them and the slot on your ticket until something nice comes along, then do a one for one, sell the bitsa as complete or as a trade in etc, or put it on guntrader, Deactivating should be the very last on the list, once its chopped it stays chopped.

Remeber No4 barrels are becoming as scarce as rocking horse S**t, so if you have a No4 and do sell off the timber and non pressure parts etc, the barrel is the money earner.

There are many shooters who also collect, and Buccaneer has some sound advice regarding this, and with regards to the HBSA you can become a Corresponding member.

I,m like a few on here who like to bring some life back into a Milsurp that has been sporterized etc, so a few of my own are bitsa,s and in the case of a few rare ones I will build them up with what I have on hand then replace the parts with original bits when or if they become available, patience is the main factor here.

It all comes down to time and money in the end, my money ran out long ago:lol:, as for time this is becoming more limited.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by jss

I now have two possibly three of these rifles and in order to keep them I have to shoot them at least 3 times a year each.

---

That is a load of nonsense made up by your local Constabulary and probably promulgated by the local FEOs.. Those numbers have no basis in law whatsoever. Additionally they are, compared with other Constabularies, particularly draconian. Here is the actual law on the subject.

Section 30A(4) of the 1968 Firearms Act - as Amended:

The certificate may be revoked if the chief officer of police is satisfied that the holder no longer has a good reason for having in his possession, or for purchasing or acquiring, the firearm or ammunition which he is authorised by virtue of the certificate to have in his possession or to purchase or acquire.

and Section 30B(2) ibid.:

A firearm certificate may be partially revoked only if the chief officer of police is satisfied that the holder no longer has a good reason for having in his possession, or for purchasing or acquiring, the firearm or ammunition to which the partial revocation relates.

The ONLY power, under those Sections, that the Chief Officer of Police has is to revoke or partially the Certificate. That is a big step for him/her and is liable to challenge in the Crown Court: Section 30A(6) and Section30B(3).

In other words, if one's "good reason" is "target shooting" and you stop doing that, the Chief Officer Police can revoke or partially revoke your FAC. However (and it is a big however) in law (and in Guidance to Police) there are no numbers quoted and this number is by far the most onerous that I have seen. If I was you I would get that in writing.

I know that standing up to your Constabulary and (more often in my opinion) over officious FEOs is a big step for you but that is the law, not what your local plods have made up.

I have a few Bitsa's myself.. Mainly No5's and, although I have three there that are quite collectable, I do have 3 or 4 that have been "saved" and made to look somewhat like they were intended to. Long barrels gone and stocks put back like they should be (although I have kept the differeent calibres as I reckon they are collectable as Australian Wildcats) .25-303 (x2), .270-303 and .35-303. All part of our history now I reckon :thup:

If it's well set up who cares? If it's a collectable something you want to keep tucked away for posterity all well and good, but if you use it, it's all about the setup, all matching numbers or none.
Just my 2 cents.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Bindi2

How do you tell between a bitsza and field repair,SSA,NRF,Maltby or Lithgow with a FTR stamp and dont forget the rifles returned to Australia after WW1 From England that needed rebuilding just to work.( got new ones returned worn out older ones):D

---

In fairness to the Brits, it would have been unfeasible to find all the Lithgows still in service and return those specifically, plus after wastage, they could never have returned the proper number.

I also doubt they selected worn rifles specifically. Many MANY of the SMLE's in inventory had spent a long hard war shooting cordite and being dragged in the mud. The AEF rifles, for that matter, largely needed rebuilding.

Personally, I like the lithgow-rebuilt Brit rifles - they have an interesting history.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Claven2

In fairness to the Brits, it would have been unfeasible to find all the Lithgows still in service and return those specifically, plus after wastage, they could never have returned the proper number.

I also doubt they selected worn rifles specifically. Many MANY of the SMLE's in inventory had spent a long hard war shooting cordite and being dragged in the mud. The AEF rifles, for that matter, largely needed rebuilding.

Personally, I like the lithgow-rebuilt Brit rifles - they have an interesting history.

---

They got new rifles they were still building rifles they could have returned new rifles. I have some of those returned rifles one is a HT the others ,well enough said. Apart from the action there is little remaining (WW2 ,Malaya then Korea i suppose is a good run) But some of the actions are still older than any we made.

Just a question on this subject. When you speak of "Bitsa's" are you referring to rifles who have had major parts of the barreled action like bolts and barrels modified or changed by us slimy civilians or would even replacing wood and small parts that got butchered or removed put it in this category?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Bindi2

They got new rifles they were still building rifles they could have returned new rifles. I have some of those returned rifles one is a HT the others ,well enough said. Apart from the action there is little remaining (WW2 ,Malaya then Korea i suppose is a good run) But some of the actions are still older than any we made.

---

In the early 1920's, only BSA was still producing No.1 rifles in quantity and those were primarily for foreign sale and commercial use. The UK MOD only bought enough to keep the production lines from closing. They would never have had enough unissued rifles on hand to send them to Australia. In all liklihood, they simply selected a muster point near Australia, perhaps India or Singapore, and had a bunch of rifles made surplus by the size of the peacetime army gathered together, counted, and sent to Australia.

As I said, had Australia retained those lithgows (and not sent them to the UK), they would have been used and abused by diggers for the whoel war and would still have needed rebuilding in similar proportions. In general, most militaries were disposing of guns anyway - Australia, by exception, rebuilt a lot of guns to like new again - I'd be interested to know when exactly though - was it in the 1920's (I doubt...?) or predominantly in the 1930's and later when the state of world affairs and its deterioration was becoming more evident?

All that to say, I doubt hte MoD did this on purpose as a snuff to Australia's armed forces. To the brass at the war office, an Enfield listed in stores as serviceable is as good as any other - regardless of the reality of the abused state of many of the rifles coming back from the front.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Rumpelhardt

Just a question on this subject. When you speak of "Bitsa's" are you referring to rifles who have had major parts of the barreled action like bolts and barrels modified or changed by us slimy civilians or would even replacing wood and small parts that got butchered or removed put it in this category?

---

Good question. I can only go on what I have learned so far from experienced collectors and the opinions vary enormously. A "bitsa" from what I understand is one that has literally been put together(presumably in the civilian world only, because if it was done by the military it would been stamped and be "collectable" and be of significant interest???) from parts lying around or salvaged from other defunct rifles, in order to create a rifle that effectively did not exist before.
Apparently this is quite common practice and as long as it is safe and sound then that's fine. But as far as collecting is concerned, it is seems only to be worth the " sum of it's parts" (but perhaps valuable as a de-act??).
Perhaps it would be a good idea to have a system of markings for civilian gunsmiths to add to the military ones in order to retain "service history". I imagine a rifle going through FTR might have had many parts exchanged but presumably with barrel,action, bolt, magazine, all from the same maker??????. Or would that make many FTR'd rifles "Bitsa's"?.

What exactly does make a rifle NOT interesting to a collector? I suppose the rarity of all matching original condition means collectable but perhaps for some of us the" bitsas" are MORE interesting and certainly cheaper. They are also perhaps very necessary in order for the collectable ones not to get worn out and turned into guess what.

Experienced comment for the uninitiated please!.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by jss

What exactly does make a rifle NOT interesting to a collector? I suppose the rarity of all matching original condition means collectable but perhaps for some of us the" bitsas" are MORE interesting and certainly cheaper. They are also perhaps very necessary in order for the collectable ones not to get worn out and turned into guess what.

---

I made the mistake of agreeing to buy a rifle after just viewing images by email. It looked great in the photos, but on handling the rifle in person, the first thing that made me cringe was the large 'DP' stamps in the wood (none on the metal). It was a classic 'bitsa' - 1904 dated receiver, with a replacement BSA (South African) barrel. The nose cap had a different serial to the receiver - so did the rear sight. The bolt matched, but was obviously a replacement, with modern stamping font. Obviously a dealer or civilian owner had made up the rifle from various parts and used 'DP' furniture (complete with volley sights) from another rifle to make it look authentic.

As a shooter great (headspace was fine) and the barrel had a very good bore. As a 'collectable' rifle, no value to me at all! I sold it pretty quickly to someone less concerned about originality than me and fortunately got my money back. Lesson learnt - I always inspect weapons in person first now, before agreeing to buy anything!:o

I guess my problem is it would appear that I'm just not a collector in the classic milsurp definition of "collector" Their monetary value does not really interest me as I don't as a rule sell firearms once I buy them.
My interest in these rifles came as a culmination of interests. First an almost life long interest in both World War 2 equipment and bolt action rifles in general. Second an interest in most things mechanical particularly cars, guns and aircraft. My interest in Enfield rifles comes as much or even a bit more from the rifles them selves as it does from their history so Bitsa's don't as a rule bother me personally as long as they look descent and function safely and reasonably well. I can definitely understand why some one interested in them mostly for their historic and or monetary value would not want one though.

I wonder how you'd categorize rifles (and everything else too.....) that's ever passed through an Armourers shop in its life. We didn't care about re-using woodwork or changing bolts or rebarrelling or even re-using part worn barrels.......... Brens were a good example of fitting part worn pairs of barrels, different types of wood. Same as No4's.......... So, we fitted a Savage barrel to an XYZ rifle or a part worn XYZ bolt to a BSA sniper.

Are these bitza's. Wait until I tell them in the Armourers shop tomorrow while they're fitting Nottingham barrels to Enfield made SA80's with MCF pistons into H&K upper receivers. No, maybe I won't......... I won't even think about GPMG's

Don't forget all you purists out there that the ONLY time a rifle goes into an Armourers shop is because it's got a fault. Then only one of two things will happen to it. It'll be backloaded - UN fixed - OR it'll be fixed and returned to the armoury. And I never met an Armourer who searched through a box of pistons to find a BSA piston to fit into a BSA rifle - or a DE piston to fit into an Enfield. It just doesn't happen...............
Maybe Tankie or Son or Skippy are prepared to elaborate on when they last rummaged through atray of spare parts to fit an Enfield part to an Enfield made SA80 or FN part to a Belgian made GPMG

Effectively there's no way of knowing whether parts were fitted at an armory level from the spares bin or just changedout in civvy street. Question for Peter is, if you replaced a bolt on a rifle, would you guys have even bothered re stamping the new bolt with the rifle serial??

I should add as a post script to my above post that living in the U.S and in a relitivly rural and slightly more politically conservative state I don't have the firearms ownership restrictions a lot of you do (yet). If I did this would likely change my views on this slightly.

Q: Would we mark a new or replaced bolt with the rifle number? MOST ABSOLUTELY AND DEFINATELY YES. It would have been properly matched and fitted and then examined by the out-inspector before being released.

Thank you Peter for emphasizing what ought to be obvious to everybody: that the aim of an armorer is to to make the weapons serviceable. Not to match up every little non-critical part for collectors. Fortunately for practical shooters, the British and Americans did not stamp the rifle number on every part. But the Germans did.

Now I cannot imagine that any German armorer in the later stages of the war, as quality deteriorated, trigger guards were being made of stamped metal, and finally last-ditch "Volkssturm" rifles were produced (or should one say: perpetrated) would have cared a hoot about matching numbers while the growing disaster was engulfing his country. But there seem to be some collectors who would regard it as his duty to have ignored the bombs raining down and search through the rubble to get everything nicely matching for their satisfaction 70 years later. Such people need a reality check.

To cater for these expectations, it appears that in some countries one can freely purchase what can only be described as forgers tools - replica arsenal and inspectors stamps, for which I can see no legitimate use. And where one can buy such items, there are a surprising number of "all-matching as-new" K98ks on offer. It's just strange that I don't see them here in the country where they were made. Hon y soit qui mal y pense and all that. But if it makes the buyers happy...

Patrick
:wave:

Don't forget also that component manufacture was farmed out to numerous sub-contractors. For FTR a rifle would be stripped down completely and worn out components replaced whilst others would be refinished. Whilst major parts with serial numbers such as bolts and action bodies would be reunited, the others would just be the first to be picked out of the component tray when the rifle was re-assembled.
If your 'bitsa' is nothing special why not get it de-activated? It would cost around £70 (maybe less if it has a good barrel which can be traded in exchange for a worn out one!), but you can then display it at home and handle it and you also have something which can be sold without undue restriction, probably at a profit.

Did I hear someone swearing? Deactivated?

Restorations are always good projects to have. I attempt to restore to original so that all parts are marked (BSA / LSA / Enfield) from trigger guard to trigger to bands etc. The interesting part is haunting the gun shows to collect the parts so that the restorations can commence. I scored excellently yesterday with a Mk 1 nose cap which is going on my 1897 Enfield as luck would have it, it is Enfield marked so I have a match. The best thing is that it cost nothing what they go for on EBay.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Rumpelhardt

I love desporterising these things. My favorite rifle next to my Model 70 is my No.4 Long Branch that I unBubbaed. I don't think it will ever be truly finished and I've learned a lot from the experience. I am in the U.S. so I don't have the ownership issues a lot of you do so that plays a big part.

---

Good on Ya!! I have exactly the same attitude. Bubba in a way has been my friend in supplying cheap Enfields other collectors turn thier noses up to. Most of my restorations are matching #'s and in fine shape due to the fact that after they were "discharged" from military service way back in the 1960's and thereafter usually fed a diet of low pressure Remington or Winchester commercial ammo. I do however demand that any bubba I purchase has not been molested metalwise ie shortened barrels, ground off rear sight/charger bridges etc. If you love Enfields and are on a budget it's a good way to go.
Most grateful our 2nd Amendment is still intact (for the most part) after reading posts from Europe.

I am glad to see the debate is gobal. I was begining to think that my office was the only place full of gun nuts. I think we discuss this weekly. So lets recap:
1. Collectors
2. Shooters
3. Accumulators
Expensive to collect, expensive to shoot, and expensive to accumulate. I cannot define myself in just one of these categories, but, I tend towards the accumulator-shooter side. I do not think there is a simple answer. Additionally I do not do well it the abstract. So lets take a for instance.
I have a few BSA Sparkbrooks. Immeadiately the collectors see dollar / pound signs. Right! The truth be told it was sold to me on Gunbroker for 250.00 USD. It is my rabbit gun (.410).
Strange, rare and unique. So heres my math:
Sparkbrook ~15000 made
BSA-Sparkbrook ~couple of hundred maybe
1914 IP*** conversions ~4000 best gues from books
1931 .410 ~UNKN
So how many BSA-Sparkbrooks exist with a charger bridge and converted to a .410 are there? Yet it was only worth 250.00 to myself and the guy who sold it.
Possiblities for the collector:
Convert it back to a Mk1*
Convert it back to a III / III*
Leave it alone.
All three are collectable. The only thing wrong with it (used loosely) is that it has a NOS Enfield Forstock and top wood. No block. But that is just it. I use the gutted and cut down magazine to hold shot shells.
For the shooter:
Good for rabbit, deer slug (not recommended) or clays as a .410
Good for deer and target converted to .303 or wildcat
On accumulation, I have lots of NOS and used parts laying around to configure these things to what ever I want. I did change out the butt stock to match the forstock. This gave it a consistant look, but, I could have just as easily changed it the other way. I swapped some buggered out screws for new ones too.
My motto is "What would an armourer do?" Kind of what Peter said. This is not what the collectors in the office say.
The bottom line for me is to think of the reason you bought the piece in the first place. The resons are as diverse as there are people. If it still fits, meets your needs or wants, keep it. As a side note; I have not sold one yet. Probably a little easier in the states.