Hi,
in Germany is this rifle to the sale.
Link
L42 from 1988??? Is it a bad fake or an unknown L42 version?
Swen
Printable View
Hi,
in Germany is this rifle to the sale.
Link
L42 from 1988??? Is it a bad fake or an unknown L42 version?
Swen
Looks like a Charnwood Ordnance conversion
Can anyone believe that this pure fakery is really being passed of as an L42........?
In answer to the original question - it's a bad fake. My schoolboy German seems to suggest that it's being sold as the real thing.
Lets see......
Wrong magazine (sterling, should be a Enfield CR marked one)
incorrect markings (commercial, lacks "T" or "TR" marking)
Incorrect sling swivel (long target commercial, not short military pattern)
not a converted No 4 T but some commercial scope mount that replaces the rear sight.
No rear iron sight like on correct L42
Wood seems to be a crude attempt at L42 dimensions, but some how not quite correct, something is off.
The markings do look like a charnwood conversion albeit moved froward, expect most of those I have seen seem to have a reporduction Enfield magazine and have the markings just under the rear sight on the left side of the action body.
It is so differnt from a real L42 that I would doubt that fakery was intended.
Sterling conversion mag, and the scope mount / bracket looks like a, cad technik. (see link below)
Collecting and Shooting the Surplus Rifle - Cad Technik Enfield No-Gunsmith Scope Mount
Of course it is as wrong as a 9 bob note. However, I do not think Charnwood were responsible for trying to fool anyone. The CO does indeed stand for Charnwood Ordnance, & the 88 is the year of manufacture. However, as alluded to above, Charnwood marked their rifles on the rear of the receiver in front of the safety (below the rear sight) as there is a nice convenient flat on which to engrave. The marks look to me NOT to be typical of those applied by Charnwood, as well as being much further forward on the body of the rifle. Note, however, they'd need to be moved to be visible with the scope mount of the type that's been fitted. I wonder if there are/were any other marks under the mount base??
Charnwood didn't need to fake stuff like this.......they had stillages full of the real thing.
ATB
Last year I imported a fake L8 from Germany that was purchased by a client at auction. I examined an original in Nottingham in 1999. The Enfield markings are clearly displayed in Ian's books and any deviation should be suspicious. I've also had a couple of the Charnwood Ordnance 7.62 No.4's and they were both marked exactly as Roger describes.
You mark my words forumers.......... Within a year, this rifle will feature somewhere as one of the rifles put up for trials as a replacement for the old No4T or some other such bullshine. But good for a chuckle anyway
Price is also Reasonable for such a rare example......
Now's the time to start recording these fakes, it may save someone a lot of pain down the track.
I have been alluding to fakery for a few months now, there seems to be a plethora of sniper rifles suddenly appearing, good timing or good reworking?
Excellent idea.Quote:
Originally Posted by muffett.2008
Its not really a fake as there are no scope pads fitted, and if they were fitted then the markings would be obliterated!
Its not the point XL39E1, the fact is, all or most reading this its quite obvious to what it is, but its what Peter mentioned in an earlier post, when this appears again in maybe 50 years, (most of us will be gone then) if there is nothing recorded or on paper about it, then it becomes legit and someone then looses a small fortune.Quote:
Originally Posted by XL39E1
Thats how forgery and fakes work, bring them into the system at the right time, or when there is an interest and people are willing to pay daft money, what you need to remember is, its estimated that 40% of the worlds art is fake.
I see your point!
With one born every minute the seller may get lucky.
I think it will probably go as a 'collector's item' rather than as a shooter, as any prospective buyer would surely have a guide dog & a white stick....
Personally I agree with XL39's original comments. Calling it a fake L42 gives it a gravitas it doesn't deserve. It's just a lash up, not even vaguely like a real L42. Perhaps I'm being overly naive, but with more information coming to light on these weapons over time (& with more books being written/rewritten) I am hopeful that the collector of tomorrow will be better informed than us........But I always was an optimist.
ATB
Have you noticed how all of a sudden all the suspect rifles have disappeared from the forum.
Is it seasonal? Do they just come at you in batches in the hope that one may slip through?
There's one thing though, the forum goes quiet without them, or is it that we all grab for our numbers stamps and a bit of acid for fast ageing?
Just wondered.
You have a point muffett. There's nothing like a good (or is it bad?) sniper fake being offered in the public domain to stimulate lively debate on the forum!
ATB