Special LB 1943

Good Day Gents,

I was hoping you could tell me a few things about this Rifle. I’ve just started researching her after procrastinating some twenty years and have landed here; to hear the judgment of experts and to share this gun with you…
This 1943 No.4mk1* was presented in 1945 to the Assistant Manager of the Long Branch Arsenal. He was there for many decades up to it’s closing, including, through the war years.
His son, my Father, would tell me their version of take your kid to work day, at 10, 11, 12yrs old, would be firing Stens and .50cal aircraft guns across the lake all day long, “because they couldn’t go out untested son…. “
I remember going to my grandfathers’ house and pretty much the only thing we’d burn in the fireplace were LB hardwood butt stock blanks in various stages of production, that were rejected and were to be discarded anyway…
I don’t know much about this Rifle, other than that it is pure LongBranch.
I’m hoping you guys can tell me a little more about it from your perspective(s).
It has no serial number and I’ve tried to include all the Proof marks I can find.
It has the quick release type bolt via the forward slot on the receiver, although there is small cut out for the previous push type bolt release on stock.
Missed one proofmark on the Magazine located on the front face of the guide,
that’s a little faint.

Is it a reg config No.4 Mk1*? and just unstamped?
Any questions, feel free. I’ll take more pics if you need. Happy to show and tell.

It’s kinda beat up, unfired 50 plus years, then before that, probably sitting around the office at the Arsenal since ’45. Unfortunately some
water damage to the butt that needs restoration, from flooding in the past.(arggg)

Attachment 30127Attachment 30138Attachment 30137Attachment 30128Attachment 30136Attachment 30135Attachment 30131Attachment 30130Attachment 30134Attachment 30132Attachment 30133Attachment 30129

One of the first names wouldn't be Ralph would it?????

Are there any proof marks on the stock? Looks like a standard 1943 No4 MK1* that was selected for a presentation or retirement gift. Was not uncommon for this to happen. I've seen a few others...some have brass plates screwed to stock with an inscription. Could you tell us what is engraved on the left side wall of the action. Great piece of history. Ron

Hey Warren- Tom

rgg7- No stock stamps or proofs.
He was the no.2 man at LB/CA until (closing and retirement) in the late 60's, early 70's...
I think perhaps it's more likely for either War's end, or end of rifle production at LB(although resumed in '49). And perhaps something more likely given by the workers?!

Attachment 30150

Is there anything on the left side of the buttsocket?

gs-Here's a left side shot...

Attachment 30151

Thank you! Very interesting rifle and story thanks for sharing. Have you had the rear hand guard off? Is there any marks, such as date?

I can't help you with the history, but I reckon there are a few blokes here who would trade you their first born for that rifle solely because of its history.

Is it normal for Canadian 1943 Mk1* rifles to have the "Gucci" front sight ears, a la the No4 trials types?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Bruce_in_Oz

Is it normal for Canadian 1943 Mk1* rifles to have the "Gucci" front sight ears, a la the No4 trials types?

---

Good question.

I often sit and ponder just how you would give a rifle away without a serial number. It would open up an absolute pandoras box of mischief.

That would mean, in effect, that anyone could 'liberate' an unnumbered rifle - or even TEN rifles, mark one - or even ten - up and......... and........ Then in 50 years time, 10 totally unaccountable rifles slowly turn up. Sorry to sound a bit cynical and all that but without supporting documentation (and SURELY there MUST be some.......), I could have Montgomery's .38 revolver in an hour

You might be surprised how many serial numberless rifles and pistols turn up in the US. Up until 1968 it wasn't a problem, IF the firearm never had one in the first place. Removing a S/N has always been "bad". But not having one- not so much- until post '68. 1911s seem to be the most "common".

Perhaps in Canada it wasn't so different?

I have the vaguest recollection (and before you smart B's chime in about Old Timers) of watching a show recently on the Long Branch rifles and there was a bit about a presentation to this bloke.

The Canadian REME kept unnumbered bodies at their Base workshops as replacements. So on that basis, with a deft bit of accounting and paperwork, there could be several HUNDREDS of unnumbered rifles out there. Each one specially presented to someone. Indeed a pandoras box. But have no fear.........., I am half way through owning Monty's revolver. Just the last line to engrave

As a matter of interest JM, what happens if an unnumbered postol or rifle turns up nowadays?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Peter Laidler

The Canadian REME kept unnumbered bodies at their Base workshops as replacements. So on that basis, with a deft bit of accounting and paperwork, there could be several HUNDREDS of unnumbered rifles out there. Each one specially presented to someone. Indeed a pandoras box. But have no fear.........., I am half way through owning Monty's revolver. Just the last line to engrave

As a matter of interest JM, what happens if an unnumbered postol or rifle turns up nowadays?

---

Canadian polititions have made a practice of decrying the "Americanization of Canada" while slavishly copying the poorer ideas of the USofA. Here serial numbers were not required on new production non restricted (long guns) firearms until @1969~ totally coincidental to the implimentation of GCA68 in the US.

Handguns and Machine Guns (restricted weapons) at the time were usually issued a serial number starting with the letter designator of the RCMP Division they were located in: F1234 in Saskatchewan, K1234 in Alberta, O1234 in Ontario ect.

In Canada this was fine until they started to register all firearms, so they developed the solution: Now they issue you with a "sticky". A "sticky" is an oval of clear plastic with a registration number on it. It is meant to be attached to the firearm to act as a perminant replacement for a serial number.

The downside is that it is illegal to deface it or remove it, but it melts in the cleaning products usually used to clean firearms, and rough handling often results in the sticker tearing....

Hey All,

I'm not worried about the provenance of this rifle. My Grandfather was well known in the community, being a 50+ year Rotarian and holding various civic posts after the closing of the Canadian Arsenal. In the 60's when Ottawa ordered the closing of the Arsenal, he went a la "Mr.Chips goes to Washington", along with a local politician at the time, ex NHL-er, Red kelly, to Otawa to make a presentation in effort to keep it operational. Not only for the workers, but also because it was the last Federal Arms Manufacturer and thats a big piece of the pie for a young country to give up and outsource...(They gained a reprieve for a time. fyi-last contract completed was for .45 pistols destined for an island nation)
My Grandfather was a good man who, although viewed these rifles as tools to accomplish a job, he took extreme pride in any work that he did. He was 92 when he passed away about 14 years ago. If he knew you guys took such an interest in these weapons I know he'd enjoy talking to you for days and filling in some blanks and telling you about the Holy Grails that went into the furnace!

I'm not in the market to sell this gun so I'm hoping we can
refocus for a sec on the rifle itself and it's technical aspects in regards to it's relation to an issued LB '43 No.4mkI*. If you saw this gun with no back story and were documenting for yourself?

As to it's registration; due to the fact my Father is a civil servant, it should be up to date on all registries including the 'new' CDN long gun registry. Although I haven't seen the 'sticky' as described, I can get more info on this subject if your interested!

Muffet- ANy info on that show would be much appreciated!

He and my Dad collected guns in the early 50's-60's, most pre-1900. The only ones that came out off LB are the No.4 and a H&R 20ga.- both presentation pieces. So, much as I wish he got one of everything they ever made and every trial, X rifle and prototype, he just wasn't thinking ahead ;)

Please don't misinterpret what I or anyone is saying Bullseye. No one is doubting the integrity of anyone but you can surely see the point that I am making. Being numberless, there could be 10 (or even more.....) similar rifles in circulation 'somewhere' each with a similar story. And without paperwork or supporting documentation, the further down the road it goes, the more fragile it gets. And to be honest, the original recipient is not here to verify anything.

Which leads to an answer to a question you half asked. Technically and visually, it looks like it's a standard and pretty well original factory LB No4 Mk1*. The small-arms collecting world (of which I am not one of I hasten to add....) is a fickle bunch...... Not just fickle, but if I dare say so, they're NOTORIOUSLY fickle and without documentation, it's value is that of a good No4. They have a saying that is regularly quoted on this (and other I suspect) forums. Buy the gun and not the story. But if there is documentation and Muffer can come up with the video, then you're quids-in as we say.............

Like I said earlier - and I hope you realised, it was just in fun - that I am now the owner of Monty's fully engraved revolver

All good Peter, no foul! I know the adage of the gun, not the story. I shared the story out of guilt for not being able to hand over all the serial number records of every LB gun ever made to you guys;)
It really is a riffle that wont be leaving my hands till death if even then?! I was truly trying to refocus on your opinion of the actual piece and its technical history....
Regardless I'm much obliged in all instances!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Peter Laidler

As a matter of interest JM, what happens if an unnumbered postol or rifle turns up nowadays?

---

If it shows no sign for having no number- ever- then it's not a problem. There's a blue million .22rf rifles and all sorts of shotguns around with no numbers. So another few firearms (of military origins or no) with "N/A" for a serial number doesn't faze the ATF in the least. Just so long as it's pre-'68.

Bullseye4MkI*, sorry for the highjacking of your thread. If you wish to show close up photos of the areas that would be expected to have been numbered, just make 'em clear enough to show the machining marks in the finsh- if any. I'm curious as to when the presentation was made.

There is another side aspect to these 'special' rifles that I have glossed over before on this forum. When these rifles go to ground, many years later, that same one OR, regretfully, another has a funny habit of turning up many years later. I mentioned the story of a 'special' M1 carbine which apparently went to ground in 1944. Lo and behold, now there are TWO identical examples. One in the UK together with all the usual documentation that you'd expect and the other, elsewhere.

Interesting thread. I collect vintage Mossbergs and the US Property marked 44 and 144US are serial numbered by contract requirements. The civilian versions are not. This presents a problem with C&R log requirements. I own four M44 civilian rifles and have no idea which is which in my log. I called the ATF on this and they had no answer other than if I were to sell one just to pick one and log it out. Then there are rifles with multiple serial numbers so again I called the ATF and asked which one should I use, original manufacturer or last owner....again it was "just pick one" or "list them both". Some import number are different than any of the serial numbers. I own a Finnish M91 with a Russian SN a Finnish SN and a different import SN. I simply pick one for the log and add the other two in a remarks column just to be on the safe side. Hard to believe makers of war rifles didn't put a SN on everything. These presentation rifles weren't part of the contract requirement so essentially they are not a Milsurp? Regards, Rick.

No doubt initially rejected for the excessive grinding of the charger bridge weld. Somebody was learning that day, and the action got put aside for future contingencies.

Interesting that they put on the MkI foresight protector. No doubt another case of using up non-standard parts. Presumably they were all out of MkI cocking pieces by then.

Thanks for sharing the photos and the story. What a pity we can't hear your dad now.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Surpmil

What a pity we can't hear your dad now.

---

Thank you, it's actually the Grandfather, Dads' still around, and he can be heard if I answer the phone!!

Just out of curiosity, exactly how many "un-numbered" Long Branches have folks run into? I've been collecting (granted in Western Canada, not Greater Toronto) for 25 years now, and have never seen one. I've seen (and owned) a few of the "lunchbox" special Inglis Hi-Powers, and they are universally un-proofed, generally unfinished specimens. Pistols I can see, but I would think it would be a lot harder to get a fully finished, fully inspector marked rifle out of a wartime factory, would it not? Has anyone actually seen or owned more of these un-numbered rifles? Peter mentions tens, dozens, or more of them--are there?

Ed

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by boltaction

Just out of curiosity, exactly how many "un-numbered" Long Branches have folks run into? I've been collecting (granted in Western Canada, not Greater Toronto) for 25 years now, and have never seen one. I've seen (and owned) a few of the "lunchbox" special Inglis Hi-Powers, and they are universally un-proofed, generally unfinished specimens. Pistols I can see, but I would think it would be a lot harder to get a fully finished, fully inspector marked rifle out of a wartime factory, would it not? Has anyone actually seen or owned more of these un-numbered rifles? Peter mentions tens, dozens, or more of them--are there?

Ed

---

2 1941 LB No4MkI never serialed, several 1944 No4MkI*, lots (@12+) of 1945 No4MkI* LB never serialed receivers and more assembled rifles than you could shake a stick at (search on gunnutz for @5 more).

Your experience with Inglis High Powers is not normal to my experience either.

My "Lunchbox" Inglis is as you describe, unfinished, unproofed and "in the white".

Coincidentally on the weekend I went visiting, and saw 2 "No2MkI*" and 1 "No1MkI*" which have all the applicable proofs and inspections, except the appropriate serial numbers.

Over the last 15 years I've seen at least a dozen No2 Inglis which are fully finished and marked except for the serial numbers, and 2 (one of which I now own) "in the white"

Sorry about the delay in getting back to this thread.
It may have been in the "Trip through Small Arms" series on Longbranch, can't guarrantee that though.
Even if it's not, the series is well worth watching and very enlightening.

Where does one find that series? Sounds interesting!

Ed

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by boltaction

Where does one find that series? Sounds interesting!

---

It's a movie from about 40-43, at Long Branch, narrated by an employee there 1940-1945, Safety Manager among other titles, voice over done in 2000 by him at age 86.
Paul R. Scott.

Available on youtube in 7 parts; A trip through Small Arms, (Long Branch).
Gets out of sync around part4.

Very interesting video, thank you for posting the link. Where did the distortion originate? There must be a clean copy of this somewhere?

From the pointing pencil etc. it appears there was an original commentary with the film. I wonder how this was lost? Pity the commentary is so out of sync.

Interesting bayonet shown at 00:46 in Part 3 on the Lightened No.4. Looks like it might have inspired the No.5 and No.8 patterns, though perhaps it was the No.5 that inspired?

Also wasn't aware their barrels were forged before machining.

In Part 4 at 1:11 two heavy looking barrels are heat treated. Their breech ends resemble No4's but they are too short and too thick. Anyone recognize them?

Part 5 at 4:15 Assembly: rifles coming off the assembler's benches via overhead conveyor hung by their slings! Neat little appliance for assembling bolts. The barreled actions come to the assembler with the stripped bolt in place, presumably straight from the lapping in of the recoil lugs. It would be nice to see how that was done.

Proof rounds being fired? Note inspector checking trigger function and muzzle bearing!

Part 6 at 8:35: the Telescopic Layer has been provided with right angle prism, which makes laying a heck of a lot easier than the original telescope. Interesting that they are tested at 300 and 600 yards with the layer and Enfield Rest.

Part 7: the cosmoline bath at 1:05!

So you enjoyed it then?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by muffett.2008

So you enjoyed it then?

---

did i enjoy what?
The sex i had last night? Yes !!!!!
Shooting? You bet !!!
Killing things? Affirmative !!!!!
Talking to you ? Courts out on that one LOL
How ya been old timer?
Cheers
Ned

You bored Ned? give the dog a cuddle, it will make you feel better, that is if it doesn't mind your fleas.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by muffett.2008

You bored Ned? give the dog a cuddle, it will make you feel better, that is if it doesn't mind your fleas.

---

In answer to your advice..
I am,
I did,
It did
and it didn't mind

over to you
Ned

Ned

Surely you can put your mind to doing something productive.

Adjusting trigger pulls, perhaps?

You can only hug a dog so many times before the neighbours start getting the wrong idea.

Paul

De lumbered and found a few more markings.
Any comments, much appreciated!

Attachment 30882Attachment 30881Attachment 30883

The dreaded pipe wrench scars! But then refinished later at Long Branch apparently. That is a bit odd to say the least. So is the "DP" stamp. A barrel salvaged from something else? I think I see a thin steel shim/washer between the barrel and the receiver which might indicate why the barrel was DP'd. Perhaps if a barrel was found to be too short on the rear face of the Nock's form to breech up properly it was unceremoniously wrenched off without the dignity of proper wrench and vise. They may have kept those for the work of assembly, rather than disassembling rejects. The cartouches are an early inspection mark, so this barrel probably reflects an early employee learning curve or machine set up error/experiment. The shoulder or collar ground off the guard screw boss was probably done later as a "target tuning" modification. I've seen that on a few ex-target rifles.

I didn't know they were that thrifty at Long Branch.

Hey Surp,
There was a bit of washer 'grind' at the barrel meeting the receiver. It was the 'ring sleeve' that sets the top and bottom lumber in the correct position at the receiver.
Thanks for the explanations, it seems, as been said, that there doesn't seem to be any rhyme or reason in its construction, and was put together at the end of the war out of what was at hand perhaps... As to it's function, I know it was used briefly and sporadically, but I would be very surprised if it ever went back to LB after it left in '45, so not sure as to the 'target turning'.. I should be able to get that info shortly, so I will confirm that hypothesis when I 'm able!