Strange (To Me) LB No.4 MK I Rear Sight

Printable View

10-03-2012, 03:58 PM
Donzi

Strange (To Me) LB No.4 MK I Rear Sight

Was in a local pawn shop today & looked @ a very-well-used but "kinda okay" 1943 Long Branch No.4 MK I rifle w/no obvious import marks. This rifle's rear sight is of a pattern I've never seen before, altho I'll grant that my experience is rather limited. The sight is the early micrometer type, but rather than the normal screw-type" adjustment, it had spring-loaded pivoting "ears" on either end of the ranging bar. ( I hope I'm explaining this in an understandable form) The ears were curved & pivoted @ their inner attaching points on the bar, & were meant to be squeezed together, just like the normally encountered tabs, except that they could (altho I don't know why you would want to) be operated independantly of each other. They were also spring-loaded. Anyone here ever seen one like this? TIA, guys, f/any info you may have.
10-03-2012, 06:58 PM
Lee Enfield

get any pictures?

Why didn't you just buy it?

Haven't you bought handguns for their grips and rifles for their slings? I have....

Otherwise when I actually figure it might be something I need it's usually gone...

Actually maybe I'm just a little off bubble... :dunno:

It wasn't a Mk3 ?

http://photos.imageevent.com/badgerd...sighttypes.JPG
10-04-2012, 12:40 AM
jmoore

Quote:

Originally Posted by Lee Enfield

Haven't you bought handguns for their grips and rifles for their slings? I have....

Yes to the first, no to the second. But I definitely have purchased rifles just for the sights. So maybe we're both "a little off bubble".
10-04-2012, 01:39 PM
Lee Enfield

Quote:

Originally Posted by jmoore

Yes to the first, no to the second. But I definitely have purchased rifles just for the sights. So maybe we're both "a little off bubble".

I hate to admit going thru stages of purchasing every Enfield rifle I've found with a "L"ong" butt stock.

I've purchased Enfield rifles for sight covers, adjustable and non-adjustable apertures, adjustible front sights, any number of excuses (whoops - reasons)...

TZ 4/47, PH8/53, PH4, early 5C, late 5C, mid 5C, 303 5C, 7.62 5C ect....
10-05-2012, 11:29 AM
Donzi

Apparently, you guys have way more $$$ to spend than moi(I'm retired), but $210 f/a fairly common rifle w/pretty ratty wood, that I already own one of, just to acquire a possibly incorrect rear sight doesn't strike me as a brilliant move. JMHO, of course. Guess no one else has seen one of these sights, either. Thanks f/reading, anyway.
10-05-2012, 04:59 PM
Lee Enfield

Quote:

Originally Posted by Donzi

Apparently, you guys have way more $$$ to spend than moi(I'm retired), but $210 f/a fairly common rifle w/pretty ratty wood, that I already own one of, just to acquire a possibly incorrect rear sight doesn't strike me as a brilliant move. JMHO, of course. Guess no one else has seen one of these sights, either. Thanks f/reading, anyway.

So it isn't a MkIII sight?
10-05-2012, 05:17 PM
Peter Laidler

I don't think anyone knows - or even has any idea what sort it is!
10-05-2012, 05:27 PM
muffett.2008

As usual, with little information and no pictures it adds up to.........no comment.
10-05-2012, 05:32 PM
Patrick Chadwick

Quote:

Originally Posted by Lee Enfield

It wasn't a Mk3 ?

http://photos.imageevent.com/badgerd...sighttypes.JPG

There seems to be a mistake in the drawings in this link. The aperture diameters are given as 0.02" / 0.01". That would be a horribly fine hole to look through!
10-05-2012, 06:42 PM
jmoore

Quote:

Originally Posted by Patrick Chadwick

There seems to be a mistake in the drawings in this link. The aperture diameters are given as 0.02" / 0.01". That would be a horribly fine hole to look through!

That's the artic summer option. Or Post WWII, the "take a last shot during the atomic blast" option.
10-06-2012, 02:14 PM
Donzi

Quote:

Originally Posted by Lee Enfield

So it isn't a MkIII sight?

I'll have to admit that I've no idea what a MkIII sight is. Do you have a pic, or a link to one? TIA.
Donzi
10-06-2012, 02:42 PM
jmoore

Links? Yes. See Post #2.

Bottom left sight.
10-06-2012, 04:58 PM
Donzi

Thanks f/the education. Yep, it appears to have been a Mk4 sight. Would that be appropriate/original on a 1943 Longbranch No.4 rifle?
10-06-2012, 06:17 PM
Lee Enfield

Quote:

Originally Posted by Donzi

Thanks f/the education. Yep, it appears to have been a Mk4 sight. Would that be appropriate/original on a 1943 Longbranch No.4 rifle?

Yes,
There was a Canadian Army program to refit all of the existing stocks of rifles equipped with the MkII rear sight in starting @June 1944, and all current and future manufacture was to be so equipped.

No Long Branch rifle manufacture dated after mid 1944 should have a MkII rear sight.