Hi everyone,
I want to buy my first Lee Enfield and I have to choose beetween a 1943 No4 mkI Maltby 2 groove barrel, and a 1950 Longbranch No4 MkI*.
Both of them are in VG+ condition.
Please help me to decide!
Which one would be the better choice?
Printable View
Hi everyone,
I want to buy my first Lee Enfield and I have to choose beetween a 1943 No4 mkI Maltby 2 groove barrel, and a 1950 Longbranch No4 MkI*.
Both of them are in VG+ condition.
Please help me to decide!
Which one would be the better choice?
1950 lb
As Pauline Hanson would say, "Bindii, please explain".
I would always go for a Mk.1 (no *) because of the number of chipped rails I have seen in Mk.1*s in the past.
Speaking from a collector’s point of view I’d vote for the 1950 as well all things being equal. The 1950 represents a high water mark in post war build quality (other than the stamped trigger guard). As regular 303 No4 production ceased in 1945 and latter restarted for the 1949-1950 run they can be considered a sub-sect with in a Long Branch collection. Though not rare they are by no means common which also adds to their appeal.
As an aside if the Maltby escaped the massive post war rebuild program and is all matching I’d likely buy both and just eat mac and chees for the next two months though.
I'd go for the Maltby because it served in WW2 - unless it has been re-built.
I have both a 1943 Maltby and a 1950 LB in my collection. If I was told today that I had to sell one of them, I would sell the 1943 Maltby.
Because it has not had the riggers of war or war time production. The machine tolerences are closer has a better barrel and will out last many owners if looked after. I doubt if the rail would chip in the type of shooting it will do nowdays. To tired to think of any other reasons MUFF
It would depend on what you want it for? purely as a historic collectable get the Maltby, if you want to have some fun and fire it as well the Longbranch for sure.
Just because the Maltby was churned out in 1943 does not mean it saw any service, it might have sat in some depot for years doing SFA.
I have examples of both Maltby Attachment 38021
and Longbranch Attachment 38022
in pristine condition, (both 1942) the british one outshoots the others, is far slicker compared to it's overseas counterparts and for a clunky No.4 is a pretty nice rifle.
That, coming from me is a good recommendation, being anti No.4.
I hope you have a Lithgow no 1 Mk3* muffett the best (i'm biased) 303 to fire a round in anger
danlm: If it were my first I'd personally go for the Maltby as it's more typical or representative of the No.4 as used during its "finest hour". The LB might be of appeal to a more specialized collector. However, if they're in great shape you might as well give up and take both as it becomes addictive. I bought my first about a year and a half ago and am on number 13 or 14 already! Actually, one of the tough things to decide is the direction you want your collection to take. Anyway, good luck with the decision and show some photos afterwards.
Ridolpho
Attachment 38024Fancy asking a collector that. ......and guess what year.
Thank You all for reply!
Lots of useful advice and information.
The Maltby is advertised as ''war stores rifle in grease''.
That means it has never been used?
I plan to shoot the gun as often I can!
Which one of them you, guys, think will be a better shooter (1943 Maltby Vs. 1950 Longbranch; 2 groove Vs. probably 5 groove)?
Oh Muffett that is a beauty it looks like one of the rifles Lithgow made with the different types of native Aust woods but for the life of me I can't remember the year, I will take a punt and say 42
Picked in one 48, 1942 has special meaning for me, beside being the year war came to Australia, it's the year I lost an uncle in Singapore, slaughtered in the Alexandra Hospital attack.
1) No. We used to get replacement rifles from War Stores held at the Tower of London (believe it or not.) and they were usually far from unused.Quote:
Originally Posted by danlm
2) In terms of shooting, the number of grooves is neither here nor there.
Personally, I'd lean towards the Maltby. But the final decision would be based on a hands-on examination. At this point you're just buying "a pig in a poke". All that's known at this point is that one was born in England and the other, Canada.
What rear sights are they wearing? The micrometer rear sight will be nicer to shoot than the 300/600 flip.
I got the Longbranch!
Good for you.
ENJOY, use often, keep it clean and plan to pass it along to another guardian.
A good buy you won't be dissapointed
Don't forget, you may add your new 1950 LB S/N to this survey Thread : Do you have a 1950 Long Branch?
Cheers.
Interesting. What makes the Maltby "slicker" or the LB less so?Quote:
Originally Posted by muffett.2008
Surpmil, that's an interesting question.
It's one I've asked myself a couple of times, even did a test with a couple of other rifle club members.
The agreement was the same, in favour of the Brit. Even tried using different lubes, the only one that came close was a silicon lube, but once you applied it to the Maltby, that was it, way in front again.
I guess it's the standard of finish, or maybe the guide rail, could be binding a bit with the side stress on closing, they just feel so much clunkier than their Brit. counterparts. (....and before you ask, yes we tested other rifles, Longbranch, Savage and Fazerkerley.)
Postscript. I will admit that the Brit's had much more use, maybe that's it.
I also own a 1943 Maltby and a 1950 LB
Both are in excellent condition, shoot great and are definite keepers.
The `43 Maltby definitely has more history behind it, but choose
either / or both!!! good luck.
There was a lot of upset at the end of the war about the closure of the Maltby rifle plant/factory for many reasons, mainly that it was in the middle of the steel industry and Country (hardly central I suppose....) with a good well trained workforce and product. But Theale had already got the chop so any further Sten gun manufacture would have to stay at Fazakerley which meant that as rifle production was already there, the fate of Maltby was sealed. It apparently stayed in a 'working mothballed' state for several years but was shut.
Hey............. That's got me thinking........ I wonder if this working mothballed stauts was when they were operating a small-scale FTR programme
It made it to Q's in Parliament but.........., well you know what it's like with politicians