Further could it have been "cleaned up" on the lhs where the no4 mk1 would have been and re-stamped no4 mk2? Or is it a no4 mk2? yet stamped like a no4 mk1?
Attached pic shows a no4mk2 engraving, but serial number on socket and F54 on guard, TRIGGER...and a 1/2 wood upgrade, though not very tidy....
Have not the foggiest what you are asking!
Im curious about a rifle for sale here in NZ. The engraving is different to std no4 mk2s, it has a no4 mk1/2 stock, and it has stampings on the butt socket and a N2xxxx serial number there which made me think its a war time faz made No4 mk1 upgraded to a 1/2, yet its marked no4 mk2 as you can see. The trigger guard has what looks like a F54 stamp, the owner claims its a 1958 gun. the owner says the re-inforce lug is missing so the Ian S. book I have on no4s says that's a mk4 receiver of 1955~56....yet the serial number doesnt conform, that should be PF or UF.
Hence Im confused/curious as to what mk it is. Is it a mk1 FTR'd but mislabeled mk2 (so its really a 1/2) or is it a genuine mk2?
The book I have says some mk2s had a mk1/2 receiver, so is this one?
Trying hard but STILL ain't got the foggiest..............
Are you referring to the lump on the RH forward side of the action body? (The one intented for the magazine cutoff bits.) The only No.4 actions of that sort I've seen are late No.4 Mk.2s and some possible post-production Mk.2 put togethers.
https://www.milsurps.com/images/impo..._zps327d-1.jpg
https://www.milsurps.com/images/impo...DSC01678-1.jpg
It sounds like the rifle is a No4 Mk1 that has been poorly converted & misrepresented as a No4 Mk2 or Mk1/2.
When I was in NZ, the Armourers at the big Ordnance Depot weren't at all hands-on familiar with the Mk1/2 and 1/3 or even the Mk2 No4's. They knew about them from the EMER's of course but not in the flesh. I don't think that there were any. I sent for and got a couple of sets of the complete drawings from the SASC Liaison Officer at Enfield and left them in the tech library. I also got an up to date EMER for the L4A4 Bens too. Unbelieveably, also got a Thompson 1928 for the small technical museum at Ngaruawahia (now housed at Waiouru). Came through the diplomatic channels 'without let or hinderance' as they say. Easier times then!
"The one intented for the magazine cutoff bits" yes its this bit, though the book I have call it a re-enforce.
"and some possible post-production Mk.2 put togethers."
Do you have any details? or where I might read up on them? like who assembled them? Enfield? BSA? Faz? Its possible this gun is one of these, so maybe its genuine. Tried googling, no joy.
Peter, there are some no4 mk 1/2s and mk2s here (so far in roughly equal proportions, NB ive not seen a 1/3 yet), none Ive seen yet have NZ army stampings, Im assuming therefore no4 mk2s are ex-target ppls guns, converterd to sportster imports (my one), or un-touched/un-issued imports via America. What I do see here is an abundance of no4 mk1* year 1942 LB guns, more than 55% Ive so far seen. Quite a few with NZ army markings. Im making up a spreadsheet of all I find....thats sort of good for me as UK based LB parts on ebay are common. I dont know how hard it is to get bits form canada yet, or even import a gun or 2, I know from the US its almost impossible. I can get an Austrialian MAB 6 groove barrel here which would also then be similar to the canadian FTR program, I think so fairly appropriate.
PS I spent 4 hours last night reading threads here, not even 1/2 way through yet, LOL....great background....thanks
jmoore, on that pic showing the missing cutoff, is there a F5x just aft? say 1.5 inch back in 1/8inch high letters? My 2/52 gun for instance has F4x (I assume the x is a 9 but its badly stamped) all other bits arr F50 or F51....
Now that I understand the "re-inforce lug" portion: "No" to all of the above. You should be able to easily discern if further machining was done in the area. If it was a No.4 Mk.I converted to the Mk.2 specifications, then it would be marked as No.4 Mk.I/2. And the added plates won't be integral to the receiver body, so that should be easy to tell as well. Your one photo is not helpful to the point of being frustrating! None of the pertinent areas useful for identification are shown.Quote:
Originally Posted by ssj
Hi,
Sorry I can understand the frustration I feel it to, but I suspect the seller was being deliberately obtuse, so I let the auction expire. If that lug wasnt machined off then it must be a mk2, though a messy one.
regards
It should be quite simple: If and only if the bracket for mounting the trigger is an integral part of the rifle body then the body belongs to a No.4 Rifle Mk2. Early bodies had the lug for the magazine cutoff, later ones had it removed as shown in the photo.
Rifles Mk1/2, 1/3 etc have a separate bracket for the trigger attached to the body by brazing and that should be obvious on examination.
I doubt if the magazine cutoff lug was ever removed during FTR, it was easier to modify the forend if a replacement late Mk2 pattern one was being fitted.
Ensci says it all.. There was never a requirement to machine off the former magazine cut-off lug during the FTR
I have a No4 Mk2 with the serial number, N1767 and mag stamped N2190. I bought it 12-15yrs ago from a very well know NZ collector. he knew the history of the rifle, which is that it was the property of an officer in the RNZN. Supposedly a small batch of around 20 were assembled the 1950`s especially for Service Rifle Competition[Not sure if this was in NZ or UK]. The rifle is clearly assembled from an unissued or new Mk2 action with no cutout lump, and fitted with modified Mk1 woodwork, all pieces are numbered!. Also an N in a circle stamped on the butt socket. I know of one other similar rifle, and have spoken to the owner about the markings. Maybe you have a similar one?
Stuart.
This would be consistant with the little I know, its serial number is N22xxx and the No4 mk2 markings are not like Faz serail number markings. It has a no4 mk1 lower forend converted to 1/2. No N mentioned, The guy just came across as to vague for me when I tried to get specific answers, so I'll keep clear without being able to go see it....
Its relisted on Trademe again, Lee Enfield No4 Mk2 .303 rifle Full Wood. | Trade Me
Hi, Yes exactly like the one I have. I make a mistake when I said mine had an N inside a circle,It actually has a C just like TM listing.
It has a broad arrow stamp apparently, so that's accepted for UK mil service a I understand it. I would have thought if it was for NZ army we'd see N^Z stamp and a NZ serial number?
I wonder what the (C) stands for, Ive not seen it before not in brackets anyway but now there are 2, this and yours.
Does yours have any sign of a date stamp?
I have just had a look at mine, it also has a broad arrow stamp on the right hand butt socket. Maybe they were owned privately by members of the armed forces. Don`t really know why they weren`t N^Z stamped! I have assumed the (C) stood for competition, and the N prefix was for Navy. I would be interested in other opinions thought!. I have shot mine in competition and at 300-600 yds it is unusually accurate!!!. No date stamps anywhere on the major parts, but several small parts are dated 1953&1954. Also has a butt disc and serial number stamped on the wrist.
The arrow isn't an ARMY mark as such, but a GOVERNMENT mark. As all (?) rifles made at the Government factories were made for Government contracts, they'll all have the arrow mark.
ssj, have been rereading your earlier threads, I have a particular liking for the No4 and have quite a number of Mk1/2`s, Mk1/3`s and Mk2`s, none NZ marked by the way. Send me a PM.
Stuart.
So even guns sold offshore to say South Africa in a contract batch will have the UK broad arrow stamp?[COLOR="black"]Quote:
Originally Posted by Peter Laidler
---------- Post added at 10:22 AM ---------- Previous post was at 10:20 AM ----------
---------- Post added at 10:22 AM ---------- Previous post was at 10:22 AM ----------
yeah Im developing a great liking for the no4 as well, sort of a growing addiction. I might need to seek medical help.Quote:
Originally Posted by S-A-M3
:madsmile:
Yep....... Unlike No1 rifles made at the BSA plant, all No4's were made at Government Ordnance factories or certainly in the case of BSA, under Government contracts, under licence. BSA did go 'over the side' in 'error' (so said) with some No8 rifles but that's another story.
Yeah I want to pick up a n08 22trainer....need to research those a bit though...