Printable View
Canadian SMLE No1 MkIII* Long Branch Refurbs?? Did they do any in the say 1942 timeframe? I am curious as I had picked up an Canadian 1917 Enfield SMLE with a mint 42’ barrel. The blue is the same colour tone as a long branch. There are what seems to be two small C broad arrows on the right hand side of the barrel knox form? They are ¼ the size of the typical C board arrow on the left side of the receiver.
Any thoughts?
Pete
Pete, Someone that knows better will reply, I hope. I remember reading that Long Branch made some No.1 barrels. I don't remember the details and don't know if Long Branch actually did the rearsenal.
Brad
SMLE's were refurbed in Canada between the wars and probably during WW2 as well. I have no idea when Longbranch would have ceased doing refurb work on No.1 rifles in Canadian stores, but they definitely did a good many.
Almost all the C-broadarrow marked SMLE's I've laid eyes on in Canada showed some sign of reworking, though it seems uncommon that they were re-barelled, probably because back then troops didn't train very often with live ammo and wear was less of an issue if the rifles were kept clean. MANY MANY were reblued though.
I'm in the process now of detail cleaning a LB refurbed SMLE. When I get it back together over the next couple weeks (dependent when I'm happy with my BLO finish - it needs work), I'll post some pics of it. On this one, there are three rather well done stock repairs and the rifle was re-blued. Everything matches except the rear sight, where the old serial was lined out and no new serial number was stamped. It's a 1916 EFD gun so it's early for a MkIII*. Interestingly, the rear sight is still windage adjustable and is not pinned like most I see. Anyhow, it's a good example of how these guns were fixed where in Britain the parts would simply have been replaced. LB aparently didn;t have access to as many spares as the UK factories.
Claven2, I wonder if someone at Long Branch just didn't see the logic to modify a perfectly fine rear sight.
Brad
I doubt that Brad. Canada started using the SMLE in July, 1916. By that time, the UK had mostly switched production to the MkIII* model (starting with BSA in 1915). The brits used up as many windage-adjustable rear sights as possible before switching to the new pattern, but at some point in 1916 they started pinning the sights to make them inoperable for windage. Also, re-use of canibalized parts also happened suring new production so you sometimes see like-new SMLE's, never refurbed, with renumbered small parts like sight leaves.
Chances are this sight was from an earlier rifle and was put on a Canadian FTR and it simply got missed, while most got pinned. Canadian armorers in the inter-war years followed the UK MOD DEFSTAN and the published change orders at that time called for pinning.
Claven2, Where were the rearsenals performed. The Ross rifle facility? I presume the Long Branch name I used in my previous post is incorrect until 1940.
Appreciate the info, there isn't a whole lot of info about Canada's involvement with the SMLE.
Brad
I'm not sure the date the actual LB facility opened? Prior to that time, I imagine refurbishment activity would have taken place at the various RCEME small arms workshops.
Canada made a pile of No.1 Mk. III barrels during WWII along with Vickers barrels. There is evidence that we also made a VERY small number of complete Vickers guns (.303 and MAYBE some .50 for Naval use). It appears that less than 50 were made.
My LB ftr/rebuild has a '43 dated barrel and I'll wager serious money that it was never fired post rebuild.ALL matching numbers with mint timber throughout.The foregoing was the GOOD stuff...The BAD is that they stamped a big FAT DP on the right side of the buttstock,a smaller DP on top of the receiver ring and nipped the firing pin.
I called Etter SENIOR about it at the time of acquisition(I truly wish that folks like him could live forever;life would be SO much easier you see)and was told that they did the rebuilds and didn't need the rifles.Drill rifles for recruits and army cadets WERE needed so whack,whack,snip and presto we had a mint DP rifle.P'd me off NO end that did.
Cheers all,
JR
I have a 1918 dated Enfield Mk.III* that has a bold C broad arrow on the left nocks form. The barrel has been replaced with one (mint) that is devoid of any markings other than '43, Long Branch proof mark and a small C broad arrow on the right nocks form. Barrel looks to be rust blued. The rest of the rifle is a mix match of parts by different Brit makers. Windage adjustable sight is pinned.Quote:
Originally Posted by Pblatzz
I have a 1917 BSA with C^ marks and a barrel stamped with the stylized LB mark.
If I get your story right, the only "issue" was the cut short firing pin. If thats the case I'd be a very happy guy to find one of these "DP" rifles cheap because "it doesn't work" per the previous owner. :cool:Quote:
Originally Posted by John R.
Dimitri
Mine is DCP proofed and has beautiful LB inspection markings. It is dated '42.Quote:
Originally Posted by Pblatzz
I recently came across a 1918 Lee Enfield No.1 MkIII* Canadian marked, manufactured by Enfield with a 42 Long Branch barrel.
I have a few questions. Pardon my possible ignorance.
Were the No.4 barrels built by LB interchangeable with the original British No.1 SMLE barrels? Can you just take an No.4 LB barrel and install it in a British No.1 SMLE? Do they thread the same to the action body? Or would the barrel have had to be specifically manufactured to fit the No.1?
I don't doubt the fact that LB did refurbs on some No.1's (including replacing the barrels etc) but is it not possible that in this case the barrel could of just been added by anybody at any time through the life of the rifle.
This rifle had a Lithgow marked nose cap and a Lithgow marked bolt that matched the Enfield receiver? Curiously the sight matched as well though the back sight assembly was BSA marked. Also the serial number on both the bolt and nose cap were prefixed by a "S" ( serial # S83**) matching the Enfield receiver. Is this not an Enfield prefix? According to the info available to me (Skennerton, Stratton) Lithgow didn't ever use a "S" prefix? Lots of other mixed parts. Whats going on with this one?
Thank you in advance for your time.
If you try and fit a No4 barrel in a No1 action the 'cut out' for the extractor will be indexed 180 degrees out - ie the extractor cut out will be on the left hand side.
We touched on this subject recently so while looking for that thread I found this one which directly addresses the matter, so here are the marks from a Long Branch-made SMLE barrel.
Many thanks, I've seen quite a lot of SMLE barrels over the years, but have never noticed one of these Canadian examples. At least I now know what to look out for!
The asterisk on the Nock's Form may be a later armourer's inspection mark of course. Took the wood off after those photos were taken and found a couple more marks on the underside of the reinforce. Overall the stamp strikes are weak or angled, so the partial may be another LB "cartouche" mark.