Printable View
I came across this interesting rifle in my daily Lee-Speed tracking:
Enfield Lee Patent Speed Rifle .22 Conversion : Antique Guns at GunBroker.com
It's an older Lee-Speed Patents target rifle that was later converted by AG Parker into a 22 Short Rifle. The knox form has the letters R.L.R.
Does anyone know what R.L.R. might mean?
Thanks!
P.S. If any of you Enfield collectors are going to attend the Antique Arms Show in Las Vegas next week, drop me a PM.
Nice rifle.
I think you'll only be able to make an inspired guess about the RLR marking; its nothing well known or obvious.
- the mark is not parallel with the AJP stamp, so they did not apply it;
- the mark is not neatly done, so it unlikely to be an owners initials (which are common on target rifles);
- its probably a club or organisation that had quite a few rifles, and hence was stamped up with no particular ceremony.
Don't know for sure; perhaps - "Rim-fire Long Rifle" as a guess?
As it looks like a separate stamp mark it may be nothing to do with the rifles progress through PH or other manufacturers. It could be simply something like an identifier for the Royal London Regiment(s)
Just a suggestion which may be wide off the mark, but there are other Regiments which operated in Canada such as the Lambton Regiment (LR)which again could be closer to the mark and associated with teaching shooting to grammar schools and other training establishments. I know certainly that the Royal Regiment of Fusiliers who were renamed in its past spent a great deal of time in Canada too
Gil
Rimmed Long Rifle or Rimfire Long Rifle as Maxwell Smart suggests seems most likely. Size and location makes sense for that reference as well.
I am still convinced that the R.L.R is a personal or Regimental stamp and nothing to do with the calibre.
I have spoke to a contact who actually worked on the Lee Speeds and he concurs with me. It certainly was not a stamp placed by them, for what its worth.
Gil
Not happy about a regimental stamp. It LOOKS too regular to be stamped. Probably engraved. Who would be still alive that worked on Lee Speeds Gil?
Peter,
I have three names which I will PM you, one of the names is on the Parker Hale M85 story I sent you................. initials Bill.S
I meant in my earlier email............fixing them not making them, as it was normally a PH sight issue they came back as a whole , normally the soldered mount failures
Quote:
Originally Posted by Surpmil
I don't think that terminology has ever been used in UK?
In that era surely they would mostly have used ".22" RF".
The rifle in question is not quite right regarding the barrel, as a Lee speed (MLE) .22 conversion was just the same as a Rifle, long, .22-inch Mk1 or in this case a Mk11 (bolt safety) so the barrel has had a chop, and looks like its been turned down to accept a SMLE fore sight block and a sight protector fitted from a, Rifle RF Short. Mk11 and also a nose cap, as the Long Rifle retained the Bayonet lug.
A Nice rifle, but not quite correct in my eyes (I'm viewing on a small screen) the rear sight also looks like a conversion (A very good one), never seen a AJP TZ like that before.
Based on the above I would guess RLR maybe the Gunsmith who did the barrel and the rear sight (if I'm right regarding the sight)
Except the London Regiment did not, and still does not, have a "Royal"Quote:
Originally Posted by Gil9713
As it has AJP on the barrel and Parker Hale on the receiver, I'm guessing that at some point these were on two different rifles.
Beerhunter,
Take that totally on board, however,the title Royal London and my suggestion of (Regiment(s) was no more than that, could account for RLR on the rifle. In the late 19th into the early 20th Century Royal London was stretched in Military history to include many Regiments of the line, some UK based, but many of which were Canadian based to for example:
Royal London Fusiliers Monument - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
The Royal London title was often stitched prefacing lots of Regiments, don't ask me why specifically Royal Lincolnshire Regiment/Royal Leicestershire Regiment but also Royal Labrador Regiment which later became the Royal Newfoundland Regiment in Canada many at the time the Lee Speed was being developed.
So my theory and hopefully helpful suggestion was merely for the melting pot, as I know from my own Regiment we stamped EVERYTHING as we rarely gave things back once broken:):)
I have never heard of the Royal Fusiliers being called (even informally) the Royal "London" Fusiliers and I was around when they were extant! They were the Royal Fusiliers (City of London Regiment).
Nor have I heard of any regiment being called, even informally, as the Royal London anything. I speak as an ex-member of the oldest Regiment of London. Or, as far as we are concerned, anywhere else in the UK for that matter :-)
As to why some regiments are Royal and others are not it is because the "Royal" has to be earned or inherited. e.g the former Royal Hampshire Regiment (1946) and the latter: the Royal Air Force's Army antecedents - Royal Engineers and from them the Royal Flying Corps. Or the Royal Signals, also from the Royal Engineers.
Oh thats why my Regiment never became ROYAL then, we couldn't have earnt it or been involved in enough battles ??
Maybe some one didn't ask. I agree is is an anomaly. Perhaps someone should take it with your Colonel in Chief. He aught to have some pull with his mother.Quote:
Originally Posted by Gil9713
My old Regiment, in spite of its age and record, is also not Royal - merely Honourable. :-)
:lol::lol: Yes Charles did slip up there, but frankly it wouldn't go down to well now anyway, we have got used to being what we are. HAC know a few there, especially those that frequent the bar:cheers: or did you mean Fusiliers?
Getting back to Jeff's original question about the R.L.R, non of us have a clue really but we do like to try and help if we can. Lets not forget, these stamps were in a generation when everything got stamped including passports.............now thats a thing of the past too. :lol::lol:
That may well be the case, but it doesn't resemble a regimental marking either IMHO.Quote:
Originally Posted by Thunderbox
Has that marking been seen elsewhere in association with the "Royal London Rifles"?
I'm not even finding a regiment of that name via Google - except a reference in Canada: "The Royal London Rifles (1st Canadian Regiment)"
Would a regiment have such a tiny little stamp made up - and it is obviously a one-piece stamp - to mark their kit in such a insignificant and unclear way? Seems doubtful to me. They would have something quite a bit larger and more obvious I suspect.
Yes agree in part, and only threw into the pot the Canadian angle of the Royal London Regiment or Rifles, because it was on that continent. They are clearly not letters stamped by Parker Hale or any manufacturer and are offset as if an after thought or merely a unit or group identifier as their ownership. I would hedge a bet they were for "Junior Riflemen" to learn to shoot with a Military school or organization, but IMHO a Military unit nevertheless.
Could it not just be a commercial rifle and not actually have any military affiliation?
You are correct Gary it is a commercial rifle, as it started off as a commercial " MLE " then converted to .22 the only chance of it seeing or being in service would be, a Officer purchase (when it was .303) or commandeered for the War effort, I,m not really clued up on that subject but am sure others would be.
(I,ve seen a Civillian rifle that was marked to a Local Home Guard unit, but was marked on the butt, (paint) the unit and the owners name, Long gone now and the original owner)
Regarding post #10, was wrong about the sight, I PM,d someone who knows his stuff on them, It's a A.J. Parker model TZ model 1. folder, made in 1928. (Big thanks to Muffer for the info on the sight)
back to the original question, I,d be inclined to go with the quote from TB,
Quote:
Originally Posted by Thunderbox