A curious No5 - ROF 1945

So I put a deposit down on this one today, picking it up soon. I'm not that great with the No5 but noticed the bolt knob and the incorrect double aperture. Now, the bolt DOES match the rifle. It IS a No5 action, confirmed by serial and the lightening cuts.

The barrel (and flash suppressor likely) doesn't match.

Thoughts?

https://www.milsurps.com/images/impo..._zps7jgn-1.jpg

https://www.milsurps.com/images/impo..._zpssi8c-1.jpg

https://www.milsurps.com/images/impo..._zpsnzf4-1.jpg

https://www.milsurps.com/images/impo..._zpsmgjm-1.jpg

https://www.milsurps.com/images/impo..._zpsjpgm-1.jpg

https://www.milsurps.com/images/impo..._zpsyko8-1.jpg

https://www.milsurps.com/images/impo..._zpslokq-1.jpg

https://www.milsurps.com/images/impo..._zpsc9kx-1.jpg

Obviously some interesting things going on here.

---------- Post added at 11:29 PM ---------- Previous post was at 11:28 PM ----------

And speaking of .303

https://www.milsurps.com/images/impo..._zpsuxnp-1.jpg

From memory of a long time ago, it looks like it's got a load of standard No4 parts on it such as the backlight, wider No4 type trigger guard and a home made fore-end made from a cut down No4 one. You CAN use a modified No4 one and we had them issued but they were patched and pegged to suit.

No doubt some of the experts will come in with more little niggling faults. Realistically speaking, No5 bolts are just the same as the different styles of fore-end end cap. It don't make any difference at all. Just differ by drawing number only.

I don't think the foreend is a DIY, it matches Skennertons book pretty closely.

https://www.milsurps.com/images/impo..._zps6m5b-1.jpg

It's not even close to the book. Without effort, as soon as I looked, I could see it's got too much sweep upward for an original... Look at the comparison of the measurements from FH to wood...from wood to band.

See your photo, 8. What is that gap through the fore-end - left edge of photo - through which I can see the barrel? LOOKS like a No4 fore-end been reshaped to No5 configuration but the remains of the lightening groove hasn't been plugged and pegged. And the curvature doesn't look anything like the curvature of the fore-end in the book you show (middle pic). That's only my opinion of course, based on absolutely nothing more that experience and on that basis alone, I say that your fore-end doesn't match the book pretty closely.

On the other hand, your fore-end could be one of those converted fore-ends supplied through Ordnance and used by us in Malaya/Singapore where the wooden insert has come out. But that said, it doesn't look like the one I have got on my lap as we speak.

Yes, most people who modify No4 forends tend to be too scared to really take some meat off & so have a very noticeable sweep upwards at the front end. Also, the barrel band recess in the replacement forend looks rather inexpertly cut - it's too wide.

Peter, in officially sanctioned No4 to No5 forend conversions, was the gap where the cut-off block would have been, patched?

Why do you think the barrel doesn't match? the flash "eliminator" is BSA manufactured.

Remove the upper handguard and see if the barrel has lightening cuts.

Is the receiver a BSA or a Fazakerley?

I don't seem to recall that it was patched out DRP (thread 6) as I distinctly remember the fore-end tip being patched - as we saw hundreds of them! As I have said many times, it was a co. called Westley Richards that supplied them together with butts too that were clearly converted from No4 butts. They were MUCH better that standard No5 butts too because the butt plates were retained with the smaller 2x SCREW, bracket butt and not the REALLY troublesome two piece No5 abortion.

The two piece screw things used to corrode together in about 20 minutes - or 10 minutes during the 11 month monsoon period! The only answer was to just drill the basxxxxs head off, knock the head off and drift the other part out. Seemed to take ages. Additionally, the male screw would expand inside the female part (sound familiar lads…..?) as it corroded, crack the wall, expand that too and make that part a pig to pull out too! The tacit thing was that if the hole in the wood was still sound, then just use 2x bracket screws and be done with it.

solid bolt knob is correct?

Do my old eyes deceive me but in photo 8, the fore end taken underneath, you can see where the No 4 wood was cut too far forward and the lightening cut in the timber can be seen.

I have seen some genuine ones with solid bolt head and others with the smaller No 4 bolt drilling.

Dick

I think they all probably left the factories with the 'large hollow' bolt handle, but that apart the bolt body is just the same as all other No4 bolt bodies, & whenever the rifles went in for work whatever was satisfactory & to hand is what would have been fitted. Thus a 'small hollow' or a solid bolt knob is acceptable as a replacement.

My Z prefix No5 has a solid handle complete with the etched-in serial number on the bolt. Not that I am in any way into all this originality train spotter/anorak stuff but…………… The irony here is that I saw a knackered old No4 at a show last weekend with a large hole bolt handle! At our workshops there was a nominal difference but we treated them all the same, same as fore-ends

Ah well, ended up walking away from it! Thanks for the advice guys!