Numbering of weapons

I would like some help on identifying the breakdown of the rifle numbers attributed to SLR's and other weapons which were distributed around UK/Canada and Australia.

I have always been of the belief that say for example: UB60A89811 given to an SLR rifle was broken down in the following method:
UB manufacturer locator, 60 the year of manufacture and the A89811 as the actual rifle number.
Am I correct or have I been dreaming for years.

To complicate things even further in my studies I found a number of SLR rifles with only these numbers stamped on them which puts my theory to cock: A93166 nothing before it, and A154067 again nothing before that either just their basic numbers.
This one threw me completely: 3354 yes an actual stamped MOD press rifle.

Anybody out there with any better definition of how the numbering was made.

A further example attributed to L81A1 rifles which have ALL been stamped in the format I thought was to cover year of manufacture and serial number of the rifle ie: UP83A4064.
SA80's the same: UE88A064683.
So I am sure someone out there knows the real reasons, it cannot be adhoc or our Colonial brothers could have a rifle duplicated elsewhere.
Is this a Canadian thing perhaps or from a manufacturer in Australia where the start letters and numbers have been dropped??

Hi Gil,

Lithgows were always numbered AD6501876 AD Lithgow first 2 numbers being year of manufacture

Dick

Hi Gil, as has been said the Lithgow L1A1sare all numbered in an orderly way, with all contract info (numbers,years,countries) avalable.

All Lithgow's start with AD and year. So far so good.

British production follows the same approach, but with some odd ball numbers thrown in. I think (if I remember rightly, might be wrong) the A****** serial rifles came about due to rifles being renumbered after limited and short term issue to the police, apparently some came back with indistinct master numbers, worn away I would guess and these were renumbered. I can't for the life of me remember who told me this now, could be completely wrong, Peter, Mike ??

In terms of the C7 in Canada the serial number usually goes something like this
88AA00000 (just a made up number)
The first two digits determine the year (in the example above it would be 1988), and I think the rest of them are just the serial number.

Example, my first C7 was 85AA00105, which made it the first run, first series and the 105th off the line. My C8 was 86AB00950...

The coding works as:-

U = United Kingdom (country of manufacture)
B = BSA (Manufacture)
E = Enfield (Manufacture)
F = Fazakerley (Manufacture)
S = Sterling (Manufacture)
XX =Year
A123456 = Serial Number

I don't know who the more modern UK manufacturers are, but they would have a letter assigned for the Ux part of the code.


Its hard to say why the rifles you have listed with the serial numbers A93166 and A154067 don't have the Ux XX prefixes I would hazard a guess A93166 is an 1961 Enfield made rifle and A154067 is a 1962 BSA made rifle. Where did you take the numbers from the Body or the TMH or the bolt and carrier?

It's possible the rifle with the s/n 3354 could be one of the X8 Trials rifles? This is just a wild *** guess unless you can post some photos of the rifles in question so I can determine whats going on.

In the British system new numbers can be issued, have a search for Peter Laidler's posts he has discussed the serial numbering of the rifles before.

The numbers were recorded direct from the bodies not other areas of the weapon, the usual place for stamped numbering. I haven't got access to the weapons, but would be interested to see from those that do hold an SLR, live of Deac whether they too have an anomoly. You may of course be right on the X8 Trials rifles and it was simpler just to stamp a brief number for quick reference purposes. Thanks for confirming what I have always believed on the Manufacturer and date etc

Ah......, that answers it Gil - or does it? You say in thread 1, para 3 that you have found a number......... Then in thread 7, line 1/2 that you haven't got access to them. If you haven't got access to the weapons, simply a record, then what you have in the A-12345 part is the actual SERIAL NUMBER of the weapon. The UB60 or BL72 or UA85 is the INDICATOR that is only of interest to the technical side of the Army. I believe that the indicator part will be there on the body but as it is very shallow and easily rubbed out by the cocking handle slide.

Never heard of a 'press rifle' We did have some Enfield made 'non rifles' that were early L85's passed around to the press and other interested parties during press and open days. These had numbers but not recorded serial numbers as such as they were just....., well...., non rifles and engraved up as such! (We gave some of the old A1 non firing versions to the usual Military Attaches after they'd been refurbished at workshops and replaced by the A2 version)

Here's some more for you KtK. P= Parker Hale, BL=Belgium Liege, A=Accuracy International

Were L1A1's issued to the Police - thread 3? The serial numbering wasn't anything to do with them Clarkie. You ought to sack your advisor smartish and stick to the forum! It started as an as-was War Department numbering system started in the 50's called the 'new codified system' that couldn't be duplicated (?) and told everyone, from the top to the bottom all they needed to know about the weapon they possessed

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Peter Laidler

The serial numbering wasn't anything to do with them Clarkie. You ought to sack your advisor smartish and stick to the forum!

---

Afternoon Peter, well,l I got wrapped round my arse then:lol:, I will dig back though my info to see were I got that duff badly remembered info from!

On a point of interest, I always assumed the limited issue to the police would refer to the RUC, on old news footage, they always seemed to be carrying Mini 14's though.

Yes Peter corretermondo in your assumption, however, the person who entered these records into the Parker Hale Register of Firearms for examination by the "Appropriate Authority" at anytime, says conclusively, what was there was recorded 110% accurately on each rifle.

It was from that, I thought I would ask the interested throng for their humble opinions on confirming what I had always assumed as correct. On cross referencing the SLR's specifically in the smaller secondary bible I have, the shorter numbers have 7.62 EXP beside them, so that indicates they were experimental, and answers that one in part.

You have to appreciate that I am going through a carbonated register with the main copy having been removed when PH went into liquidation and many entries are duplicated and faded, as specific rifles had barrel changes and then had EXP placed beside their numbers.
I am placing all the information from each line in both bibles onto a spreadsheet which hopefully will retain the history of Parker Hale's rifles and pistols that went through their hands in a digital format for future generations of shooters to use as a database and can rely on it. Similar to what Simon does already with Enforcers/L42A1s etc

Now that the prefix's of these rifles have in part been answered for most of the SLR/L81A1/L42A1/SA80 and many others for which I thankyou, its great to learn something new everyday about the reasons why things were done.

In relation to the RUC as it was then, they used the MINI RUGER due primarily to its size and versatility, on checkpoints and the SPG vehicles they had ...........that is correct. I have to say, I spent a lot of time with the lads and never saw an SLR once not even on the border, they swore by the MINI RUGER and the STERLING.

I never saw an RUC issued L1A1. They would occasionally shoot them on the range and certainly WXXXU had some. And don't even ask for any elaboration on that................

In the great scheme of things Gil, the man DID record the rifle serial number sufficient for positive identification I'd say. But unless a few others turn up without the identifier data, the wisdom of the crowd might decree that he didn't record the unnecessary identifier.

I think Peter, he did his job very well and certainly for a Sec 5 holder as a manufacturer Parker Hale like many others had to record what they saw stamped on the weapon when they recorded it.
He states he would not have done it in full for one and not the other. Tiome will no doubt throw one of these up as either a Deac or still on someones permit. Only 15 years ago when the stock went to the four winds on liquidation!!!

I appreciate all that Gil the line 1 above. We'll have to wait until another turns up so engraved. Maybe as this thread is read by others from other forums one will.might come to light.

To be honest, if anyone had seen a rifle with an identifier-less number, then it'd be KtK, Tankie or KevG who'd spot it straight away.

The issues of the 'serial number' on British L1A1's is one I have stumbled over while doing an informal gathering of numbers to try and make sense of the batches of s/n used by BSA and Enfield. I've had to restart the gathering of information, because I couldn't validate some of it I had been given by 3rd parties so I've been looking for photos which show the full indicator and serial number to help work out the batches.

There are two goals for the research, the first is to try and figure out how many L1A1 rifles were produced, at this stage is up around 155,000. Nowhere near the 250,000 that is reported to of originally requested. This in part I understand was due to the downsizing of the British Army in the late 50s early 60's. The other of course is to work out the serial number blocks given to each company and find the Fazakerley serial number blocks given to BSA.

If anyone has the full indicator and serial number from the THM or Body and would like to share please PM or I will set up a new topic especially for it.

In your research then, have you perhaps come across serial numbers on their own without prefix's?

I have been given serial numbers without the prefix's .... that in the end became useless to me when trying to sort out if its Enfield or BSA and the reason I'm starting over with the search for confirmed details. But I think a lot of that was because the numbers people gave me came from Breech Blocks and Carriers. I think especially with BSA rifles you could quite easily loose the prefix to the serial number (and the serial numbers) as they seem to be hand engraved, they certainly don't seem to of been done with a pantograph or engraving machine. On the other hand the ones from Enfield you could lose a small child in the engravings.