I was shown an SMLE MkIII* the other day fitted with a brass barrel band, it was OA marked, I have never seen one of these before has anyone else come across one, it was the only brass item other that the butt plate on the rifle?:confused:
Printable View
I was shown an SMLE MkIII* the other day fitted with a brass barrel band, it was OA marked, I have never seen one of these before has anyone else come across one, it was the only brass item other that the butt plate on the rifle?:confused:
Yes Sir, Many of them. OA is the Orange Rifle Factory in Australia. Australian manufactured Mk.III's are the only rifles that left the factory with them although, I'm sure some of them have made there way onto many other rifles over the years.
Agreed. They are around, particularly if you look at Lithgow produced rifles. Having said that steel bands were also produced in Australia, but I don't know enough about Aussie production to know who produced what & for how long. Can someone kindly educate us??
Lithgow produced the brass lower band & they also produced a brass butt swivel boss, both this & the band were finished in black.
The other part made from brass as a production expediency was the inner band. Away from the books at the moment, but late in 41/ early '42 start rings a bell. Corrections taken, as usual :)Quote:
Originally Posted by 5thBatt
Does anyone know if the steel & brass lower bands were produced contemporaneously (I mean, in Australia), or did one replace the other?
Looking through SAIS No19, it says for all three components, "From April '42 these were made from die cast brass and black finished. Steel was reverted to in 1945" (the butt swivel mount was steel or malleable iron before and I assume after the couple of years of brass.)
My '45 Lith MkIII has the brass OA front band must have crept in at one stage.
I'm thinking the OP's question regarding the "barrel band" was in reference to the "inner band". Not to be confused with the "lower band". :DQuote:
Originally Posted by Son
Since the SMLE Mk.III normally has no upper band, how can it have a "lower" band? Maybe "inner" and "outer" or "barrel" and "forestock" bands? What's the official terminology, anyway?
From the parts list sheet...Quote:
Originally Posted by Parashooter
Band, inner
Band, outer
Also referred to as a lower band, try page 146/7 TLE, will see if i can find more reference to it being called a Lower band tonight.Quote:
Originally Posted by Son
The only one that counts is the Ordnance parts list........ According to mine (see below), the band around the barrel is the BAND, inner and the band around the fore-end and handguard is the BAND, outer.
While we're all here, the same Notes for Armourers dated 9/43 and amended in 8/47, issued (to 14502442 Craftsman T Charnock who's name is pencilled on the front!) by RAOC Technical Services at Weedon makes only 2 mentions of the W mark '.....as found on the left side of the reinforce on service arms which will indicate identifiable cordwear at the breech'. The letter W also indicates Pattern 14 rifles made by Winchester whereby components.............. and off it goes......'
So quite where this fallacy that little letter was ever meant to indicate Weedon is just that - a load of tosh! There, another load of useless Enfield info
That maybe so Peter but that doesn't change the fact it is also known as the Lower band & i also see it being referred to as the "swivel band" in some publications.Quote:
Originally Posted by Peter Laidler
I am more than happy to call it the outer band for this thread & for the sake of peace on Earth. Happy Holidays :surrender:
I see the point you're making 5th Batt but while it might be known as something else, as is the so called 'king screw', ........ the official nomenclature is what it is. Reminds me of the time I ordered 10 bore brushes or something similar and put the VAOS ref down as B1-1005....... instead of B2-1005....... Instead of my 10 bore brushes I found myself the proud owner of 10 brand new No5 (or was it L1A3) bayonets. Ordnance only issue what is on the demand sheet.
The problem also arises on the forum when you dive in and answer a Q only to find, as I have done, that I ain't answered what he was askin' because he has mis-identified the part.
It's like the W mark........ If you don't correct these little things they become regarded as the gospel
I suspect references to "lower band" on the SMLE Mk.III are the result of someone erroneously applying the nomenclature from one of the earlier or later models, many of which do, indeed, have upper and lower bands. Of course if we go back to some pre-Lee Enfields, there's a mid(dle) band, too.
:runaway:
Attachment 67919
Another interweb favorite is "top handguard". Ever seen a "bottom" handguard? (Upper and lower are OK when we have tandem handguard sections, but it's never top and bottom. Go figure!)
:dunno:
You could well be right but need to check tonight but at least one refers to the earlier rifles while explaining why it was referred to a Lower band even though the SMLE did not have a upper band.Quote:
Originally Posted by Parashooter
Don't forget to specify which SMLE. Think about the Mark V, which does have an upper (and lower) band.;)Quote:
Originally Posted by 5thBatt
Don't forget the No4 has a upper band too.Quote:
Originally Posted by Parashooter
The book is pre WW1 so no MkV then :)
But, we all know the Number 4 isn't an SMLE, right?
Don't know about that it depends if you use stripper clips & not Chargers ito load your No1 Mk1 even more so if your No1 Mk1 has the 30 inch barrel & no Charger guide :)Quote:
Originally Posted by Parashooter
Some interesting conversation here... if you want to get to the bottom of it, go to God's Book... the LoC and look up the Sht LE MkV and see what the two bands are officially called.
I never ceased to be amazed at the direction that some of these threads go. To the lesser mortal with no military background the SMLE has only one barrel band and a nose cap regardless of what the "official" designation is.:madsmile:
That's all very well until someone asks '.....the band on my SMLE seems to be very loose when it is tightened up. Is there a method of tightening it up without having to strip the rifle further?' So you go into how to gently tighten the hinge point and then pack the whole band out with a strip of non absorbent paper and............. Only to find that he's talking about the BARREL band and you're talking about the fore-end one!
Talking of the Mk5 rifle. I searched high and low for a parts list for this/these two variations of this rifle but couldn't find one anywhere. Nor could the old P-Room as was. Does anyone have an official one. I don't think that one existed
Everyone should invest the tidy sum of $10 for a copy of Skennerton's Small Arms ID series booklet, (No.1 for the SMLE), which have the illustrated parts catalog included within. I have the same problem frequently when people place orders for parts with the wrong nomenclatures.
I was going to suggest the same in a more impolite and less diplomatic way Brian. But from my experience here it is clear that some of the more learned owners/contributors/scribes don't have them either. The BEST $10 worth owners, contributors and scribes can invest in. And yes, even though it's 50 years ago tomorrow (December 17th 1965) that I passed out from Carlisle as a newly qualified Armourer I still have to refer to the parts lists and still learning.
I can see where you're coming from regarding selling parts Brian. You can understand about answering technical queries now!
But you need EVERYONE to order from the same list you have, as i have said above i can find the band being called three different names.Quote:
Originally Posted by Brian Dick
As for my search (had visitors so interrupted) i can find it referred to as a lower band but find more reference to outer band, as for the book i mentioned earlier i cannot find it at the moment & need to see if what i remember is correct or a case of 'for the sake of this study we'll call it...' or i just got it plain wrong.
I will refer to it as a outer band for now as i now strongly believe i might be wrong & Peter & Son are correct.
It's not really a case of rite and rong 5thBatt. If the part is described correctly then what the heck! it's just that as the examples show, it can be very confusing at times........... just like wot my spelling is