Mystery (to me) No 4 mk 2

Hi,
I have an Enfield No4Mk2, for which I would like to find some information.
When and where was it manufactured etc... ?

The only markings on the action are No4Mk2 and the serial number: N1329
(yes the ejector screw and the rear sight are missing, I removed them when I was looking for markings)

The action, bolt and magazine have matching numbers.

Here are pictures:

https://www.milsurps.com/images/impo...IMG_4804-1.jpg
https://www.milsurps.com/images/impo...IMG_4820-1.jpg
https://www.milsurps.com/images/impo...IMG_4818-1.jpg
https://www.milsurps.com/images/impo...IMG_4823-1.jpg

I see an "F 56" stamp on the barrel shank, does this mean the barrel was produced in 1956, and the rifle came from the very late Fazakerley production?

Thank you for your help.

I hope someone will also chip in and agree that this was a last gasp of the industrial strike bound Fazakerley factory to become commercially viable by selling off new No4 Mk2 rifles to the commercial gun trade. The gun trade would allocate their own serial numbers. The F56 is the date of manufacture. The mark directly below the H20 mark, is the UK Military proof and below that is an arrow with the Fazakerley section examiners mark (05/FD?) - known at the factory as 'team leaders'.

Thank you very much, finally I got a lead.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Peter Laidler

I hope someone will also chip in and agree that this was a last gasp of the industrial strike bound Fazakerley factory to become commercially viable by selling off new No4 Mk2 rifles to the commercial gun trade. The gun trade would allocate their own serial numbers.

---

This is probably as good an assumption as would be reasonable. The Mk2 serial numbers in 1949-54 began with PFXXXXX, then the 1954-56 models began with UF. Few were made in 56. So yours may be made up with the random parts that were left in the factory that weren't under contract. The serial number isn't common.

Looks like a nicer variation of these No.4 Mk.2's :

https://www.milsurps.com/images/impo...une12020-1.jpg

https://www.milsurps.com/images/impo...DSC01669-1.jpg

I would very much doubt that that was a Fazakerley allocated and marked registered number JM. I know that their engraving marks were dire but stamping on the body sides was not allowed - except for the letter 'T' and that was only due to a bit of ambiguous wording.

You might also see another particularly identifiable Fazakerley feature on the lower photo. Note the SCREW, catch, magazine. On Fazakerley production, the screw head sits fully recessed into the lug whereas on other manufacturers products, the screw head isn't recessed but sits onto a narrower differently profiled lug. Not a lot of people know that!

There you go, another section examiners mark. This time 59-PL

Thank you for all the information.

Do you have any idea, how many of those rifles were produced during this period?
Does it mean this is a rare variant of a No4mk2?

As regards the second rifle with the 4/xxxx serial number

I have no idea if this is true but back in the late 1990s there were a few od variations of No4 MKII rifles in PA that all had a similar look:

1) The old markings scratched out, including the serial numbers.
2) the metal was bare or looked like it had been re-blued and then handled until the bluing was gone. These rifles did not seem to have the park/suncorite look
3) two serial number patterns: A) metal stock disc and the serial number on top of action body, 4 digit xxxx
B) serial number on butt and rear of action body, with either a 1/xxxx (if SMLE) or 4/xxxx (if No 4)
4) stamps on action (two I examined) were Faz 49

In any case a chap told me these were rifles supplied by SA to Rhodesia in the 1965 to 1970 time frame, the ones with the stock disc being police guns and the other ones being military or some sort of armed guards. I believe the guy who told me was a expatriate from one of these no longer existent nations.

Never seen that in print, but thought I would add that to the mix.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Frederick303

As regards the second rifle with the 4/xxxx serial number

I have no idea if this is true but back in the late 1990s there were a few od variations of No4 MKII rifles in PA that all had a similar look:

1) The old markings scratched out, including the serial numbers.
2) the metal was bare or looked like it had been re-blued and then handled until the bluing was gone. These rifles did not seem to have the park/suncorite look
3) two serial number patterns: A) metal stock disc and the serial number on top of action body, 4 digit xxxx
B) serial number on butt and rear of action body, with either a 1/xxxx (if SMLE) or 4/xxxx (if No 4)
4) stamps on action (two I examined) were Faz 49

In any case a chap told me these were rifles supplied by SA to Rhodesia in the 1965 to 1970 time frame, the ones with the stock disc being police guns and the other ones being military or some sort of armed guards. I believe the guy who told me was a expatriate from one of these no longer existent nations.

Never seen that in print, but thought I would add that to the mix.

---

Best lead to date for identifying these "cosmetically challenged" rifles.

https://www.milsurps.com/images/impo...une12009-1.jpg
Per item "3)B)".

But no sign of old markings removed on these two rifles as per item "1)".

https://www.milsurps.com/images/impo...DSC01682-1.jpg
https://www.milsurps.com/images/impo...DSC01683-1.jpg

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by polaris

Do you have any idea, how many of those rifles were produced during this period?
Does it mean this is a rare variant of a No4mk2?

---

I'd guess that these were rifles made of "scraps and spares" that were left at the end of production at Fazakerley in '56. You can see it has a modified fore-end using a Mk1 fore-end adapted with a filler plug to a Mk2 trigger. If there are any production records on this "tail end of production" they aren't well recorded, although someone might have some recollection or records.

As for rarity, yes you have a "rare" version. Whether it is "valuable" is a totally different matter. For example, when Long Branch ceased production in 1950, they continued to produce Dominion of Canada Rifle Association versions from scraps and spares and limited production into the 1950s which were target rifles, and have thus have value today. Unless there is something unique and valued about your rare version, there may not be a market for your unusual gun. If there was a verifiable "provenance" or "back story," then it might have some value. Otherwise, don't think you just won the lottery. Suggest you hold on to the rifle until someone emerges from the nooks and crannies of Lee Enfield history that can give credence to your find, then it might accumulate additional value.

The modified fore-end with the squared insert as opposed to the usual factory rounded and dovetailed insert is indicative of the Indian Mk1/2 conversion process. As indeed is the abysmal number stamping.

Whether the subject rifle N-1329 is a late body can only be ascertained by looking down, plan view, from above

I have sn. N1310. It has the late body as mentioned by Peter. It's a DCRA conversion, (sn. 430), to cal. 7.62 as done by Canadian Arsenals, Ltd.

Please be aware I have not seen anything to back that up, and as such it must remain a ? In particular two things have always bothered me about hat explanation:

1) On the rifle I have seen I can see no sign of any canceled out arrow in U or M in U marking.

2) The rifles with the stock discs have a different set set-up on both the serial number and the added stock disc. The chap was quite specific the stock disc was for the BSAP and the ones with the 4/xxxx and 1/xxxx were for No4 and SMLE rifles respectively for some guard/secondary military organization. Why would they be marked so differently ?

That said I have been told there were imports form Rhodesia and other than the FN police shotguns and cut up FAL, no one seems to have identified a SMLE/No4 variant, so it might be true.

here are pictures from the disassembled wood set (all shiny due to raw linseed oil)

https://www.milsurps.com/images/impo...IMG_4830-1.jpg
https://www.milsurps.com/images/impo...IMG_4828-1.jpg
https://www.milsurps.com/images/impo...IMG_4827-1.jpg

will post more pictures of the rifle once it is reassembled.

Cheers

please delete double post

Hey, Brian, your thread 12. The fore-end would appear to indicate that N-1329 is an EARLY Mk2 body - unless Polaris puts up a plan view of the body as I suggested,

Make sure that you thoroughly grease the body and barrel where it fits into the wood before you assemble it. And the SCREW, tie, fore-end at the rear only needs to be nipped up. NO monkey wrenches!!!!!

Interesting Peter. N1310 has the late Mk.2 body with a late Mk.2 forend. You'd think it would be vice versa! It still has it's original numbered .303 magazine fitted too.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Peter Laidler

to indicate that N-1329 is an EARLY Mk2 body - unless Polaris puts up a plan view of the body as I suggested,

---

I am not sure what you mean by "body".

Frederick .303: you write
"rifles supplied by SA to Rhodesia in the 1965 to 1970 time frame" and "In particular two things have always bothered me about that explanation: 1) On the rifle I have seen I can see no sign of any canceled out arrow in U or M in U marking..."

FWIW, South Africa stopped using the U stamp when she ceased to be the Union of SA and became the Republic of SA on the 31st May 1961.
That date was significant, it's the anniversary of the day the Boer republics signed the treaty to end the Boer War (in 1902) and the day that the 4 provinces unified into the Union of SA (in 1910).

The body...... It's the body of the rifle - as in the parts list

Sorry, but I have absolutely no idea what the body of an Enfield is.
Is it the action? the center part of the stock?

I researched it on the net without the slightest success.

Once the rifle is reassembled , I will put up pictures from all angles, and hopefully the body will be captured in some pictures as well. :)

The receiver, out of the stock showing the markings on the left side of the receiver by the trigger group.

PLAN view........ from the top! Oh, never mind......... A common people divided by the same language!

Me I just call it the receiver for all bolt guns just to be as usual a PINTB.................:madsmile:

I'll say it again. "Small Arms ID Series booklet #2" Ten bucks well spent!!

That's what I was desperately trying to say Brian.............. If we all use the same hymn sheet it wouldn't get so frustrating

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Peter Laidler

I hope someone will also chip in and agree that this was a last gasp of the industrial strike bound Fazakerley factory to become commercially viable by selling off new No4 Mk2 rifles to the commercial gun trade. The gun trade would allocate their own serial numbers. The F56 is the date of manufacture. The mark directly below the H20 mark, is the UK Military proof and below that is an arrow with the Fazakerley section examiners mark (05/FD?) - known at the factory as 'team leaders'.

---

From what I can find so far, yes I suspect you are correct. I have seen a few of "N" guns now but most if not all were also stamped "Fultons" This one does not appear to have been, so my thought that Fultons used "N" is probably now binned. I have also seen "A" and just 6 digits aka ParkerHale and so marked.

---------- Post added at 06:42 PM ---------- Previous post was at 06:37 PM ----------

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by polaris

Sorry, but I have absolutely no idea what the body of an Enfield is.
Is it the action? the center part of the stock?

I researched it on the net without the slightest success.

Once the rifle is reassembled , I will put up pictures from all angles, and hopefully the body will be captured in some pictures as well. :)

---

It is the bit the N XXXX is stamped on, the receiver. Under the rhs there will probably also be a F5X about 1/8th inch high which will tell you the year the receiver was made. On the RHS there will probably not be the un-machines single shot boss which suggests a late receiver. The F56 barrel could be an original or a replacement, as Ive seen a few F56 barrels on older guns. I assume they made a lot of barrels in 1956?

A late No.4 Mk.2 shouldn't (in theory) have the vestigial boss on the right lower front of the receiver (action) body. I.e.:

https://www.milsurps.com/images/impo...DSC01680-1.jpg
https://www.milsurps.com/images/impo...DSC01678-1.jpg

Versus the original version:
https://www.milsurps.com/images/impo...DSC01528-1.jpg
https://www.milsurps.com/images/impo...DSC01534-1.jpg
The No.4 rifle's magazine cutoff feature went away basically immediately, but the extra metal on the action remained almost to the end of production. (Not including the No.5 Mk.1 rifles!)

So late No.4 Mk.2 rifles generally don't have the extra metal, and the fore stock inletting was changed to avoid having a void.

Here is an expert on British rifles and an all round nice guy.....http://www.skennerton.com/

It'd be better if everyone purchased his Small Arms Identification Series (SAIS) easy readable handbooks. It'd make life much easier all round, for everyone when it came to correctly identifying parts