1918 mk.III* finish

Gentlemen:
I have a 1918 dated mk.3* that appears to be all original, even has grease still in the forestock,has correct brass oiler, old sling with vertigris from the fittings, very tight draws. Plus it's all matching and has a decent bore. No rust, no pits. So what's not to like, you ask?
The metal finish on the entire gun except for the bolt, rear sight slide, and a couple small internal parts appears to have been grit-blasted, as in preparing for parkerizing. There is a brownish patina all over, like a 98 year old finish would be expected to look like. This was apparently done a very long time ago, as shown by the wearing away of the blasted surface where the bolt has been rubbing for all these years.
But as far as I can determine, SMLEs were blued, not parked back then.
There are no rebuild stamps, as near as I can tell. (Not that I'd recognize one if I saw it.)
If it helps, it is a V series Enfield as manufactured for SSA, and is so stamped on the rear receiver just behind the safety.
So- is it correct as-is (that is, once parked), rebuilt, bubba'd, or what?
Any thoughts, insights are appreciated.
Thanks much guys.

Lots of these went through refinish as near as 70 years ago...how about some pics to see what you see?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by browningautorifle

Lots of these went through refinish as near as 70 years ago...how about some pics to see what you see?

---

A picture would be nice, I agree, but I only use an ipad and I have no idea how to get a picture from it to the forum. I've got pics, but can't get them uploaded. But I'll keep on it, might get smart!

If you can download the Tapatalk app to your ipad, you can browse the forum with that lightweight app and use it to upload photos to a thread.

If you are interested I can provide more info and help walk you through it.

You could also email me pics and I'll post them. PM me...

thanks for the suggestions on posting pics. I reverted to my desktop, after blowing the dust off and remembering how to turn it on, here are a couple of pics of the finish. very hard to make it out, but these are the best of the bunch.Attachment 73587Attachment 73588Attachment 73589Attachment 73590
Note the difference in texture between the rear sight assembly and the leaf itself.

All that looks original and not a parkerizing at all. The bolt head is definitely later, it could have been headspaced anywhere along the line including last year...explaining the new bolthead. The rest of the rifle as far as I can see is original... We'd love more, bigger and detailed pics though. Looks like a nice one.

I agree. Photos are small on my phone but looks pretty normal.

I suspect, with regards to the finish of the metal parts that it has not been grit blasted because it is a wartime produced rifle (1918) and the metal parts were not finished off to what they would be in peacetime. In my opinion, the very slightly rough/uneven surface is most likely how it left the factory when new but to some may have the appearance of a shot/bead blasted surface.

All good inputs, thanks. BuAttachment 73600Attachment 73608Attachment 73607Attachment 73606Attachment 73605Attachment 73604Attachment 73603Attachment 73602Attachment 73601Attachment 73609t here are some more, better, pictures showing the surfaces and a couple of overall views, as well as some individual highlights. i do not know how the barrels were dated, or even if they were dated, but one pic does show a '18 mark on the barrel. Everything points to all of the original parts being kept with the gun, except that there are some font differences visible (receiver, bolt, nosecap all the same, but barrel and sight leaf are different). I do notice the HV stamp by the sight, too. forestock font is same as barrel, but struck twice, once horizontal and once vertical-sorry, no pics, forgot to take one.
As always, eager to learn more, so comment away, i understand you want to help.
Oh, yeah, one more thing-I do recall a comment or two some time back that stated there was a general refurb of some sort in 1944 and maybe the 20's, which could maybe account for a parkerize. very little backup info, though.

That C broad arrow is priceless...nice honest looking rifle.

nice rifle. the oil bottle isn't era correct, it is an earlier and harder to find mk2 version.

more info: .303 Oil Bottles - Other Equipment - Great War Forum

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by henry r

the oil bottle

---

It's sure a nice piece though.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by henry r

nice rifle. the oil bottle isn't era correct, it is an earlier and harder to find mk2 version.

more info: .303 Oil Bottles - Other Equipment - Great War Forum

---

You beat me to it, the oiler is rare and worth almost as much as the rifle.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by gew8805

You beat me to it, the oiler is rare and worth almost as much as the rifle.

---

Seriously??? Anybody wanna buy an oiler??

Are there are manufacturer's/acceptance markings on the oiler and is there any chance of a picture of the complete oiler, please?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Flying10uk

Are there are manufacturer's/acceptance markings on the oiler and is there any chance of a picture of the complete oiler, please?

---

It's marked with a WD broad arrow (New Zealand), a horizontal B over 16 over H. It's 3 3/4" long. I'm not yet really ready to sellit, mainly because I don't know what it's worth yet, but keep in touch, you never know.

I wasn't enquiring because I was interested in purchasing it just in seeing a picture of the complete oiler. I have never seen these early oilers in the flesh only pictures of them.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by gew8805

You beat me to it, the oiler is rare and worth almost as much as the rifle.

---

I'd offer at least 2 oilers for the rifle! [emoji6]https://www.milsurps.com/images/impo...e0ac9faa-1.jpg

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Gingercat

I'd offer at least 2 oilers for the rifle! [emoji6]https://www.milsurps.com/images/impo...e0ac9faa-1.jpg

---

Well there go my dreams of early retirement!

:) My apologies bob4wd, keep in mind that it has been a while since I bought oilers or Enfield rifles so my prices may be lower than today's values. The last No.1 Mk.III rifle that I bought - in NRA VG+ condition - I purchased for $125 and I thought that was too much but I liked it at the time and bought it. Standard WW1 era oilers were selling for $5 to $10 each at the time (up from $1 each just a few years before that). Things have gone up over the last 10 or so years so don't allow my statement to over value your oiler, it is nice but worth only what someone wants to pay for it in today's current market.

OK, so we've established that I'm not gonna get rich off of the oiler (LOL), or probably anything else as far as that goes. From what I've gleaned from the responses so far, and thank you all btw, I conclude that what I've got here is a desirable rifle that can be accurately described as :
-all original, except barrel
-rebarreled in 1918
-was in Canadian service
-was reworked/refurbished at some point in it's life, but no idea when
-was parkerized at some point. The pics don't show it real well, but under a strong glass, the "acne" or small pits, are easily discernable and are inside of the serial number stampings and especially on the edges of the Canadian broad arrow stampings, proving that it was grit blasted after the stampings were made.
I Still wish somebody knew who or when.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by bob4wd

I Still wish somebody knew who or when.

---

Problem is, I don't think any records really ever existed. I know from my time in, and Peter has reflected this too, rifles are controlled as they go along and when they go out of service we simply didn't care any more. The records didn't matter so they went right into the burn barrel. As we controlled them while they were in service, they were shown and where they currently ARE, not a trail of who had it before...

Regarding the finish looks just like the standard bluing at the time, although we say bluing it was actually controlled rust, the solution applied at the time to start and quicken the rust has etched the metal could of been a strong solution at the start or left too long.

bob, I'm not sure that your rifle ever has been parkerised; as I've said previously I don't believe that too much attention was given to the quality of the surface finish of the metal parts during 1918. Remember things were quite desperate for the allies during the early part of 1918 before the arrival of significant numbers of American soldiers. The name of the game was to turn out as many rifles as possible and not worry too much about the quality of the surface finish of the metal.

I agree- just normal bluing but maybe a bit of light surface corrosion giving the rough surface. Are you sure the barrel is a replacement?

Ridolpho

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Flying10uk

I'm not sure that your rifle ever has been parkerised

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by bigduke6

Regarding the finish looks just like the standard bluing at the time

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ridolpho

just normal bluing

---

I agree and said that in the beginning(post 7)...just the new bolt head is Parked, I'll bet it's an Aussie bolthead too. Probably made about 1945-50...right at the end. The rest is bluing and hand wear/patina.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ridolpho

I agree- just normal bluing but maybe a bit of light surface corrosion giving the rough surface. Are you sure the barrel is a replacement?

Ridolpho

---

Regarding the replacement barrel, I have seen no documentation to support this, but I have read numerous times on this and other forums that a replacement barrel was dated using the format 'xx, ('18). Or "apostrophe number number", the two numbers being the last two numbers of the year of installation. An original barrel would have been dated with the full four numbers of the date, as in 1918.
I would love it if someone more knowledgable than I were to show me otherwise - still learning.

I have yet to see a full four digit year on any British military rifle barrel. Month/Year (XX/XX) or just year ('XX). Going back to the Snider era at least. I don't remember seeing month stamps on British SMLE barrels either. Aussie ones, yes.

FWIW, I agree that this is a worn/maybe slightly pitted original finish...it can be hard to judge from a photo though. I don't see anything that says "replacement" on the barrel either. Like I say...FWIW.

Both my 1918 SSA & NRF have '18 dated barrels & the font on the barrels differ from the rest, we had a discussion on just this over on Gunboards a while back & another example was posted, in short, the barrel is not a replacement.
My photos are missing in this thread so will post the photos tonight
NFR No.1 Mk.III*

Barrel dating........ It all depends on who did it and where it was done. Replacement barrels were a Field, Base, contractor and factory job. And even then, factory dated replacement barrels could have been in Ordnance for years and years. We had new No4 barrels in stock in the 90's dated F56!

So were barrels dated at manufacture, fitment or other?

I have replaced a few barrels in my time and don't ever recall dating one with the fitting date.

There are some earlier examples that skew things a bit. I have a CLLE that was converted by Vickers in 1911. The barrel has both Victorian and Edwardian proofs and only the '11 date. The barrel's an LSA, so since they didn't date their barrels, and the proofs predate 1911, it would seem that the date was stamped at some point during the conversion to charger loading.

Needless to say, nothing would please me more than to know I have an original barrel on that rifle. So I will assume that it is!
I checked my other no.1s, results were:
-1939 bsa (Egyptian use) - no barrel date at all, fonts match but barrel had obvious grind marks under the number, so I suspect renumber, plus has no letter prefix. Btw, has the bsa commercial (3 stacked rifles) stamp on the knox form.
- 1943 bsa dispersal- barrel dated 42. Fonts exact match.
-RFI .308- no barrel date, fonts match.
-1941 Lithgow- very faint stamping, but seems to be 6 42. Obvious rebuilt gun, butt dated 53.
-1918 Lithgow- barrel dated 1918. Matching font.
-1940 BSA dispersal- no barrel date, matching font.
So no apparent pattern that I can discern. Still learning!

Here are the serial numbers on my 1918 SSA & NRF both rifles have a silver/blue finish
First the SSA & then the NRF
https://www.milsurps.com/images/impo...inSerial-1.jpg
https://www.milsurps.com/images/impo.../06/SSA5-1.jpg



https://www.milsurps.com/images/impo.../06/NRF5-1.jpg
https://www.milsurps.com/images/impo...06/NRF11-1.jpg
https://www.milsurps.com/images/impo...rreldate-1.jpg


Here's a 1918 LSA MkIII* NZ marked with 2 dates on the barrel 10 '39 on the left & 8 '40 on the right below serial number
https://www.milsurps.com/images/impo...rreldate-1.jpg
https://www.milsurps.com/images/impo...IIstarSN-1.jpg

............and thats where us colonials stray from our Brit. masters Pete.
When the SAF was developed at Lithgow, we were allowed to adjust the Specification/Inspection Guide SA307D as ammended, to suit our conditions and manufacture procedure.
The relaxing of the regulations for the India Practice (Regulations to Guide the Inspection Department) and the formulating of Manufacture and Inspection Instructions (SAF) as dictated by Major A.H Sandford, R.A.G.A laid down the criteria that is still used in OZ today.

The marking of Brit. Barrels saw them dated with only the year of barrel manufacture. This practice of only using the year flowed to the Indian Inspectorate, but saw them use the date as body/barrel completion Inspection.

The Australian system, however, had the month/year added to the barrel when mated to the action and after proofing(as per Instructions to Viewers and Inspectors SAF) the inspection criteria is laid out in a minute paper approved and countersigned by Sandford and Colley(chief armourer) and ammended several times from 1914 to 1936.

The current practice here in OZ, dates back to 1947 and requires all firearms to be marked with a means of relating the barrel to it's manufacturer/fitter, the serial number allocated to the barrel blank, must be stamped when assembled to an action, the fitters mark, date and barrel twist should be stamped, however if this information is recorded on the barrel replacement form lodged with the State FAR, it may be excluded, providing the mandatory serial number allocated is provided.

Here in OZ you can find undated barrels still in the wrap, or fitted to rifles outside the system, I'd have several here in my barrel box, both light and heavy barrels.
As the State FAR now allocate a barrel number on their registration certificates, it now allows us to legally;) fit these undated unnumbered barrels to Milsurp rifles without adding the Registries allocated number.