Printable View
Good morning one and all, Just introducing myself to the group. Located in Ottawa Canada and have been using this great site to get some info on my new purchase that came yesterday. Managed to pick up a 1943 Long Branch No.4 Mk1*. The serial number however did not fall within the expected range according to info I have read. Serial No. 88L0103 on the action and same on the bolt. Could the number be that far off from the numbers listed in Charles Stratton book?
88L is within the 1945 production year. Can you post a picture of the left side wall that shows the markings as well as the serial number on the butt socket. Something strange going on. Ron
I agree it is strange but this is what is shown on the rifle. Here are images of the numbers. Any help would be greatly appreciated.
It's had a 1945 bolt installed at sometime in the past. The receiver has be restamped to match the bolt. Generally the other way around. See the position of the"88" to the relationship of the remainder of the SN. Interesting. Ron
Thanks Ron. The rest of the gun looks normal to what should be there and is in good shape although the rifling is wore alot. Good to go with the bayonets.
All books can only be a guide, the Charles Stratton books in particular seem to be full of inaccuracies.
Will have to respectfully disagree about that: the "L0103" on the butt socket is original. The "88" is clearly a later over-stamping of the first two digits of the original SN; not even the correct sized stamps. The bolt is a complete renumber and another number was filed off first, so it is a re-used bolt, and looks like the hand of Bubba was upon it.;)Quote:
Originally Posted by rgg_7
Why the SN on the socket was over-struck is anyone's guess: someone who liked "88", wanted to obscure the number of an "acquired" rifle, thought they knew what the SN "should be", etc. etc.:dunno:
I agree. The bolt has been filed and renumbered. You can see all sorts of different previous numbers.Quote:
Originally Posted by Surpmil
But we should also add that there's nothing wrong with re-using a bolt providing that it's fittedCORRECTLY and you can get CHS with it. A bit more to it than that of course - but the principle of re-use is acceptable
Most certainly, no arguments...we're just trying to suss out the odd number.Quote:
Originally Posted by Peter Laidler
The bolt looks right to me. Look closely at the first "8". Looks like a little bounce in the number, but the color and finish look right. I think someone made the rifle match the bolt and called it "A numbers match" rifle. A couple more close ups in natural light may help. When bolts are ground down and renumbered, there is usually a shelf on the left side, (to the right of the "B", in this case). The serrations look like machining marks to me.
The back of the bolt has been filed. There's another number to the left of the "8" and something was under the "L". There's a remains of a number inside the "3" too. Inside the "0" is a lateral mark like the back of a "7". It's not unusual to reuse a bolt. This isn't a factory new bolt though.Quote:
Originally Posted by limpetmine
As a matter of (little....) interest but when we had a box of used but serviceable bolts to put back on the shelf, one of the blokes would take them to the machine shop and one of the fitter turners would machine the number off on the lathe. You usually asked the most junior bloke in the machine shop because he would always(?) xxxx the first one up due to the overhang of the knob on the bolt handle whacking his lathe tool. Big laugh all round while discussing the latest Rugby (against the Kiwis) or cricket (against the poms) scores. Nobody worried about the feint markings left behind as a rule. Then into the phosphate plant.
Thank you guys for all your insight into my numbering dilemma. My latest purchase - 1939 Ishapore SMLE No.1 MkIII looks to be without any of the issues on the numbering.
Thanks again most appreciated....Len