Printable View
I just received a No.32 MKII scope with serial number 9052 and dated 1943. Is it my imagination or does the No. 32 MKII scope seem to be of better quality than the No. 32 MK3? I have both and it just seems the No. 32 MKII seems sturdier. Now I need a scope bracket for this jewel.
Jim
I don't know the answer to whether the quality of one over the other differs, but certainly the Mk1 and 2 were more mechanically reliable than the Mk3. The very best of all no doubt was the Mk2/1 and then the Mk2/1(W) type. It had the mechanical reliability via its two way direct acting lead screws and simply adjusted turrets and waterproof to boot. But that said, 'simply adjusted' only applies when they are correctly set-up on the workshop bench first. Don't even get me started on the exploits of the enthusiastic amateurs/home taught instrument experts/ tinkerers who set about 'correcting' their own Mk3/L1A1 turret heads..............
Gads when I saw the header I imagined that one from France just sold on fleabay had surfaced wanting someone to repair it ......whew! after all I tried with that seller the reply was there was no serial No. on the scope you could make out the broad arrow and some writing but thats all so I gathered it was sanded de-crusted to within inch of its life.
Quote:
Originally Posted by CINDERS
Its the internals that count Cinders, am sure Peter has seen a few from the outside that look past there sell by date but with a full strip and bead blast etc come out looking new...... lets hope thats what will happen and fitted to a rifle in need, but it does give the owner an artistic licence to put what ever number he wants on it......
I believe this one must take the prize for the most buggered up specimen ever publicly displayed!
Yes, it could use a bit of help.
Dire....
Looks like two, welded together around the Mk2 and No32 radius. If it wasn't done between centres it'll NEVER colimate in a million years. Looks like the turrets could do with new heads too. But maybe a donor for someone's rebuild. But where do they conjure these prices from........
How about :
"Just a little clean up and replace the lenses only if you have to "
"Please keep the costs down as the baby needs shoes..."
:eek:
Attachment 82726
Camera angle - or with those two turret openings being in-line and absence of the brass inner tube (that holds the OG lens), is that a Mk3?
Looks like that one's taken a bit of a smack...Quote:
Originally Posted by Warren
A few hours electrolysis and I bet the Bracket would go again, probably need new thumb screws though.......
Probably rebuild the whole things to "Eriginul" with some cold blue and a couple of pieces. Create a good story and put it up for sale...too bad about that one.Quote:
Originally Posted by bigduke6
And that sharp step at the start of the ocular bell: only seen on some Mk3s wasn't it?
The worst part is whoever dug it up seems to have knocked off the brass "turret block", but was it to "reuse" it or to sell for scrap!? In fact it almost looks like they broke the tube at that point to get it off and just set the front piece there for the photo!
Where was it found Warren? If it is a Mk3 and it was found in NW Europe that would be very interesting as I don't believe there is a single photo of the Mk3 scope in use there during WWII.
Maybe Korea Rob ?Quote:
Originally Posted by Surpmil
To be honest, if the brass turret housing is salvageable then you've got yourself a telescope. In fact, I've got a 'new' Mk3 tube made from just such a salvageable part plus a machined No53 tube. No turret housing, no tube!
So that's what happened to this one no doubt. Makes sense.
It's back on again for £3,000 I see. Have many been selling on eBay lately? Not noticed any myself particularly.Quote:
Originally Posted by Surpmil
You have to ask yourself that even if you had a set of drums of any mark/type plus the time plus the internal work that it'll inevitably need as sure as god made little green apples, you'd still be spending probably twice what a reasonable one would fetch. As for getting it for its spares value, you can't be sure that it's all there. To be honest, the only part of that scope that's any use is the acual brass turret housing. And that's only the parts we can see. Heaven knows what the internals are like
I'd advise an forumer tempted to look at it for any reason, to read and re-read the short article wot I writ a year or so ago about buying one........ Nope...., looks like a pig in a poke to me with my untrained eyes
But to Warrens unanswered thread 9. Could that be an L42? I'm not really in a position to scale-up the barrel dimension ahead of the nocks form. Most of the L1A1's and L2A3's from the beached Sir Galahad were like that when it was cleared prior to being sea dumped. Just a point to ponder.......
That's $3,714.20 CDN if it's the same one we were speaking of...1943 No 32 Mk II British Lee Enfield No 4 Sniper Scope | eBayQuote:
Originally Posted by PrinzEugen
Thats the one Jim, I thought it was another one regarding post #4, (which was in France IIRC that you couldn't make out anything on the tube) the seller does state Satisfaction guaranteed!, so I can't see a problem.........:rofl:
I added up the total decent parts on the re-run of the butchered Ebay scope and came to about $150.00 Cdn. in value.
To transplant an ocular bell with the retaining rings around the erector cell cover or replace the rings by taking one off a 42 or 53 is a bitch of a job...done it and don't relish doing it again. They are brazed on.
The knobs are toast as is most of the turret assembly: a lot of metal has been removed.
Hmm, maybe an offer of $140.00 tops.
By the way, the No.4 (T) with the crushed ocular bell and missing the turret body in a previous posting is the "survivor" of a house fire.
The turret assembly just plain melted off.
I've rebuilt a 32 out of a house fire but no way close to that one and it came out OK, but even the erector lenses were pooched. Every lens had just exploded.
Not as hot a fire as the current one but it did however, get a lot of heat.
That would be sad to find after the water receded. Nothing to be done with any of it.Quote:
Originally Posted by Warren
I think that we can all agree that the vendor of the telescope must be inhabiting another planet. Or is asking financial advice from someone living there. He's making himself look like a wally!