Hi,
Since few months, I'm working to restore a Long Branch riffle. This one have the serial number 7L8215. Now it's time to work on the rear sight wich is gone. Is there any data about the choice of the rear sight related to the serial number and date of production? Where can I find the proper information to choose the right one??
Thanks!
Shouldn't it be a Mark I*
You are right, I forgot the star. It's a Mark I*
It would have been a 300yd-600yd flip sight when it left the factory, but depending on its service life could have had any other no.4 graduated sight installed.
I concur about the flip sight.
Here is my '41 6L series LB No. 4 Mk I/I*, she came with the simple flip sight.
MJ, would the sight be replaced when FTR'd to No4Mk1/3 spec ?
I'd say definitely.
Very likely so.Quote:
Originally Posted by 30Three
https://www.milsurps.com/images/impo.../wLPNCu8-1.jpg
.........:thup:........
https://www.milsurps.com/attachment....6&d=1512686114
Hm, it's not often you see a bolt head retaining catch and a bolt head release slot on the same rifle...
A 1941 6L rifle...that doesn't square up either...
There is a No4 Trials rifle in the Pattern Room, also shown in The Lee Enfield Story which shows a similar "double billing" It was a trial of that ill-starred MkI* modification.
Maybe your rifle is something along the same lines done at Long Branch?
But the MkI* modification was introduced before the 6L series wasn't it?
An orphan MkI receiver that got put back into the production stream when they were working in the 6L range and for ease of production was just fed through and got the release slot cut in like all the rest?
Can you post a few closeups of the slot with the bolt retracted?
I have heard/read somewhere that the 300/600 yard flip sight was graduated with having to have the spike bayonet attached when using the 300 yard aperture is that correct?
That's what I was always taught too. And here\s how we were taught to interpret it. 300 yards, when the enemy are close,bayonet fixed. 600, when they're some distance away and you've still got time, bayonet UN fixed!
The forend has been cut for a cutoff as well.Quote:
Originally Posted by Surpmil
So would I, it's been through a UK FTR, had it's bolt replaced, etc. etc.Quote:
Originally Posted by Brian Dick
Your 1942 No. 4 Mk1* came with the milled sight or flip sight, but is correct with any of the 4. I have data entries showing all 4 types on the 153 1942 rifles in the database.
I see that you are restoring the rifle.
Based on this, I'd recommend using the replacement wood as a guide. If you find late war or post war wood, use a milled sight. If you find FTR wood, again, use the milled sight.
If you find unmarked WWII wood, use whatever sight you want. They are all correct. If it's 1943 era wood, the flip sight would be "more" correct.
The data I have for the year/serial change is:1941 1L6926 /// 1942 1L5979, so even here you see that there is a serial discrepancy. The 1941 rifle has a later serial than the 1942 rifle.
EDIT: A 7L rifle is most definitely a 1942 rifle, but I have a handful of cases where the serials are clearly out of range. No common, but not unheard of.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Montgomery
Attachment 90077Quote:
Originally Posted by Surpmil
Attachment 90078
Attachment 90079
Littlejohn, you need to get the butt to butt socket gap corrected because before long that split will start to break off a part of the butt. Then glue, peg and make good the split part. There must be a gap the width of a hacksaw blade between the butt and the socket.
I need to stop using those old photos, I guess. I was unhappy with the fit and appearance of that buttstock from the day I acquired the rifle. I purchased a NOS Long Branch buttstock from Springfield Sporters in 2016, and replaced the stock in the above photo.Quote:
Originally Posted by Peter Laidler
It was discussed here:
https://www.milsurps.com/showthread.php?t=57343
Attachment 90111 Attachment 90112
True, and that is a feature which persisted at Long Branch until somewhere between approx. 3L and 6L---- I believe.Quote:
Originally Posted by Bindi2