What do you think of this sniper? A fake?
Printable View
What do you think of this sniper? A fake?
No4mk2 converted to T "ish" spec I would say...
I suspect the receiver side wall engraving is probably honest - about the only marks that are. Assuming so, it was FTR'd by BSA in 1955 (or is it 1953?), & probably converted to Mk1/2 spec at that time, long before someone took some repro parts & added them, together with some implausible numbering on the scope bracket central face & the cradle clamps.
Thanks.
As I suspected.
Yes, it was FTR'd in 1955.
I think the scope and the bracket are the only original components: they are those mounted on the Italian Lee-Enfield sniper rifles. Anyway completely out of place on this rifle.
Hi giove. Is the bracket & the scope of Italian manufacture? The scope didn't look quite right to me, but there are no really clear views of it, nor of its markings. The bracket definitely isn't of UK manufacture, nor Canadian, so I guessed it may be a fake. If that's not the case I'd be interested to know more - did Italy set up any 4T's, or just make replacement scopes & brackets? And do you know if the scopes were made it Italy, or were UK scopes reworked?
Thanks.
Its NOT right I'm afraid.............:nono:
This from our very own site:
Spotting a fake sniper rifle
Besides looking for both ‘T’ and ‘TR’, one very simple test is to examine the screw heads on the pads. Staking the end of the slot with a pin punch is an uncomplicated way to lock a screw head, and was listed in the armourer’s orders in March 1946. More than one stake per screw head, indicates the pad has been removed or replaced, either for repair or overhaul. A single stake mark suggests a rifle is newly converted, was not used very much, or left British service prior to 1946. The front pad takes the worst beating of the two.
To summarize Laidler, the first guideline is to examine the left side of the receiver. Read the model number. All British and Savage-made sniper rifles were built on No.4 Mk1 actions (“number four mark one”). Only wartime dated Long Branch No.4 Mk1* (“number four mark one star”) receivers were converted to sniper rifles. If a rifle from two British plants was more accurate than average, it was set aside for No.4(T) conversion. Birmingham Small Arms’ plant in Shirley stamped their ‘M47C’ on the butt socket. Royal Ordnance Factory in Maltby stamped ‘ROFM’ ‘RM’ or ‘M’ on the sidewall or on the butt socket. The serial number ranges are listed in Stratton.
There was a continual reduction of sniper rifles in British service after 1945 until the 1960’s. Those unsuited for upgrade programs or surplus were sold off. Remaining rifles were converted to L42 rifles in 7.62 NATO. Therefore, a British rifle has a storybook of markings establishing its history. Canadian issued rifles usually do not have the characteristic British speckling of stamps and punches. The collector must educate himself on the nuances of each stamp and punch. They are not random, but tell a lengthy and detailed story beyond the intent of this article.
Still following Laidler, the second guideline is to look for a large ‘TR’ stamped on the left of the butt socket and a letter ‘T’ on the flat of the left receiver sidewall after the model number. The fonts are distinctive. The ‘TR’ was applied by inspectors at the plant to indicate the rifle grouped better than others. It was segregated and shipped to Holland and Holland. The new arrivals were inspected again, and those that met a higher standard were converted. Some rejected ‘TR’ rifles may be in circulation without other sniper marks. The ‘T’ signified a No.32 telescope had been fitted, and the combination met all inspections. Without a ‘T’ marking, the rifle could not have been converted at Holland and Holland or Long Branch, except for defined batches of rifles converted before the marking procedures were settled.
The third guideline is to look for a ¼ inch ‘S51’ stamped on the bottom of the handgrip of the butt stock. This is unique to Holland and Holland. The standard length butt was a Normal marked with a letter ‘N’ on the top near the butt plate. There will be a check rest with a scalloped front end screwed to the comb. There are some variations in the finished shape and centering of the cheek rest. Some rifles have it more upright while others tend to have the rest rolled to either side. Unbuggered screw heads on slotted screws are an encouraging sign. Look for a stamped telescope number on the front edge of the butt, just before butt socket. If possible (but I strongly advise against amateurs touching any tool to a collectable rifle), unscrew the butt and look on the wood for the rifle serial number just in front of the scope number.
Look at the stock, look for a screw from one side of the wood to the other just in front of the receiver ring. This is the dreaded Ishapore screw. The Indians modified every No.4 rifle they found with this strengthening screw. Nobody else worried about such things. Although, India did use unknown numbers of No.4(T) rifles, but the references give no indication of Indian markings.
Look on the front right side of the receiver just behind the receiver ring. A genuine Holland and Holland conversion will have a 1/8 inch letter ‘S’ close to the wood line. I cannot comment if Long Branch is marked as such.
If there is an angular sling swivel on the take down screw in front of the magazine, this is a sign, A) the rifle was either produced after September 1944, B) it left British military sometime near then, or C) someone has ‘improved’ the rifle. A considerable number of civilian Parker Hale target shooting swivels change hands on the internet, regardless of appropriateness for the year of No.4(T) production.
Look at the sights. Are both surfaces on the front sight blade, which face the shooter, undercut? Apparently some snipers found the normal slope reflected back on their eyes. I wouldn’t worry if it is not there. It may be a peculiarity of British unit-level conversions. The back sight should be the machined early Mk.I style, without the 90 degree battle sight. It should be completely black with no exposed metal surfaces. One sign the rifle has been used by someone knowledgeable will be if the underside is rounded out. Smart armourers made this modification (without permission) so their sniper comrades could remove the rifle bolt without removing the scope and flipping up the back sight.
The next to last item(s) are the accessories according to the equipment checklists. Every well-dressed No.4(T) has: a No.15 wooden transport chest; a No.8 scope case and leather strap or No.8 MK.2 rubberized canvas sleeve; a canvas protective case that is too small for a rifle with scope; a Scout Regiment ‘pirate-style’ draw tube telescope; a small tin cleaning kit; and a World War I dated American M1907 leather sling. Each item is a study in itself. Generally speaking, collectors look for matching numbers to their rifle and telescope, and for example, a Broad Arrow on the sling. Any No.8 case or sleeve, and surprisingly the can’s strap, are highly sought after, followed by the No.15 chest. The Canadian C No.7 .22 rifle chest is similar, but not tall enough by 2 inches.
The final item from Laidler’s books is the No.32 telescope and mounting bracket or base. If the rifle offered does not have a No.32 scope, be skeptical. Remember, the Century rifles are sold without brackets or scopes. If there is a scope, compare its number to the stamped number on the butt and the rifle number to the one on the bracket. If they match, Bingo! We have a winner. If not, don’t despair. Most No.4(T)s sold for surplus in Canada have mismatched numbers. The dealers stored the rifles unheated and the scopes heated; most salesmen or shippers didn’t know or care to match them up. It is not unreasonable to suspect a similar tale elsewhere.
In broad terms, a 1941, ‘42 or ‘43 rifle should have a MK1 scope; rifles made in ’43 and ‘44 should have a MK2 scope, and rifles made in ‘45 a MK3 or C No.67 scope (also known as a Mk4). Canadian-made REL scopes restart serial numbers with each mark change. Only a few hundred REL scopes of each mark were ever produced, so overall they are exceedingly scarce. An REL scope on a British rifle or a Long Branch rifle with British scope should be approached skeptically. The best British MK3 scopes were kept for the 7.62 conversion program, as earlier Marks were no longer needed. Some good condition MK3 scopes were sold off.
There are a number of replica scope brackets on the market. US companies like SARCO and The Sportsman’s Guide sell fake sniper rifle mounts. It has an obvious two-faceted rear face. The author succumbed to a testosterone race and bought a not-so-cleared explained replica bracket for 50% more than the retailer was asking. On the other extreme are brackets made in the UK for Roger Payne. His products are high quality and esthetically close to the original, but still distinctive to the knowledgeable collector.
The flat side will be flat, not sharply angled. Look for a round radius on the rear “arm” of the bracket and a short vertical rise from the rear finger knob. The originals were cast iron, with limited machining for the scope contact surfaces, the ring halves, and the bearing surfaces at the pads. Postwar, the British rifles stamped the rifle serial number on the rear leg. Long Branch serialized the bracket to the rifle, centered near the top edge.
Canadian knobs have a small depression in their centre. The British knobs are smooth surfaced inside. There are two styles of split washers which are not interchangeable.
Laidler suggests if the pads have tiny Broad Arrow marks, they are replacement parts from authorized sources. However, there are replica No.4(T) parts kits on the market. One internet seller includes drills, taps and screws with a set of pads. Hardware is one thing, talent is another. The key ingredient in the Holland and Holland conversion was two operators and three machines using all the same jigs. They converted rifles on a production line of one rifle after another. Every faker is trying to replicate that unique set of conditions. Without a good knowledge of the factors, it is unlikely to get the pads properly centered and aligned over the bore. A fake rifle and pads are unlikely to be aligned to the natural centre of the telescope’s adjustment.
Calling it a fake is probably much too flattering to the person that did it!
It is more like a poor attempt at a replica! :thdown:
Hi all.
Roger, the "Italian scopes", I think, are British scopes reworked. Brackets are some reworked and others of new production.
The serial number font on the bracket of this scope, and the numbers on the rings, are correct.
The "Italian Enfield sniper rifles" are, predominantly, set up in Italy using all the makers; I have 2 Savage and 1 Long Branch with two groove barrel and a 5 groove BSA. I saw, also, Maltby and Fazakerley.
Italy also received a handful of Long Branch T.P.; I have one of these.
I haven't pics of mine, but if there is interest, I can take some pictures.
Gil Boyd, it's not always like that, I learned it right on this forum.
Thank you all.
Giancarlo
Thanks Giancarlo. Most informative. I'd love to see some photo's of Italian set up 4T's. I don't think I've ever seen one, at least, not that I know of.
I agree with your comments, plus of course, on an original wartime 4T you would never expect to see a Savage rifle with a serial number anywhere near as high as 78C being converted to a sniper. All of the Savage 4T's I've seen & owned have been between 0C & about 15 or 16C.
Giancarlo,
If you were presenting me with that rifle, I would have to decline the purchase thats all............experience and all that tells me it is not 100% correct from what I have seen.
Sorry if I burst bubbles but thats the way it is I'm afraid. If you ask for a considered opinion on a website you have to accept the views expressed, nothing personal.
Good luck if you want it as a 4T, I take it you are saying these are "Italian" 4 T's set up and reworked in Italy!!!!?
I might have misunderstood Gil, but I didn't think Giancarlo was suggesting that the rifle that started this particular thread was a real Italian set up No4 (T) (or a British or Canadian one, for that matter), but that the bracket could be from one, & presumably, be of Italian manufacture, rather than just a modern commercial repro bracket. Also, that some 4T's manufactured by the Italians do exist. This is news to me, but I'd be interested enough to have a look at his photo's of the rifles in his own collection which he believes to be of this origin, if he'd be kind enough to share them with us.
Roger,
Agree there totally, its a language thing, perhaps I too misunderstood his phrase:
Gil Boyd, it's not always like that, I learned it right on this forum.
Giancarlo,
Good luck with finding the rifle, as I too have never heard of an Italian made 4T, alwys willing to learn.
I also know of Italian "made" (which would better be described as "converted") No. 4 T rifles. They, at least to my point of view, are hard to impossible to authenticate, since they basically are No. 4 rifles with a No. 32 scope. I am not aware of a distinguishing marking or way of manufacturing which would identify one of them as an "original" (Italian) conversion.
Hi Gil Boyd.
You misunderstood me. I certainly expressed myself badly I'm sorry, English isn't my mother tongue.
You haven't burst bubbles, I am aware that the rifle, in the thread, is a fake and I don't want either buy or sell it. I said only that the scope and the brachet are original, but made or reworked in Italy, post WW2, for the Italian Army.
Thank you for the useful information you have posted. I am here to compare and learn.
What I wanted to say was that the markings: T, TR, S, S51, etc. aren't always present on an original British sniper rifle.
Sincerely. Giancarlo
Giancarlo,
No worries at all. Hope there was enough there I posted, and from other members to assist you.
In terms of the pre nomitures on 4T's, I don't think I have seen many without those tale tale signs stamped in at H&H or whereever. I would certainly look for the S stamped into the metalwork on the ejection side, to prove the action had been selected, as I would the woodwork, and the T/TR stamped on the wrist and the other side of the action, with designated and correct T's.
I do see where you are coming from, as on occasions not all would be in place, more from an oversight rather than mix and match, later in service.
Others may have a varied opinion, I have only ever owned three all Maltby 4T rifles and all heavily stamped with "Pride".
Thanks Gil Boyd. I agree with you in general, but this my 1941 BSA have no T, no S nor the particular inspection mark.
https://www.milsurps.com/showthread.php?t=62692
My "Indianized" 1944 BSA 4T haven't the S51 because the butt-stock was replaced in India (it has the Indian depot mark).
It isn't real impossible to distinguish an original (Italian) from a fake.
Here an original (non mine). Note the Smle magazine.
and a fake (not mine, fortunately). Only the scope is authentic.
Some interesting learning points here Giancarlo; so the cradle clamp numbering on the rifle that started the thread is in fact correct for an Italian set up rifle (although the rifle itself is a fake): the number is the same on both clamps, but there is an 'A' prefix preceding the number on the rear clamp, & a 'B' prefix on the front clamp. This is worth noting for future reference, as well as the precise shape of the Italian made brackets. Did the prefix letters advance through the alphabet, or were only the letters A & B utilised?
Thanks for sharing the photo's with us.
Also this bracket is neither British nor Canadian? Because I have my very personal and wacky theory about the "Italian brackets".
Yes, there are only the letters A and B; only the figures change.
Thanks Giancarlo. The thing that strikes me from the few Italian made brackets that you have shown us, is that they are all the same in style, & now seen, can be recognized. The central 'strut' is slightly tapered in shape, like a Rose Brothers bracket. In other words it is slightly thinner at the front end than the back, but the surface is finished to a better standard & is flatter than a RB bracket. Additionally, it is now clear that Italy had its own numbering system for the cradle caps, which we now all understand. At least, this is what I will pick up from this. It has turned into a worthwhile thread - I've learnt something anyway. Previously I knew Italy used 4T's & I had even seen one Italian refurbished scope, but it did not have its bracket, & I did not even know that Italy had produced its own brackets.
Sorry my friend, IMHO that is not an original in any respect except that it is an "original" Lee Enfield rifle and an "original" Italian made(?) scope. The difference in finish between the pads and rifle shows the pads were put on very recently and have certainly not been on there since the early 1950s when the Italians were purportedly making up their own No32 MkII scopes and No4(T)s.Quote:
Originally Posted by giove
Why they would have is a mystery to me, since the Mk3 was so much better and simpler to make... To say nothing of the numerous optically superior scopes available long before then.
There was a previous photo of a rifle overhauled - or was it made - in the UK in 1955. Are we really to believe that this was then shipped out to Italy in time to join their purported No4(T) conversion program, but never got a proper uniform finish applied in the process?
Those wonderfully skilled artisans who have been producing superb art "fakes" in Italy for centuries would laugh at such an amateurish attempt. They who can age a marble bust well enough to fool experts, what would they say about mismatching finishes and clean screw slots? :ugh:
Really, we have a right to expect better from a country of so many talents! :rolleyes:
Surpmil, thanks for your post.
I haven't seen that rifle from life, but only in pictures. To be sure you should see the markings on the barrel. The fact that the bracket and the rifle have different S.N. and that the screws head are "slaughtered", were the reason that made me desist from going to see it. Surely 1 or 2 screws of the front pad have been replaced.
Soon I shall insert the pics of one of my surely original "Italian sniper".
Do you confirm that the scopes were Mk II?
Italy come out of the II World War as a defeated nation and, therefore, was not allowed to, immediately, equip itself with modern armaments. The Lee-Enfield sniper was later replaced by the Garand sniper, also in 7,62x51 caliber (?!).
Regarding the firs rifle in this thread (the 1955), we are all aware that is a fake.
This is surely original (unfortunately not mine); I saw it from life.
The finish is much more convincing. I assume the absence of the "T" indicates this was an Italian conversion? Or do I see one applied there behind the "Mk.I."
What are the numbers behind the rear pad about?
I am surprised that the Italians would perpetuate the sliding brass eye shade, but such things are often done "just because".
Whoever assembled the scope to the bracket didn't pay much attention to the gaps between the cradles and caps; I think an Italian armourer would have done better.
The knurling of the ocular lens retaining ring appears identical to the R.E.L. pattern. Did the Italians perhaps use optics from R.E.L. No.42 scopes for these No.32s? It would have made sense economically.
With the change from WWII tanks soon after the war, there must have been many such scopes available as surplus even then.
If the ocular lens rear face is somewhat convex that would support the No.42 source idea as the R.E.L. No42s had that feature, as well as very good optical quality.
giove,
Thanks for all the info on the Italian side of things, but I can't seem to find any reference to 4T's being used there or even supplied to them, as they always preferred the Carcano for sniping and not the Enfield range. You will understand I am only relating to WW1 and WW2 and what I can get via our museum and the Imperial War Museum.
The images there are not of a 4T but what looks like a build up copy, any other photos closer in on the action?
Have you seen something in paperform that links H&H with Italy which could help us Enfield buffs understand the methodology?
They had tons of Enfields post WWII. See yourself here: Euroarms - ENFIELD RIFLES FROM ITALIAN NAVY . Already from the wooden boxes you can see all of them came from Canada via the NATO.
He never claimed them as WWII weapons, even in WWII the Italians basically had no sniper rifle (what would refer to a scoped rifle in this context).
Promo,
Agree many countries had oodles of Lee Enfields pur se, I was asking more about any H&H connection to proper Sniper rifles going to Italy from the UK, and whether any litrature was present to confirm that?
One has to assume that if a country wanted to buy a Sniper rifle already passed all its checks to save time and money they would order them. Have I got it wrong? Did Italy do these checks themselves and make a good rifle a sniper rifle? ;)
We supplied thousands of surplus weapons & other equipment to friendly countries immediately after the war, as I'm sure most people are aware. This was long after H&H's involvement in setting up the 4T rifles - they'd been accepted, seen service with British & Dominion forces, & were then passed on to the (as they were then) 'needy' friendly countries (& of course in amongst the bulk of H&H contract rifles there would be a few Long Branch & Trials rifles as well, no doubt). So, no, Italy didn't contract with H&H to make them more 4T's, but they were supplied with 4T's of ours that had been set up originally by H&H. And it now seems that they set some up themselves as well. I suppose we shouldn't be surprised. The 4T's set up by the Israeli's are well recognised.
Churchill was referring to the need to guard against the descent of a Soviet 'Iron Curtain' even before the Third Reich was finally vanquished. So, we were probably pretty keen to re-arm the emergent occupied European countries, as well as our former enemies. And, of course, shortly after the war NATO came about.
The scope and the bracket in the pics in post n. 24, are original. I have a similar one and I am sure it's an original because the person who had this is the same one where I bought one of the "Italian sniper" I have, his father bought it from Terni's arsenal (now PMAL of Terni). All the originals come from the former arsenal of Terni.
After the armistice (September 8, 1943) the Italian Army in "liberated areas" (South), fought alongside the Allies, and was supplied with British equipment and guns (also Lee-Enfield); yes, in 1944 - 1945. (See the attached pics). In the pic Italian officers of the Friuli fighting group.
Can not attach pdf files?
Converted pdf file.
On page 3 an image of Italian soldiers armed with Lee-Enfield rifles. We are in the years
1944 - 1945.
giove,
Sorry but can only make out a Thompson in photo 3 above.
In thread #24 I have zoomed in on the image and can see a T I believe at the end of a number starting NE 4 *3 T. The bracket is stamped clearly C17863
Could you give us a clearer shot of that number please with what appears to be a correct T?
You are correct Gil Boyd, I was fooled by the caption. The correct image is this:
http://www.esercito.difesa.it/storia...e/mantova.aspx
No T must be present; the T was neves stamped on these rifles.
Just clarify the above please " No T must be present; the T was neve(r) stamped on these rifles" Are you saying it isn't a T? and that the T was never stamped on these rifles?Quote:
Originally Posted by giove
I appreciate its probably a language issue, thanks.
Giancarlo, did you mean that the receiver side wall 'T' was never stamped on 4T's set up by Italy? That would make sense to me. We know that most British ones did.
Yes, no "T" was stamped on the receiver side wall. As far as I know, the letter "T" was, in general, stamped by Holland & Holland after matching the scope with the rifle. H. & H. has no connection with the "Italian Lee-Enfield sniper rifles", so nothing "T".
The Scopes: I think they are almost all, No. 32 Mk I reworked here, for this reason, I think, they maintein the slide shade. Italy also used the Mk III scopes (but not on these snipers) without adding the slide shade.
This is my Long Branch.
The mark on the butt-stock is that of the arsenal of Terni, followed by the conversion year: Star/FAT/50.
Note, on the nock's form, the Canadian marks with the Italian FAT 1950.
The bracket seem to me an original one (British).
What do you believe is the history of that rifle?
Do you think it was converted by or for the Italian military?
IMO you have an Italian produced MkII scope and a genuine UK made bracket, but as for the rifle it has a number of early production features which would not normally appear on a 76L rifle would they?
And so the question is, who added them, when and why?
The finish appears to be perfect and yet the stock is well used and of the earliest pattern.
There is more, but those are the most salient points I think.
A bit of literature:
Sorry, this was missing:
Why do you think the scope is Italian made and is a Mk II rather than a Mk I?Quote:
Originally Posted by Surpmil
I think it has been suggested that the scope is a Mk2 because the range drum is as per the Mk2. The Mk1 range scale lacks the intermediate 50 yd graduations (although it could be a Mk1 with a Mk2 range drum I suppose!). The actual adjustment graduations would depend on whether the scope has a Mk1 or Mk2 range clicker plate.
Because only the very earliest UK made MkI scopes had that degree of precision in the casting and machining of the "turret block" (the bronze or brass block which forms the base for the drums and graticule assembly) Many, especially the William Watson production, are poorly and roughly shaped.Quote:
Originally Posted by giove
Also the tubes are not thick enough to completely machine off the original markings and still retain enough material to have adequate strength.
And because no UK make MkI or MkII scopes had that type of knurling on the ocular lense retaining ring. Most of those I have seen in photos or "in the flesh" had a pretty perfunctory knurl and not much of that.
The ring which forms the mounting for the erector cell locking segment and cover plate is also different from UK production.
As I mentioned earlier, that lens retaining ring is for all intents and purposes identical to the REL pattern which makes me wonder if the Italian made scopes used lenses taken from REL No.42 scopes, which MAY have been available as surplus in the early 1950s.
Or of course REL No42s may have just been used as a source of spare parts for repairs over the period of time the No.32 was in Italian service.
The tubes of the No42 scope were quite a bit thicker than the No32s, particularly the UK made examples. So, perhaps those tubes (and optics?) were used as well? Of course the time and trouble in stripping those down and cleaning the optics for reuse etc. would probably exceed the cost of just making new tubes, but who knows? There are cheap ways to do these things and labour must have been pretty cheap in Italy in the late 40s and early 50s?
Considering the large firearms industry in Italy and the high quality of the arms they produced, it does seem a bit odd to be using Lee Enfields, but of course they were more or less a free gift from countries like Canada and the domestic industry could then concentrate on the export market which would produce foreign exchange income.
Sorry for the delay.
Thank you all for the precious information.
I don't know if the Italian made scopes used lenses taken from REL No. 42 scopes. I know the lenses on Italian scopes are incompatible with the British one. I think that Italian lenses were used: the "Filotecnica-Salmoiraghi" and the "San Giorgio" supplied the Army with binoculars in the same period.
Yes, the labour was cheap in the late '40 and early '50s.
I'll see, soon, to put pictures of the other "Italian snipers" and the "Italianized TP".
This is my first (in order of purchase) Savage.
The stamp on the butt-stock is: Star/FAT/52.
On the Nock's form: the Flaming bomb and the Italian mark Star/61.
On the Transit chest: FAT/1952.
[FAT isn't "fat-man":lol:, but "Fabbrica Armi Terni" (Terni Arms Factory").
Impressive piece of kit Giancarlo. Everything looks in pristine condition, even the transit chest. Has it all been sympathetically refurbished?
Yes Roger, FAT refurbished everything and then stored.
I suppose the only logical explanation of why the Italians decided to replicate the MkII rather than Mk3 scope would be that either they simply weren't aware of its existence, or they decided to standardize on the MkII since they perhaps had so many ex-UK (& Canada?) examples, either MkI, MkII or both? The MkI's could be upgraded to MkII quite easily, but that is also just a hypothesis based on logic. And logic does occasionally play a part in decisions of this kind! ;)
AFAWK, the Mk3 so no service in WWII, or very little and AFAWK, the UK was getting rid of MkI and perhaps MkII scopes postwar, not Mk3s. Of course that policy must have changed at some point as thousands seem to have got onto the market in as-new, matching condition.
Probably a case of one bureaucratic hand not knowing what the other was doing. Those new-in-the-crates rifles would certainly have come in handy in the 60s, 70s and 80s from what Peter has told us about the vast amounts of work required to keep the rifles then on hand serviceable.
Surpmil, I don't know. I think that to Italy, in the post WW2 period, armament limits had been imposed.
Neither do I! It is just a guess, a hypothesis.Quote:
Originally Posted by giove
Quite possibly, but what kind do you mean; limits on production?Quote:
Originally Posted by giove
I apologize if I answer only now.
After the end of WW II, for Great Britain, Italy had to be a small power on whose military contribution G. B. could maintain, even in indirect form, some control.
In the immediate post war period, the U.S.A. took no interest in Italian military problems of which only G.B. was interested, at this point.
According to General Browning, the Italian military industry should have been dismantled, and the equipment for Italian Army should be provided by G.B. with the considerable amount of surplus materials it could have had in the post war period.
It was established that for 5 years, the Italian Army would have a maximum of 265,000 men, and the production of war materials would be limited to the strict minimum to fill the gap left by the supplies of Allies materials.
The Italian "Army of Transition", that is the Army from the armistice to the peace treaty, would have received the equipment and the war materials from three supply channels:
1 - from Italian national resources;
2 - from the surpluses put on sale by the Allied liquidation organizationa;
3 - from imports decided by the Italian Government.
Of all these sources, only the Allied surplus materials deposits, were able to contribute to the Italian Army reorganization. The Allied authorities also realized that most of the U.S.A Army stocks had already been taken out of Italy; it was, therefore, decided (Decembre 1945) to standardize the armament for the "Army of Transition" to the British Army. General Browning suggested that only British weapons be distributed to the Italian Army units and that the "Carabinieri" units would have been armed with Italian weapons.
All this lasted until the Summer/Fall of 1947.
By the end of 1947, the British position was supplanted by the U.S.A., also due to the severe economic crisis that Great Britain met in the 1947 Winter.
The U.S.A. aid was realized with a weapons supplu in the 1948 Spring.
The Treaty of Peace established a force of 185,000 men for the Italian Army. The article 53 prevented Italy from manufacturing or possessing war material in excess of the needs of the Armed Forces allowed; thus macking difficult to set aside the necessary stocks. However, Italy also lacked the necessary economic resources to buy stocks.
However, due to the persistent economic constraints, for the whole year 1949, extensive use of all materials provided by the Allied in previous years and not yet been exploited, was made.
In 1949 Italy joined the NATO, and so the M1 Garand were supplied. The Lee-Enfield passed to the Navy. Italy, also, received a number of M1 Garand sniper rifles.
A number of Lee-Enfield No. 4 Mk I (T) were used by the Italian Army (then Royal Army) in the last stages of the "Liberation war", in 1944 - 1945 years.
It seems that the Lee-Enfield sniper rifle has never been officially adopted by the Italian Army, but used to acquire the necessary capabilities awaiting the arrival of official sniper rifles.
The first sniper rifle officially adopted, in post W.W. II period, was the M1 Garand in 30-06 caliber. The Italian Army initially received some M1C version to, then, move on the M1D model from the second half of the '50s.
Thanks for that interesting context; this was Gen. "Boy" Browning I assume?
Major General Langley Browning, chif of "Land Forces Sub-Commission"