Real or Fake: This No. 5 "Jungle Carbine"?

Hello,


I am looking to purchase this Jungle Carbine. I wanted to see if it is authentic. Furthermore, certain markings appear to have been scrubbed off of the receiver. Any ideas as to why this is? Barrel, receiver, and magazine are matching. That is all of serial numbers he sent me. I will list all of the pics he sent me, if I need to get more I can. Also, what is the approximate value of this rifle?


http://prntscr.com/j1iwdz
http://prntscr.com/j1iwic (Scrubbed markings)
http://prntscr.com/j1iwlm (Barrel Cuts)
http://prntscr.com/j1iwqo (Matching magazine)
http://prntscr.com/j1ix1f
http://prntscr.com/j1ix6y (Century import)
http://prntscr.com/j1ixcz
http://prntscr.com/j1iyi1 (Overall pic)


I need an answer decently quickly in case he decides to sell to someone else.

Please post pics or at least a single link

I have 8 pictures with URL's there. That is how I have posted pics on all of my other threads. Is there an issue with the URLs?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by neoisprettycool

I have 8 pictures with URL's there. That is how I have posted pics on all of my other threads. Is there an issue with the URLs?

---

They are taking forever to open for me. Maybe it's my connection.


Is there one that shows the rear of the receiver.

Here is the pic of the rear of the No.5

The picture of most concern is the receiver markings photo. I'll try to upload them a different way tonorrow.

See these ones for the forumers

Certainly not one for me, unusual to see so much over use of disguise by XXX everything IMHO

It looks to be correct as far as cuts and receiver go but I have never seen the xxxx before.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by capt14k

It looks to be correct as far as cuts and receiver go but I have never seen the xxxx before.

---

So everything besides the magazine appears legit? Any idea as to why there are hashed/scrubbed markings on the receiver?

And assuming any of you were going to buy a Jungle Carbine like this, how much would you be willing to pay?

If I had to guess I'd say that the BSA code was obliterated while it was in service somewhere in the world, only because I can't think of a logical reason for a private owner to do this. Assuming good condition with a matching bolt I'd go $300, more if the X's were not there.

They are pulling between 900- 1500 here but its all on condition of the bore if its a clap trap the as SHINY says $300 I concur on the M47C you can sorta make some of it out with abstract thought.

I agree $300 if bore is good.

The barrel looks correct and in the same pic you can see there is no lug like a No4 has on the right side below the wood. If you turn it upside down does the trigger guard form a figure 8 at the front screw? The magazine is a force match. Around here a much worse No5 which was drilled tapped and filled with screws with a rusty bore was going for $750 so I guess $300 should be a decent price. Bill

Rather odd for the marks to be so heavily xxxed-out. Lined through seems to have been a typical and sufficient procedure, thus enabling the origins of the parts to be traced if necessary.
And, if I recall correctly, Peter Laidler has written somewhere that the receiver was the fundamental item of the rifle's identity and was therefore never replaced - i.e. a new bolt should have been marked to match the receiver, not barrel and receiver marked to match the bolt, which was a replaceable part.

Peter, are you out there? Is this OK or a bit "iffy"?

Patrick,
I think you hit on the fundemental reason this rifle appears odd. Its almost like changing a cars serial numbers by scoring out its identities, and giving it another cars details because you feel like it.
I have never seen this in weapons before, ever, to this extreme. Its done well, but done so well its over cooked the sinister reason for it, when a line would have sufficed.
I don't think many gun owners and even those looking for a No 5 would venture to take a chance on this, unless there was some provinance or documented reason for it IMHO.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by oldfoneguy

The barrel looks correct and in the same pic you can see there is no lug like a No4 has on the right side below the wood. If you turn it upside down does the trigger guard form a figure 8 at the front screw? The magazine is a force match. Around here a much worse No5 which was drilled tapped and filled with screws with a rusty bore was going for $750 so I guess $300 should be a decent price. Bill

---

Well I'm looking to trade him my all matching refurbished 1950 Russian SKS. The SKS is mint refurbished condition.

neo,
It is really your call I'm afraid. Does he know how and when the markings were done to cover up the true identity of this rifle?
If not, I would hang fire my friend, even Law Enforcement Agencies would be curious and be asking the same questions on examination. If I was still in, I would have asked for an explanation at least!

Hm. Well I had held off to talk about my SKS because I know what I value it as. I guess I'll just wait and see what Peter has to say. The seller also is not sure.

No chance I would trade an SKS in America. In Canada I would.

As others have said in general they seem to run from $300-800 here in the US based on condition if they are legitimate.

They are always a hot ticket item that everyone wants for the looks or the handling to shoot until they actually try shooting one for the first time and get a nasty surprise.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Patrick Chadwick

Rather odd for the marks to be so heavily xxxed-out. Lined through seems to have been a typical and sufficient procedure, thus enabling the origins of the parts to be traced if necessary.
And, if I recall correctly, Peter Laidler has written somewhere that the receiver was the fundamental item of the rifle's identity and was therefore never replaced - i.e. a new bolt should have been marked to match the receiver, not barrel and receiver marked to match the bolt, which was a replaceable part.

Peter, are you out there? Is this OK or a bit "iffy"?

---

But receivers were replaced, i have 2 examples in my collection a 1890s EFD MLM MkII with a 1903 Sparkbrook receiver & a 1918 BSA MkIII* with a 1939 Lithgow receiver.

PatrickC and 5thBatt. Yes and no.....you are both correct.

With muzzle loaders, the barrel was the master component and carried the serial number (if it had one). This carried over to breech loaders where the barrel was still the master component. If the receiver was changed out, it would be marked to match the barrel.

Then in around 1925 this rational officially changed in that the receiver became the master component, so if the barrel was changed it would be marked to match the receiver.

This got me puzzled where I had a rifle with an BSA manufactured receiver and barrel but with a prefixed four digit EFD serial number on both barrel and receiver in BSA style font. Huh?

I did note that the rifle had several 'Crown BR' inspector markings which suggested that it had been through the Birmingham Repair facility at Sparkbrook a number of times.

The scenario was probably that an Enfield made rifle needed a new receiver, so it was replaced pre 1925 with a BSA made unit and marked to match the master component, the barrel.
Then later on in its life, post 1925, it needed a new barrel which was changed out with a BSA made unit and marked to match the master component, the receiver.

A "prefixed four digit" serial number does not necessarily mean its a EFD number, yes, most likely if it has a letter suffix as BSA also stamped 4 digit numbers.