Printable View
Can anyone comment on the lack of cleaning rod channel in the forend of an 1890 Sparkbrook Magazine Rifle.
The rifle has been upgraded to Mk1* with an Enfield inspectors mark and date 6-96.
The nosecap has the hole for the rod
The forend has the finger grooves and finger clearance for the cutoff. It has a crisp Sparkbrook inspection mark behind the nosecap where the channel would be
Incidentally the butt carries an Enfield Inspectors mark at the wrist
Does the barrel has Metford or Enfield rifling?
Original barrel, Metford Rifling
Replacement fore end made after rod was abolished?
I hope my suggestions aren't too "bleeding obvious", and I may be quite mistaken - but here goes:
- Your MLM 1* was upgraded from the MLM 1 some time after Jan 1892 by changing the sights, but it should still have the 8 round single column magazine, a characteristic bolt, fore-end, brass butt stock disc, swivel arrangement etc. - I imagine your rifle has all these features.
- Your rifle was made by BSA in Sparkbrook, Birmingham, and the London Enfield inspection marks indicate it was checked at Enfield, but I don't know why. You don't indicate whether your rifle is broad-arrow marked, or is unmarked = private purchase - I understand BSA manufactured both military and private purchase MLMs.
- The upgrade from MLE 1 to MLE 1* [which brought with it the loss of the clearing rod on the MLE] dates from Aug 1899. But as far as I am aware, there was no similar military upgrade of the MLM 1* or MLM 11 to remove the clearing rod or change the fore-end.
- Thus I suppose the Sparkbrook-marked fore-end on your MLM would have been fitted in civilian life. Either the rifle was sold out of service [if previously broad arrow marked] or it was a private purchase rifle given a new fore-end, some time after 1899 when clearing rods were out of fashion.
Does that make sense?
The only possibility that I can suggest is that a piece of MLE I forend was grafted on to restore a chopped forend. If done very carefully and wood stained to match it can actually be very tough to see. Personally I have a P53 that I owned for over a year before finally noticing the "repair" (attached under the lower band). Two years ago I bought a CLLE Mk I* that, in the poor light of the show venue, I failed to notice had a similar grafted on forend tip. When putting it in the safe that night the end of the forend came off in my hand- it had been carefully stained but not even glued on. I've now firmly attached it with dowels and even further perfected the stain match and it's very difficult to detect. In any case, with spare MLM MK I/I* forends kind of difficult to find, such restoration would make sense.
Ridolpho
Sorry if I didn't make it clear enough in my original post, but.....Quote:
Originally Posted by RobD
The Upgrade to Mk1* was done at Enfield in 1896 - the inspectors mark and stamp indicate this
Yes - the rifle has all of the Mk1/Mk1* features you mention
Re: the Enfield inspection mark - see above
Sparkbrook was a government factory and didn't make commercial weapons - so yes its military
BSA was a commercial supplier to the WD and is quite different to Sparkbrook and Enfield (indeed LSA is like BSA in this respect)
To that end Sparkbrook wouldn't have produced a forend with a military inspectors mark and supplied it outside the 'military'
I have attached a picture of the rifle and the forend inspection mark
BSA didn't actually take over the Sparkbrook Factory from the Government until 1906
And stopped producing rifles shortly afterwards
Definitely not grafted - always been like itQuote:
Originally Posted by Ridolpho
I'm stumped. But it is a nice looking rifle!
That was my initial thoughts, but I thought it strange to delete the rod channel, but keep the finger grooves and cut-off reliefQuote:
Originally Posted by green
Finger grooves were still in sealed pattern for MLM MkI*and cut off was never deleted on MLM.Quote:
Originally Posted by waco16
Waco16: Check out this old thread:https://www.google.com/url?q=http://...xftq-FYb6w7kyV. Apparently old bodies were used to fill a contract with Australia for MLM MK I*'s post 1900. Perhaps new forends without cleaning rod grooves had been finished for that contract?
Ridolpho
In British Army "Instructions for Armourers 1912" it states regarding the MLM MkI* "NB In fore ends of future manufacture the Clearing Rod Hole will be omitted".
Knew I had saw that in an official publication.