Printable View
This forend showed up in the mail yesterday. Any idea who made it and where? What type of wood is it?
If it isn't NOS, I'd be surprised as I don't think it has ever been fitted.
The only possible damage I can see is what appears to be a chip missing on the inside of the receiver mortise on the right side near the draws (in the last picture). Anyone see anything to be concerned about here?
Thanks
The fore ends are walnut & they were made at RSAF Enfield. I think (someone will correct me if I am wrong) that they are amongst the last of UK SMLE woodwork production, dating from the 1950's. I think they were made as spares for existing rifles. I have a few in my workshop, stashed away for a rainy day!
Thanks Roger. The pics I saw prior to purchasing weren't the best, but I figured I couldn't lose for the price unless it was kindling when it showed up. Then I'd have used my return privileges. I speculated this might be Walnut, but I wasn't 100%. Maybe I'll trip over some NOS handguards to match now.
You see hand guards for sale on 'that internet auction site' from time to time (at least on the .co.uk site), but they tend to be sold for pretty horrendous prices. I think I saw new rear guards up for as much as 75 pounds apiece...........& SMLE butts are even harder to find!
What's the old saying "a crook bit of walnut is still better than the best of any other timber " or something like that
I believe the "chandelier's" in the Surrey Hut at Bisley are made from SMLE butts, the story is that Fultons wanted rid of them in the 1970's and they ended up hanging from the ceiling!Quote:
Originally Posted by Roger Payne
They'd better keep an eye on them now then!
P.S. Meant to say front guards at 75 pounds in post above. Rear guards tend not to be that expensive, but still dear enough.
Just received a NOS Walnut long length No 1 butt in the mail today. An excellent match to my forend, and thankfully it was down right affordable.Quote:
Originally Posted by Roger Payne
Chasing handguards presently. I have NOS rears located, a front handguard seems like it will be real tough to find.
That forend looks like it was made on a pantograph judging by the irregularities in the inletting. Very much doubt it would have got past inspectors looking like that. Certainly doesn't look like anything that was produced at RSAF Enfield IMHO.
Still, it has some convincing looking dust inside, could a stack of "seconds" have been sitting around this long? Possible, but doubtful and if it was a second, even more doubtful it would bear the Enfield stamp - something easily made in an Asian workshop these days.
It looks used to me. .ifferent colour in the bands and bayonet boss area. A piece missing between well and main screw. Looks like a bearing polish at the draws closet to the camera.
Anything is possible, and I am not an expert in Enfield wood. That said, this forend was not being sold as anything special, It was listed simply as WWII era No 1 Enfield forend stock. It was not sold by a firearms dealer or a shop specializing gun parts. It came out of a military surplus store that happens to sell an odd gun part here and there. I bought a US T44E4 stock from the same outfit at a giveaway price as well that was being sold as a plain Jane M14 stock. If this is a reproduction, someone went through a lot of trouble for me to end up with it for less than half of what the well used and damaged forends seem to sell for on eBay and a fraction of what the Walnut repros that were made in the UK, NZ or Australia cost.Quote:
Originally Posted by Surpmil
You guys tell me, is it or isn't it? I'm not bothered either way. If you need more pictures just let me know.
FWIW, the pics I posted in the IP look much darker than how this stock appears under better lighting.
Respectfully beg to differ with Surpmil on this one, & hold to what I wrote in post #2. I have about ten identical under my lathe in the garage.........just like the one shown. Mine came out of Charnwood when they packed up, although I cherry-picked but a few, & Terry Abrams ended up with most of them, along with the 1950's South African SMLE barrels & a shed-load of other spares.
I'm happy to defer to your greater knowledge of the type! Seconds or just a "low point" in production?
Rob, I just suspect that by the time it was made the standards were ok, but not as they were during WW1. As a consequence the product is perfectly functional, & adequately well made, but doesn't cause a sharp intake of breath in admiration of the finish as once it did.
Thanks for the confirmation. Now to start a thread on the rear handguards that showed up in the mail today.......