Saw an all matching British no4. mk1 enfield today. My question is, were No. 4 Mk1s originally fitted with Mk3 sights or were Mk3 sights put in post war?
Second question is what does an M47 stamp on the back of the rear sight mean?
Printable View
Saw an all matching British no4. mk1 enfield today. My question is, were No. 4 Mk1s originally fitted with Mk3 sights or were Mk3 sights put in post war?
Second question is what does an M47 stamp on the back of the rear sight mean?
M47 and later M47C, Birmingham Small Arms Factory (Shirley)...Quote:
Originally Posted by Mauser1947
So it Has nothing to do with 1947?Quote:
Originally Posted by browningautorifle
Nope, it's the dispersal code for BSA.Quote:
Originally Posted by Mauser1947
Oh alright cool. And does a Mk3 sight mean post war or did they produce Mk3 sights for no.4 MkI enfields originally from the factory?Quote:
Originally Posted by Flying10uk
Anything with a UK dispersal code on it normally indicates wartime manufacture but the item in question could have been made just after the war from parts made during the war. I don't suppose that every factory in the UK using the dispersal code system stopped using it the day that the war in Europe ended.
Very well. With that being said, I did not see any FTR marking on the rifle. Could it have not been refurbed then?Quote:
Originally Posted by Flying10uk
I expect that the original sight was replaced with with whatever was available at the time.
The thing to remember about the UK during WW2 is that almost everything was either not available at all or in short supply if it was available. This was because we had no supplies coming from occupied Europe and numerous supply ships were being sent to the bottom of the Atlantic by U-Boats. It was a case of "making do and mend".
The sight on the rifle is correct even if replaced post war. Factory correct is not a correct term for British war time rifles. The next part in the bin was used, the same for a unit field repair by the armourer. There were multiple types of sights being made at different places at different speeds.
I am not absolutely certain, but I am pretty certain that the fabricated rear sights were designed, produced, & fitted during WW2. They were a cheaper & not so nice alternative to the Mk1 'Singer' sight, but a rather better proposition than the crude Mk2 'battle' sight. I daresay that all the information is quoted chapter & verse in the LES.
If the rifle is really unadulterated & not FTR'ed & it bears a rear sight marked up to BSA then there is a good chance that it is a rifle produced by BSA at their Shirley factory near Birmingham, UK. The regional factory codes were applied to parts for some years after the end of the war by some manufacturers, BSA included. I've seen woodwork marked M47/C & dated in the mid-1950's. The secret factory codes were allocated sequentially, & began with either a 'S', a 'M' or a 'N', for Southern area (Southern part of England), the Midlands (which allso included Wales IIRC), or the North of England & Scotland. So, BSA, being based in the Birmingham area of the Midlands of England, was given a 'M' prefix, & just happened to be manufacturer number 47 in the Midlands area. The addition of the 'A', 'B', 'C', or 'D' simply indicated which of the four BSA facilities made the weapon/component. When the codes were adopted by BSA in 1943, at least initially, the last letter was not applied, so seeing rifles & components just marked 'M47' is quite common.
Hope this helps a little.
As ever, if the OP can get us a few photo's of the rifle in question he will no doubt get plenty of helpful advice - unless the rifle body has been linished, the manufacturer's name or code is likely to be on it somewhere, along with the year of manufacture.
Very cool. Thank you very much for all the info!Quote:
Originally Posted by Roger Payne
The Mark 3 sight has the slide with a sprung lever to adjust on the RH side. My 1944 Maltby has one as original fit. They were cheaper to produce than the Mk1 screw type.
Adjustment is not as fine as the screw type; so if target shooting, try and find a mk1 type and keep the original in your spares tin.
The various types :
What Peter told us was that during wartime they would put on the Mk 2 for expedience. After the war when an armorer came to it he would change them for the Mk1 again.
I think many wartime British rifles were fitted with the Mk.III sights as new. I just serviced a matching serial numbers, early ROF Fazakerley No.4Mk.1 with remnants of wartime green paint and it's original two groove barrel for a client in Idaho and it had one installed. However, I don't know how early on these sights were in the production system and it may have been a replacement for a MK.II. This rifle was a learning experience in markings because it's so original. The date of manufacture is stamped on the wood below the serial number on the forend as 12/42. The only marking on the left body side is "No.4Mk.1" and the left side butt socket markings were horrible with only "ROF" and the serial number. It is also serial numbered on the top of the wood of the buttstock where it enters the butt socket like a No.4T sniper butt. The only parts I found that I know for sure were changed is the buttplate and one of the screws. It had a post 1944 Canadian steel buttplate added as a replacement at some point during service. It most likely had a pot metal buttplate as original. The Fazakerley socket markings were so poor that I had to consult DRP to get his opinion on who the manufacturer was because i was thinking ROF Maltby which wasn't the case.
You can say that again Brian. It was one of the worst, most messily marked rifles I've ever seen. I suppose that should have given us a clue it was a Faz product!!
I've seen some wartime, post 1941 ROF Maltby rifles marked pretty badly too but usually you can find an "M" stamped on the butt socket, even if it's upside down! There wasn't one "F" stamped on any of the component parts. Just contractor codes or nothing at all. Much like the No.4T, I'd guess none of the early service rifles had standardized markings. Guessing that really didn't happen until 1943. Did you know that they stamped the date of manufacture on the front bottom of the forend under the serial number? I sure didn't. That told me pdq that it was mostly original and not sanded to death either in service or afterwards. The right side of the butt had "ZF" stamped on so it was a cull, surplused prior to 1968 with British commercial proofs. I gauged it and it barely passed all the standards but was definitely on the loose side throughout. My uneducated guess would be that it was culled because it was a bit tired all over! The point of impact with the front sight blade bottomed out to the left was a bit out of specification but I still shot a ragged hole at 25 yards after servicing and managed to hit my 2' Salute steel popper at 120 yards three times in a row using a bit of "Kentucky windage". Thank Christ some exspurt, wannabe armourer didn't destroy the draws in the forend. I see the damage from improper disassembly all the time now it seems.
In a few years time, when I have shuffled off this mortal coil some one will be on here questioning my Savage No.4 MK1* with jungle carbine sight fitted. :rolleyes:
Ditto on my Savage No4 Mk1*Quote:
Originally Posted by Stanforth
The No 5 sight on a No4 gives 0.5 MOA, whilst a No4 sight on a No4 gives 1.0 MOA
From an old thread by Parashooter :
Parashooter – No4 Vs No5 Rear sight Threads
At least on these two examples (original sights), there appears to be a difference in screw diameter and pitch. Given the slightly coarser thread on the 800-yard sight, the "click value" would be some 10% greater than the 1300-yard sight if both were mounted on rifles with the same sight radius - except for the fact that the 1300-yard elevation screw is double-threaded, giving it an effective pitch approximately double that of the single-thread 800-yard screw.
On measuring the two sights shown, each click of the No.4's sight moves the slide .008" - vs. .0043" on the No.5's sight. Consequently, the 1300-yard sight gives very close to 1.0 MOA per click with the No.4 rifle's 28" sight radius while the 800-yard sight has a click value of ~0.66 MOA with the No.5's 23" sight radius and would yield ~0.55 MOA on a No.4 rifle. (Pretty much what Maxwell Smart reports in post #17 on this thread.)