No1 MK3 * 1921 LITHGOW FTR

Hi fellows

I'm looking at a 1921 Lithgow that has been thru an FTR.....it is stamped on the receiver ring "FTR" as well as on the left side of the butt socket under the safety "MA 50".

The finish and stampings on the metal are very nice on this rifle, the bolt and rear sight are matching numbers, the barrel I'm not sure about as the rifle is not in my possession so I did not ask to have the rear upper handguard lifted to check.....the nose cap is un-numbered.

The furniture on this rifle is in excellent condition and appears "as" unissued but it seems a bit of a puzzle, at least in my limited knowledge when it comes to Lithgow rifles and especially ones that have been thru an FTR process.

The butt is certainly Australian as on the underside just behind the butt socket there is stamped in the wood "SLAZ 53" along with an inspectors stamp. There are no additional stampings in the butt other than a large "S" at the top rear.
This butt is obviously an replacement, could it be possible this butt was the one used at the time of the FTR process? Seems unlikely given the FTR was dated 1950 and the butt is dated 1953? Your thoughts please......

The other question is about the fore-end, the only stamp on it (I was told) is one just forward of the mid band and it is stamped M-47 C with a broad arrow which denotes a British, BSA Shirley manufactured for-end, is it possible the Australians used British fore-ends during an FTR? The upper rear hand-guard appears to be beech and the fore coachwood.

In your estimation has this rifle had a hodge podge of furniture fitted to a de-sporterized rifle or is it possible it left the FTR process this way?

Thanks

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by bros

The other question is about the fore-end, the only stamp on it (I was told) is one just forward of the mid band and it is stamped M-47 C with a broad arrow which denotes a British, BSA Shirley manufactured for-end

---

As far as I am aware the M47 C code was only used on the No4 rifles - I have never seen a No1 MkIII BSA manufactured with the M47 C. marking.

M47 was the BSA 'parent' factory with each individual plant having a suffix, so, M47A, M47B and M47C etc.

The M47C plant was the assembly factory for the No4 rifles.

The woodwork that I have seen that is M47 marked has normally been M47A (Small Heath factory)

It'd be interesting to see a No1 MkIII dressed with an M47C

Never say Never with Enfields !

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Alan de Enfield

As far as I am aware the M47 C code was only used on the No4 rifles - I have never seen a No1 MkIII BSA manufactured with the M47 C. marking.

M47 was the BSA 'parent' factory with each individual plant having a suffix, so, M47A, M47B and M47C etc.

The M47C plant was the assembly factory for the No4 rifles.

The woodwork that I have seen that is M47 marked has normally been M47A (Small Heath factory)

It'd be interesting to see a No1 MkIII dressed with an M47C

Never say Never with Enfields !

---

Hi Alan........I'm requesting a few more pictures first with permission to share them and then I will see about posting them......I'm hoping to get to the bottom of this!

Thanks for your reply......just give me some time and I hope to respond.

BSA did make new furniture for their 1953-54 Rifle No. 1 and No. 2 FTR program. Why one ended up on your rifle is a mystery that suggests that your rifle might be a post-service restoration.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Lance

BSA did make new furniture for their 1953-54 Rifle No. 1 and No. 2 FTR program. Why one ended up on your rifle is a mystery that suggests that your rifle might be a post-service restoration.

---

Now that is interesting - I wonder why BSA continued to use ther 'secret war time code' some 9 years after the war ended ? and didn't revert to BSA ?

There is "nowt as strange as Lee Enfields"

I would love to see some photos.

You described the wood as 'unissued' and with a1953 date.

This is already painting a picture in my head as a possible John Jovino import into the USA/Canada from the 1980s.

The dating of the practically new wood AFTER an FTR is a big indicator that this could be the case.

If the rifle was FTR'd then a lot of the time new wood was placed on rifles. This isn't the case for every rifle but I have never seen WW2 BSA wood on an Australian FTR'd rifle.

Here's pics for the OP post...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by mattyboy82

I would love to see some photos.

You described the wood as 'unissued' and with a1953 date.

This is already painting a picture in my head as a possible John Jovino import into the USA/Canada from the 1980s.

The dating of the practically new wood AFTER an FTR is a big indicator that this could be the case.

If the rifle was FTR'd then a lot of the time new wood was placed on rifles. This isn't the case for every rifle but I have never seen WW2 BSA wood on an Australian FTR'd rifle.

---

Well.....first a big thanks to browningautorifle for stepping in and posting the photos, Jim contributes to the success of this site in a large way!!

Just to set the record straight, the butt is the only piece of furniture that is dated, it is stamped "SLAZ 53" on the underside just behind the butt socket, at least it's correct in the sense that it is Australian.

The fore-end is not dated at least from what the pictures tell me, I have asked the owner to send me photos of any stamping in the wood, I think Lance is onto something and that's the way my feeling's are leaning that post service the fore-end and other pieces were added, it would be nice if someone could prove otherwise though.
I usually stay away from Enfield's that were de-sporterized but this one is a real "looker" so I'm still mulling it over. Interestingly the photos taken of the entire length of the firearm of the left/right side: the fore-end grain and color seem to match up rather nicely with the rest of the pieces other than the upper rear handguard, it's appears very different though when looking at the fore-end from the underside!

Can the wood experts identify the various types!

Mattyboy82 can you expand upon your theory regarding John Jovino when it comes to this particular firearm.....his name and significance escapes me when it comes to the firearm's world.

Thanks all.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by bros

a big thanks

---

A pleasure...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by bros

Can the wood experts identify the various types!

---

One side looks like Birch and then I see a couple of feathers that suggest beech. I think it's Birch though.

[/QUOTE]Mattyboy82 can you expand upon your theory regarding John Jovino when it comes to this particular firearm.....his name and significance escapes me when it comes to the firearm's world.[/QUOTE]

The John Jovino Gun Shop in no other place than lower Manhattan in New York City was America's oldest gun shop until it closed in 2020 after the COVID 19 Plandemic. They imported all sorts of milsurps from around the world and were famous for supplying New York movie sets with firearms and Police departments.

Mattyboy82 can you expand upon your theory regarding John Jovino when it comes to this particular firearm.....his name and significance escapes me when it comes to the firearm's world.[/QUOTE]

The John Jovino Gun Shop in no other place than lower Manhattan in New York City was America's oldest gun shop until it closed in 2020 after the COVID 19 Plandemic. They imported all sorts of milsurps from around the world and were famous for supplying New York movie sets with firearms and Police departments.[/QUOTE]


They also did a total factory clearance of Lithgow allegedly buying not only all the assembed rifles in stock, but every component and even the benches and stools used in the factory.

They brougt all of the firearms and parts back to the US, and set about assembling the parts into complete rifles (without any quality control) and sold them as new unused Lithgow rifles. There has been a lot of controvosy over the years about these US bitsa-built rifles.

Do a forum search you'll find 100s of posts about them

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Alan de Enfield

Mattyboy82 can you expand upon your theory regarding John Jovino when it comes to this particular firearm.....his name and significance escapes me when it comes to the firearm's world.

---

The John Jovino Gun Shop in no other place than lower Manhattan in New York City was America's oldest gun shop until it closed in 2020 after the COVID 19 Plandemic. They imported all sorts of milsurps from around the world and were famous for supplying New York movie sets with firearms and Police departments.[/QUOTE]


They also did a total factory clearance of Lithgow allegedly buying not only all the assembed rifles in stock, but every component and even the benches and stools used in the factory.

They brougt all of the firearms and parts back to the US, and set about assembling the parts into complete rifles (without any quality control) and sold them as new unused Lithgow rifles. There has been a lot of controvosy over the years about these US bitsa-built rifles.

Do a forum search you'll find 100s of posts about them[/QUOTE]
Alan de Enfield.....did you see the pictures of the rifle in question browningautorifle posted
for me in post #7?
You were questioning about a "M47C" marked No1Mk3* fore-end.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by bros

Alan de Enfield.....did you see the pictures of the rifle in question browningautorifle posted
for me in post #7?

---

Yes, but I was actually responding to a request about JJ Co

...........his name and significance escapes me when it comes to the firearm's world

And those pictures are certainly of interest as I have never seen SMLE / No1 woodwork marked with M47C.
Thanks for the information.

That rifle is not a Lithgow FTR. The furniture has the wrong finish, also why would Lithgow use BSA timber when they had SLAZ coming out their ears. The action and bolt seem to be the wrong colour the barrel band is not oil blackened and there is no return to stores date. The Butt has been cleaned wrong finish.
None of my Lithgows look like that rifle.

That's why Bindi I think it's a John Jovino import. I couldn't see the photos before but now I can.

In my opinion, it's had a legitimate Lithgow FTR at some point but when imported into the USA it has been spruced up with a new finish and random parts.

Not the first time I've seen a Lithgow rifle that has been FTR'd in the 1950s but now have an array of random furniture and a new finish applied to it by the Jovino clan.

Thanks all for responding, your input has helped educate me and my decision.

I was suspect from the get go and that's why I sought out more info.....it's a pretty piece though and probably would make a real nice shooter.

Always something more to learn about collecting Enfields.