Question Regarding Volley or Long Range Sights on the No 1 Mk III

[Bluenoser]

I am about to start my next restoration project and could use a little guidance.

It is a Canadian issued 1916 BSA Sht LE Mk III (not III*). I would like to restore it back to as-issued configuration complete with volley (long range) sights, but am not sure it would be appropriate for the year of manufacture. I understand the Mk III* was approved in January of 1916 and the associated List of Changes stated with regard to the Mk III “In future manufacture, rifles of the above-mentioned pattern may embody any of the following modifications:

(a) The omission of long range sights (dial and aperture) ……..”

Choice of the word “may” implies that rifles equipped with long range sights could have been produced well beyond early 1916. I believe they were, but have nothing concrete to base that on.

What are your thoughts?

Information

Warning: This is a relatively older thread This discussion is older than 360 days. Some information contained in it may no longer be current.

[Thunderbox]

Probably 99% of all MkIII came out of WW1 without volley sights anyway - nearly all of them were restocked during the war.

Frankly, unless the rifle is a specimen that survives with its volley sights intact, then its most "original" form as it was last in service would be with cut-off but without the volleys.

[Bluenoser]

Valid comments and I agree completely. I have restored several back to last in service configuration as best I could determine it. My objective this time around is to restore it back to as issued configuration and I would like that to include long range sights, if appropriate, since that is so rarely seen on a No. 1 today.

[Bindi2]

Valid comments and I agree completely. I have restored several back to last in service configuration as best I could determine it. My objective this time around is to restore it back to as issued configuration and I would like that to include long range sights, if appropriate, since that is so rarely seen on a No. 1 today.

One problem you will have is if the forend has been replaced and is not a transitional forend there is no palm swell where the dial sight goes. Finding the right marked sights may also be a problem ( they are not all the same) .
The other issue I see is you maybe devaluing a rifle by doing that conversion unless it is a total rebuild from parts in which case the value will never be there in a representative piece.
I dont consider them rare just not as plentiful as MK111* as I have more than enough in my collection of Lithgow and Brit rifles.

[Roy]

I consider them rare as they rarely come up for sale. there are plenty of collectors out there with a dozen MkIII's with volley sights in their collections. however these days the acquisition of a totally correct MkIII with volley sights is difficult, and fairly expensive unless you get a lucky deal, the last MkIII I saw for sale here in NZ on the open market was nearly $1000. I agree with Bindi that if your rifle is as it was issued after a rebuild modifying it will devalue it, also it is quite likely that is left BSA without volley sights anyway. However if its already a mixmaster and you have maybe less than mint forend with the 'bulge' for the dial sight, i'd go for it if you have the skills and tools. I did it for my NZ marked BSA 1908. I had a ratty forend which I pulled form a boneyard in OZ, I used a pillar drill, sharp curved chisels and some spade bits which I filed to the exact size. I was also lucky enough to have the sported forend which provided the pattern which I also did a practice run on. If you's like some pics of my work ill post them up

[Bluenoser]

Interesting and helpful comments

To clarify, the starting point is a barreled action and a butt plate. All of the wood was trashed when it was sporterized. I would not be in favor of modifying an intact gun.

Bindi2’s points are well taken. I see coming up with an appropriate forend as my single greatest challenge, other than the posted question. If I were fortunate enough to find the right sporterized forend that has been cut beyond the band, I could do an extension with a hidden splice. I have done that quite a few times on Long Lees and carbines. Monetary value on completion is not a consideration for me. I probably chose my words poorly with regard to rarity. My intent was to say Mk. III’s with long range sights are rarely seen (not rare) in the market today – at least in my experience.

Roy, I would very much like to see pics of your BSA 1908. I am sure others would too. I would especially like to see close-ups of the palm swell area.

[Peter Laidler]

We had a tacit acceptance that once a weapon was officially modified by, for example removing the dial sights or the cut-off then it was NEVER retro modified in service. The unwritten rule for cut-offs was that they were removed if the slot would be covered by a fore-end. If you weren't going to replace the fore-end, then because it would leave a pathway into the magazine for grit and shi........, er.........., other muck to enter, the cut-off stayed. But once a high fore-end was fitted the cut-off went

In my service I only ever saw two examples where a weapon was retro modified. A Mk2 Sten gun had the original cocking handle replaced and modified hole in the body welded up and the other. Just for display purposes. The other, an original Enfield 1986 SA80 reverted back to its 1986 spec simply for comparison purposes and to show how things can be when you don't listen to those who REALLY know

[RCS]

Almost twenty years ago, I found this rifle for sale from an old friend, the bore is still nice and the barrel is also dated '09 with both SC and HV stamps. The rear sight has a working windage knob. The bolt is not matched to the rifle. The volley sights are complete. This rifle is without any import marking.Attachment 58321Attachment 58322Attachment 58323

[gsimmons]

EFD has new made mkIII stock sets but, they are expensive.

[Bluenoser]

Would those members with long range sight equipped Mk IIIs in their collections please post the manufacturer and year of manufacture here?