Questions on No 5 MK 1 authenticity

[Aragorn243]

Found a No 5 jungle carbine today that is priced such to really call it into question.

I found no markings on the rifle other than a 4 digit serial number with the U prefix. The serial number is stamped on the receiver, bolt handle, stock near the end of the fore end. The magazine serial does not match. I can see very faintly where it had been ground off MK ??? on the receiver above the serial number. The sights appear to be correct, it is is a fake it's a good one. I did not take the hand guard off to see if it has the grooves cut into it.

I read that it is possible this was a commonwealth rifle that was sold as surplus to a third country and that the markings could have been ground off at this time. Bore is a dark but very good rifling, will probably clean up. Stock is solid but has a reddish shellac similar to that found on many RC k98's. Front hand guard ring is in bad shape but is the only part on the rilfe that is.

Feels like a good solid piece but I'm no expert on these and the lack of manufacturers mark and proof stampings has me concerned. The serial number stamp on the bolt looks like many I've seen photos of on the net on legit rifles, there is part of what looks like a proof mark directly after it. The serial on the receiver is stamped, not electropenciled which seems to be more normal for these. Also the U prefix is much higher than any others I could find.

There is an import marking on the barrel that id's it as a MK 5.

The price is just over $200 so I don't think I'd be in bad shape either way but would prefer legit over fake obviously. The gun shop just got it in and I suspect from the way he was acting, the lack of markings has him wondering a bit too. If this is legit, it should have what look like finger grooves cut out of the receiver ring? I've seen a photo but it wasn't real clear.

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.