"...actively sought out and destroyed..." 'A' Suffix No.4 Rifles

[jrhead75]

Don't remember if I've mentioned it before, but I've got one 'A' suffix Fazakerley rifle that was FTR'd at Maltby, at which time the serial number appears to have been restamped sans 'A'. From the markings, it appeared to have ended up with a Royalist militia in Greece during their civil war.

[jmoore]

Please excuse the interruption and just slightly off topic but as a very curious newcomer to the Enfield world I was wondering just what the non standard parts would be?

Yes, that IS the question. No interruption at all! Briefly, if the action body was in some way built where later parts replacement would require further non-standard parts or unusual fitting during maintenance, then the "A" would be added as a suffix. WWII Fazackerlys seem to be quite commonly marked in this manner, but just why, well, that's the reason for this thread.

---------- Post added at 11:22 AM ---------- Previous post was at 11:19 AM ----------

Don't remember if I've mentioned it before, but I've got one 'A' suffix Fazakerley rifle that was FTR'd at Maltby, at which time the serial number appears to have been restamped sans 'A'. From the markings, it appeared to have ended up with a Royalist militia in Greece during their civil war.

Photos are always welcome, especially if you think it'll add to the knowledge base, or is otherwise "cool". If relavent to this thread, add it here, otherwise start a new one of your own! The more details the better.


"Again. a WWII ('41-'45 w/ a focus on '42-'43) NON-suffixed Fazackerly photo would be welcome, as well! I've never seen one. "-From a previous post on this thread- it still applies!

[RJW NZ]

I once tried to get a thread going on this one to see what replies and opinions would be out there. I have a no1mk6 1930 with an A serial number, it was found set up as a stock no4 mk1 with the common old 300/600 two position battle sight. The sight wouldn't flip over, and it took the longest time to learn that early no4's had a lower height at the rear sight pivot pin and that would stop anything but the original 1930 sight from folding and standing up, you get one position or the other.
The question became, would any armorer have released an enfield if the rear sight could only be set in one range position, and out of all of the available choices it would only be set for either 300, 600 or the aperture ring of an adjustable rear sight? I'd be guessing the answer would be no.
So, what were these height deficient rifles used for, if anything? This ones surface finish and bore show little wear. I wonder if they were held for emergencies only like a jerry invasion, when even a muzzle loading shotgun might be useful, and then taken out of the firing line asap because of shortcomings like this?
I wonder if it explains why they were scoped as T's so often, as a rifle that would/could not be using its rear sight at all ...?

[Bruce_in_Oz]

There is something tickling the back of my brain about serial number ranges.

Is there a chance that two factories ended up stamping similar sequences of numbers?

If so, a simple solution would be to order ALL of factory "X" units have their numbers "adjusted" when spotted.

[stan61]

Here's another Fazakerley A-suffix, crudely stamped and all! This rifle has matching serials on barrel and bolt as well(with A-suffix of course) It also appears to have been in Canadian service at some point as it's C-arrow marked.

[jmoore]

Adding a link to husk's thread that contains some useful photos, but not quite what was expected:

Fazakerley No. 4

[Surpmil]

If I had to hazard a guess, it would be that the "A" suffix was intended to mark rifles inspected to a lower standard, or to be more precise, rifles whose defects while noted were not thought critical enough at that point in the war to warrant their being rejected for service. If that was the case, the later destruction policy would make perfect sense.

It may also have been that the "A" suffix was ALSO applied to rifles that were simply non-standard in the sense of having for example bodies from the No1 MkVI or No4 MkI trials rifles. Perhaps bodies that were rejected for some non-functional defect during their original production, but were not destroyed as they might "come in handy" later. Which of course they did.

Or perhaps bodies that were not out of spec at all, but simply left overs or pre-production pieces.

[Peter Laidler]

It seems to me as this 'A' suffix serial number querie has been covered many times to my knowledge. I'll repeat what the bible says about the subject. EMER C-509, Micellaneous instruction 3, dated June 1952 and amended later to add more stuff

Rifles No4 Mk1 which bear the suffix letter A to the serial number, eg 444A ase fitted with components which are not generally interchangeable (more later.....) and care must be taken when changing such components. When a replacement is required and a spare component will not fit, the rifle will be exchanged (by returning to Ordnance for disposal and or destruction)
Rifles that bear a plain serial number or a number with a PREfix letter have component parts that are interchangeable.

There you have it, from the bible.......... unless someone out there in forumland has another bible that supercedes the EMER
Later an added nots goes on to say that Armourers will always selectively fit parts and this order does not bar the use of hand fitting blah blah blah. The sort of thing we'd do anyway.

These rifles were not actively sought out and destroyed. At least, I have never seen that instruction. I'd ask the question '...why would we when a bit of hand or selective fitting could solve, say 90 percent of the problems' And that brings us back to the next question '......... if they WERE sought out and destroyed, why did many make it through the Ordnance system, through the FTR system and even get through the later Mk1/2FTR system?

[jmoore]

I was quoting beerhunter's 25 June 2010 posts when I started this thread. Mostly to refute it!

See post #1 of this thread for the link to the thread that started this one. Someother links as well are scattered throughout for further reference.


But it has the secondary function of trying to investigate why WWII Fazackerly rifles esp. 1942 and '43 dated more often than not ARE "A" suffixed. So far, a common easily identified non-standard feature has been a "never pinned/no pins" welded on charger bridge. I do understand it's not really a part found in the spares inventory, but it COULD be one reason for the "A" suffix, yes? Peter Laidler has discussed repairs to this area, so why not a "CYA" heads-up at original mfg.?

ETRemove: Extraneous comment

[Peter Laidler]

explanatory PM sent JM