ZF markings - again

[curly]

I'm very sorry to open up this Pandora's Box again but I have a legitimate question to ask, I did PM Peter Laidler and he agreed it was better to ask the question on the open forum.

I wanted to know if a No.4 trials rifle with the letters ZF painted on the butt would have been condemned purely because it has non-standard, non-interchangable, parts?

Perhaps Mr Skennerton would like to offer any information here because I read in his excellent reference work "The Lee Enfield" that these trials rifles were pressed into service after so many small arms were lost at Dunkirk. They were converted to more closely resemble standard No.4 Mk1s but were given an "A" suffix to the serial number to indicate they possessed certain non-interchangeable parts.

After the war, in the 1950's, these emergency weapons were ordered to be withdrawn and scrapped because of the non-standard parts. Would one of these with a completely different action or body have been classed as "ZF" even though it was serviceable?

I wonder...

Curly

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.

[Badger]

Previous thread on same subject for those wanting more background ...

ZF marking on Enfields?

Regards,
Badger

[Peter Laidler]

A good and timely reminder here Curly and I'll reiterate. SO far as REAL, properly trained Armourers from across the Commonwealth are concerned, the ZF meand that there is something big/bad wrong with it. That is the significance of the 'Z' marking. It als means that whatever is wrong, then in the examiners (or in an experienced Armourers) opinion, the fault can only be rectified at a Base Workshop or Factory. That's the significance of the 'F'. Hence ZF. If I say to another Armourer, whether he's in Canada, NZ or Aust, is that rifle ZF, he'll immediately understand and answer.

The 'A' serial number suffix doesn't make a weapon ZF. That just indicates that it's got non interchangeable parts. And well it might, but if it can be corrected by selecive fitting, of say, a magazine or backsight or, say, by a bit of good quality hand fitting with a file, then the rifle could go on for years and years. Albion made .38" Enfield revolvers were a good example. We had loads of these with an A serial number suffix. In fact, even if they didn't have an 'A' suffix, most of them could only be corrected by selective of fine fitting by someone who knew what he was doing with them - and that didn't include me!

[curly]

Peter, thank you for that clear and concise answer regarding any rifles which were faulty or worn and thus marked with 'ZF'.

According to Mr Skennerton: " These ex-trials No.4 rifles which were taken into service during the wartime years, marked with the 'A' suffix to the serial number, were finally ordered to be withdrawn and scrapped in the mid-1950's"

Can you tell us how these presumably fully serviceable rifles would have been marked for scrap - would it not have been with the 'ZF'? Is there another mark which means "perfectly serviceable but scrap"? Unlike the Albion pistols, it was not a case of these will do for years if they are tinkered with, there was a definite order to remove them from service and scrap them.

On another interesting note, can you tell us what would have happened to them? Clearly they were NOT scrapped as they exist to confuse and confound us! Why were dangerously unsafe weapons allowed to be released and sold? (albeit to the American public) Unlike 'DP' marked rifles these 'ZF' marked rifles have no useful training value, why were they not cut?

Puzzled...

Curly

[Peter Laidler]

Q1. I can't find any instruction that states that these will be withdran and scrapped. Just suppose they're serviceable......!
Q2. If they were fully serviceable they wouldn't be scrapped
Q2. There isn't a mark, so far as I am aware that indicates perfectly serviceable, but scrap..................
Q3. Scrap rifles guillotined/torched or sold off as such.
Don't know.
ZF rifles can have training value. Convert to DP. Been done since the tear dot!

Bit of advice. Don't invade Russia and don''t use a DP or ZF marked rifle

[curly]

Q1. I can't find any instruction that states that these will be withdran and scrapped. Just suppose they're serviceable......! - A1. Apparently Mr Skennerton did find an ORDER to withdraw and scrap these presumably serviceable rifles. (see page 212 of the latest edition of "The Lee Enfield")
Q2. If they were fully serviceable they wouldn't be scrapped - A2. See above
Q2. There isn't a mark, so far as I am aware that indicates perfectly serviceable, but scrap.................. - A2. So they would have been marked 'ZF' even though they were serviceable
Q3. Scrap rifles guillotined/torched or sold off as such.
Don't know. - A3. Fair enough, you don't know.
ZF rifles can have training value. Convert to DP. Been done since the tear dot! - A4. I'm referring to a 'ZF' marked 1930's trials rifle with a non-standard body and parts, it has not been converted to 'DP' and thus has no training value.



Bit of advice. Don't invade Russia and don''t use a DP or ZF marked rifle - Thanks for the very useful advice.

Curly

Mr Skennerton care to interject?

[Son]

Curly, I have an immaculate Longbranch No4 that I will never fire or sell. It has ZF marked on the butt. No end of inspection by anyone will convince me to tempt fate and pull the trigger on a live round.

[Bindi2]

Son i presume you have been over that LB with a fine tooth comb. What is out of spec.

[Son]

Son i presume you have been over that LB with a fine tooth comb. What is out of spec.

Nothing! I was about to declare the butt had been fitted from another rifle (sand the marks off and go fire it) when I spotted something that sealed it's fate. There are corresponding marks on the butt and the receiver (pictured below) which I cannot find any reference to anywhere... What I do know is that it tells me the butt belongs to the receiver, the ZF mark on the butt stands as the classification of the rifle.

It last belonged to a mate of ours at gunboards who didn't shoot it- I bought it from the shop he'd traded it to. He had contacted the previous owner who was a re-enactor who'd had it for donkey's years and never fired it either.

As I said, I'm afraid- never to be fired, never to be sold.

[Thunderbox]

With all due respect to the board experts, I personally remain unconvinced that there isn't another "ZF" out there with an unrelated meaning to the accepted British/Commonwealth "scrap" designation:

- why are there so many marked rifles out there? Why weren't most of them scrapped in the usual manner as they passed back up the depot system?
- why do many/most of the these rifles have no apparent defects, even under inspection, gauging & proof testing? Some even appear to be little used since an FTR or similar, or even from initial production.

One aspect that intrigues me is that the "stamped" ZF mark on butts I've examined appears to be an identical font to the "FR" that appears on NIW and fitted wood associated with Pakistani production.