Strange (To Me) LB No.4 MK I Rear Sight

[Donzi]

Was in a local pawn shop today & looked @ a very-well-used but "kinda okay" 1943 Long Branch No.4 MK I rifle w/no obvious import marks. This rifle's rear sight is of a pattern I've never seen before, altho I'll grant that my experience is rather limited. The sight is the early micrometer type, but rather than the normal screw-type" adjustment, it had spring-loaded pivoting "ears" on either end of the ranging bar. ( I hope I'm explaining this in an understandable form) The ears were curved & pivoted @ their inner attaching points on the bar, & were meant to be squeezed together, just like the normally encountered tabs, except that they could (altho I don't know why you would want to) be operated independantly of each other. They were also spring-loaded. Anyone here ever seen one like this? TIA, guys, f/any info you may have.

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.

[Lee Enfield]

get any pictures?

Why didn't you just buy it?

Haven't you bought handguns for their grips and rifles for their slings? I have....

Otherwise when I actually figure it might be something I need it's usually gone...

Actually maybe I'm just a little off bubble...

It wasn't a Mk3 ?

http://photos.imageevent.com/badgerd...sighttypes.JPG

[jmoore]

Haven't you bought handguns for their grips and rifles for their slings? I have....

Yes to the first, no to the second. But I definitely have purchased rifles just for the sights. So maybe we're both "a little off bubble".

[Lee Enfield]

Yes to the first, no to the second. But I definitely have purchased rifles just for the sights. So maybe we're both "a little off bubble".

I hate to admit going thru stages of purchasing every Enfield rifle I've found with a "L"ong" butt stock.

I've purchased Enfield Rifles for sight covers, adjustable and non-adjustable apertures, adjustible front sights, any number of excuses (whoops - reasons)...

TZ 4/47, PH8/53, PH4, early 5C, late 5C, mid 5C, 303 5C, 7.62 5C ect....

[Donzi]

Apparently, you guys have way more $$$ to spend than moi(I'm retired), but $210 f/a fairly common rifle w/pretty ratty wood, that I already own one of, just to acquire a possibly incorrect rear sight doesn't strike me as a brilliant move. JMHO, of course. Guess no one else has seen one of these sights, either. Thanks f/reading, anyway.

[Lee Enfield]

Apparently, you guys have way more $$$ to spend than moi(I'm retired), but $210 f/a fairly common rifle w/pretty ratty wood, that I already own one of, just to acquire a possibly incorrect rear sight doesn't strike me as a brilliant move. JMHO, of course. Guess no one else has seen one of these sights, either. Thanks f/reading, anyway.

So it isn't a MkIII sight?

[Patrick Chadwick]

It wasn't a Mk3 ?

http://photos.imageevent.com/badgerd...sighttypes.JPG

There seems to be a mistake in the drawings in this link. The aperture diameters are given as 0.02" / 0.01". That would be a horribly fine hole to look through!

[jmoore]

There seems to be a mistake in the drawings in this link. The aperture diameters are given as 0.02" / 0.01". That would be a horribly fine hole to look through!

That's the artic summer option. Or Post WWII, the "take a last shot during the atomic blast" option.

[Peter Laidler]

I don't think anyone knows - or even has any idea what sort it is!

[muffett.2008]

As usual, with little information and no pictures it adds up to.........no comment.