Bizarre finish on a LE T

[mcnuttwa]

Is there any chance that the finish on this Enfield was done by the military?

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.

[Simon P]

Possibly Canadian FTR, some of the Canadian - Italian Navy Enfield's had the same type of finish.

[Patrick Chadwick]

I would be worried by the obvious serrated imprints of vice jaws on the wood. That does not look very professional.

Then there is the question: why would it have been refinished?
And if it was an arsenal-level job, wouldn't the rifles have been stripped right down to components parts - i.e. with the scope mounting brackets also removed? The screws on the rear mount look as if they were bead-blasted without being removed.

So take a very, very close look indeed (one cannot tell from the couple of photos) in all corners: are there traces of a previous finish that was not removed because the rifle was not completely stripped down?

One obvious reason for a refinish would have been degeneration of the original black "suncorite" coating. Look for traces of that.

Furthermore, I see no traces of the usual factory markings on the side of the receiver. If they have been obliterated, then it was probably a Bubba job.

[Brian B]

I saw that rifle listed with many more pictures. I would look at it very closely before considering purchasing. It is a 1945 rifle with a No 32 Mk II scope. It looks to me like someone found an original scope and "matched" it up to a rifle. The serial number is restamped on the receiver and the serial number on the bolt looks funny. Some parts are refinished while others are not. It has a somewhat "matching" box. I am no expert, so I will break my own rule and post a link to a live auction as I think the more experienced members here can keep anyone from making a poor purchase. Let's see what the forum thinks.

The scope tin has an old Canadian rifle number with an REL scope number listed. The serial number on the side looks almost engraved as opposed to stamped. The lighter finish reminds me of other rifles I have seen posted here that were refinished by another country (Belgium?). Can't remember.

It looks a bit like this one earlier on the forum. See post #1:

Any issues with this Longbranch No.4 Mk 1 T

WWII BRITISH NO. 4 MK 1 (T) ENFIELD SNIPER RIFLE : Curios & Relics at GunBroker.com


Brian B

[Peter Laidler]

When ours went through the workshops the pads would only be removed if they were loose. By loose, I mean even a small oil squeeze would be loose in some in-inspectors opinion! But they'd be replaced PRIOR to going through the bead blast and phosphating plant.

Was that one done by the military.........? Probably yes, but a crap military looking at the standards!

This grey finish has always been a bit of a mystery. We did a huge load of old grey No2 and commercial type L9 9mm Brownings for a Crown Agents programme many years ago. Where they came from or where they were going to, nobody knew. It was said by |Robbie, the examiner that they'd come from the Netherlands (I think....., or one of those low Countries) and were being supplied via a MAP programme to....., well, somewhere!

[MasterChief]

This is a No4 MarkII purchased about 15 years ago. PF 192-series dated 3/50. It had an arsenal-type repair to the buttstock toe and a replacement walnut hand guard (since replaced my me) and a sloppy Suncorite paint job over gray park. It is all matching numbers and was probably some sort of arsenal repair/rework at one time prior to being surplussed, but no FTR mark. I removed the Suncorite paint and this is what it looks like underneath.

[Paul S.]

If I were a betting man, I'd lay a small wager that the rifle in question has been subjected to a poorly done DIY attempt Parkerizing, or less likely, an aftermarket anti-corrosive finish such as hard chroming or Rogard NP3.

[Brian Dick]

Hey Master Chief, May I ask how you removed the Suncorite? Having worked with it for many years, I've never seen properly baked Suncorite removed completely without bead blasting. Even the denatured alcohol, (meths) as our British friends know it, won't touch it if it's baked properly. Maybe some of the nasty chemical strippers but I've never tried. I'm usually busy putting it on instead of taking it off. Brian

---------- Post added at 02:22 PM ---------- Previous post was at 02:21 PM ----------

I was thinking maybe the No.4T was a teflon coated weapon from Belgian stores but the closer I look at it, it just looks like a very smooth zinc phosphate job. It's not dark enough to be manganese phosphate. I could be wrong.

[Peter Laidler]

You're right there Brian Once in the oven it cures the sunkorite paint (something that air drying will not do successfully) so I agree with you that whatever was on there weren't not sunkorite! It just looks like the whole rifle has been dunked in the phosphate tank and then given a quick blow job with an aerosol can of barbie paint! (- as opposed to a barbie doll)

[Brian Dick]

You're much more straight to the point Peter! My point was that I don't think it was painted with Suncorite!!