No.4 replacement barrel

[bob4wd]

Is there any way to determine if a barrel on a no.4 has been replaced in it's lifetime? I have an all-matching Fazakerley that has undergone FTR in 1948, so could well have been replaced at that time, I suppose.
The rifle itself has at least one unusual trait that I cannot begin to figure out. The s.n. is T 1042, which has would of course be correct for a no.5, but for a no.4?
I've gathered from this site that all old numbers were usually left on the piece, in order to give a history of it, even though they might be lined out if a new number was assigned. That being the case, this is the original number? Any ideas?

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.

[Peter Laidler]

If it was a Fazakerley rifle then it's more than a remote possibility that the original number has been lost or become identifiable. I'd guess that along the line somewhere that a little judicious book=keeping might have taken place and........... Well, you know how things are in the real world..................

[bob4wd]

If it was a Fazakerley rifle then it's more than a remote possibility that the original number has been lost or become identifiable. I'd guess that along the line somewhere that a little judicious book=keeping might have taken place and........... Well, you know how things are in the real world..................

Yeah, I can easily imagine somebody screwing up in a large factory like that. I can see a host of difficulties with such a scenario, though, not the least of which would be in using a totally bogus number like that one and getting it past the inspector. But still....
My original question still stands, though. Not necessarily for this particular rifle, though. I have 5 no.4s, two of which have dated barrels, one is serialized to match, two are unmarked. I have never seen any information on this subject, not even after spending many, many hours going over old posts. Very educational, and entertaining to boot.
So- does anyone have an answer? Educated guess? Wild guess?
Thanks

[Bindi2]

Yeah, I can easily imagine somebody screwing up in a large factory like that. I can see a host of difficulties with such a scenario, though, not the least of which would be in using a totally bogus number like that one and getting it past the inspector. But still....
My original question still stands, though. Not necessarily for this particular rifle, though. I have 5 no.4s, two of which have dated barrels, one is serialized to match, two are unmarked. I have never seen any information on this subject, not even after spending many, many hours going over old posts. Very educational, and entertaining to boot.
So- does anyone have an answer? Educated guess? Wild guess?
Thanks

PLs answer is right. The original numbers were very feint on the action of many rifles. Therefore armourers like PL renumbered them. Unnumbered barrels without dates remember there was a war going on and those were low on the list to getting the rifle into service or repaired.

[bob4wd]

Ah yes, that makes total sense. I will attempt to attach a picture of the markings, which support your supposition totally. One can almost make out a "T" and maybe a "10", but the rest is just a smudge. The date was struck twice, as well, I noticed. Too faint even for them?

[Peter Laidler]

Bob........ I mean that the number has been transposed while the rifle is out in service, many years after it left the factory. They all had a pretty hard life out there! This isn't a wild guess on my part but a statement of how things actually work and happen.

There's a similar question on the restoration page about a Sten gun with a new number following the 'loss or otherwise indistinguishable' of the original number.

Can someone put up a photo of an example of the dire and shallow feint Faz engraving?