L42A1 Condition Question.

[Roger Payne]

I don't know whether Peter can help here, or for that matter, anyone else, but it has long mystified me why so many L42's came out of ordnance stores in the 90's in such.......er.....let's say 'indifferent' condition. That's not to say that there weren't belters amongst them, but the general state of them was not the best. I know they were already getting long in the tooth when converted from 4T's, & they then soldiered on for another 20 years after conversion, but........ Or maybe they just saw a hard service life & when they went into stores it was realised that they would be unlikely ever to be required for front line use again. I've had more than a few go through my books over the years, & most of them have needed a little 'tidying up' (at least). It's a bit of a paradox really, considering the astronomical prices they now command.

Any thoughts?

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.

[Brian Dick]

I thought the exact same thing Roger. Lord knows I've brought a few back from near death with a priceless long distance Armourer's course from an Officer, (I try to over look that part), and Gentleman we all know and love! One day I was browsing through a book on the British Special Forces I have here in my small library. Low and behold, there were photos of soldiers on the sniper courses with L42's. It dawned on me that these rifles; most of which were already long in the tooth, were being sent over the sniper courses time and time again until they were finally withdrawn from service. Therein lies the answer in my humble opinion. Many were sent to the disposals unit just as they left the sniper courses. Some in not-so-great states of affair.

[DanL96a1]

One day I was browsing through a book on the British Special Forces I have here in my small library. Low and behold, there were photos of soldiers on the sniper courses with L42's.

Brian do you have the pictures you refer too, or the name of this book?

[Gil Boyd]

Brian,
Hated having all those squares stuck to my face, they call it pixalation these days

[Peter Laidler]

That's an interesting Q DRP. It's a fact that even when 'new', it was only the barrel and magazine that were truly new. The real downside, as I have said time and time again was the dire condition of the woodwork that was converted to suit. And when the original wasn't suitable, 'new' old stock was converted to suit. It really was done on the cheap with cost cutting the norm. Quite how the rifle has entered the world of megga-bucks value heaven knows. But it has!

Then there's the sad saga of the sights - both the iron and the telescope. 2x classic cases of cheapness personified! Good job the person who suggested that the iron sights could accurately be read as metres when the datum line was lowered by .070" wasn't subject to current descriptive legislation

Spare parts that were not identical to those from the No4 rifle were always 'dues-out'. That is shorthand for '......awaiting stocks'. The constant patching of fore-ends, handguards and especially cheek rests were a constant thorn in the side. In fact there were NO replacement cheek rest so far as I am aware ever ordered! The whole project was like this. This lack of spares meant that on the sniper courses for example, if you were waiting for 8 weeks for a dues-out replacement fore-end - or a cheek rest - the rifle was stuck on a shelf at the unit or the Field workshop. Eventually it'd be returned to Ordnance for a replacement.

The Course Warrant Officer Mick Hagan SASC, reported back to the Infantry HQ that the confidence of the courses AND the instructors was being undermined not by any inaccuracy of the rifle but by the gradually worsening overall condition of it. Even replacements from Ordnance soon fell into disrepair. I appreciate that this was one unit where they were worked hard. But it does reflect on the rifle generally. Loose and sheared pads were something else...... You could satisfactorily replace the pad and repair a sheared spigot but what a time consuming job

The telescopes were really no better. Bird and Tole who made some of the internal parts were mystified by feedback that the parts didn't fit. Nope......., because there were different original manufacturers. Here's an example. A new range drum assembly might FIT on an old, say CTS telescope, but the screw holes might not align exactly. Not because they were inaccurately machined, but the old CTS was hand assembled, holes drilled to suit and then countersunk!!!!! Other spare were simply not made when existing stocks were exhausted....... like front ray shades. So when that internal thread was stripped you looked up your pal at Base Workshop/Donnington and got him to send down one from a stripped/unserviceable one! A sheared locking segment (usually pressed from sintered aluminium) meant that a telescope was effectively ZF unless the Instrument workshop foreman had a few in his drawer

From the early 80's even replacement stocks of the rifle were in short supply until more L42's were converted but by then there weren't even any serviceable No4T's left to convert! It was only then that a big concerted effort was made to start cannibalise the unserviceable ones to make serviceable replacements. Barrels......... No new replacement barrels were produced either so if a rifle was returned as 'fails standard accuracy test' that was the end of the road........ Maybe you can understand why the ex service condition was generally so dire. Of course, you can rebuild and replace the old tatty worn out woodwork and have the telescopes rebuilt.

They've now entered the realms of mystique and mystery, a bit like the DeLisle and mysterious Welrods. Quite why is a mystery to me! Just my thoughts on the rifle. With 1080 accepted, they should have been given more maintenance resources

Added a bit later..... Even the magazines weren't 'new'. They'd been languishing at Enfield since 1965 as a leftover from the ill fated politically inept L8 'Aid for India' agreement that failed to materialise at great cost to us because the non aligned Indians wouldn't be brow beaten..... Oh, don't get me going.........

[Gil Boyd]

Isn't that what makes this old girl exceptional.
A piece that can't be read easily, and one that has to be individually taken on its accuracy and not its historic date of manufacture at whatever house of excellence, or its Military service.

Albeit my own L42A1 was ressurected from the dead, right from the slopes of Tumbledown Mountain on the night of the 13/14th June 1982 during the Falklands War, when it received a direct hit to the action with 2 Scots Guards. For whatever reason it was brought back on line on return to the UK, but as I say the history matters not to me, it is whether the rifle is up to it, which she still is. Strange thing to do I often think, when clearly these rifles had been identified as ready for the retirement home.
I remember someone commenting some time back of a soldier throwing his L42 away during the conflict............well clearly this confirms that never happened, and in fact shows that even when a rifle is broken badly in action, it is still on your signature and HAS to be ereturned from whence it came!

[Roger Payne]

What a shambolic state of affairs (spares). It seems little short of a miracle that the L42 turned out to be the tack driver it did. I guess those rifles that were used over & over again on the courses could well be explained.......& I suppose they were getting long in the tooth anyway, but not to have a properly equipped spares system is appalling.

[Brian Dick]

I feel privileged to have had a hand in putting so many range ready examples back into the hands of collector/shooters over the years. The L42A1 will always be one of my all-time favorite rifles….

[Peter Laidler]

That's very probably because people have taken the time, cash - and often, large amounts of it I hasten to add..... and resources to have the replacement parts re-manufactured. One workshop I dealt with and had under my wing in a roundabout way told me that the rifles would come in with a note that asked then to do whatever was humanly possible to repair the rifle. If not, and it was returned as BLR for lack or parts, then the replacement would be yet another unknown quantity - or quality! The attrition rate towards the end was critical with no new barrels for the last 10 years. It 's little known that authority was given for ill fitting fore-ends to be repaired/fitted to the body using an epoxy mix. All very well but it caused even MORE problems!

At a quick count, I have seen/overhauled/repaired 494 (+/- a few) L1A1 telescopes and most of them were really at the end of their lives, needing a lot of time and effort spent on each.

I forgot to mention in thread 3 that the out-of-alignment new drums problem was 'solved' by simply using the old ORIGINAL index plate. But as it was the index plate that was worn out in the first place - it didn't cure anything!!!!!!!

[Roger Payne]

Peter, were the post war cheekpieces that we sometimes see on L42's made for them, or were they of 1950's/60's replacement manufacture originally intended for the 4T? Colin Moon did make some parts for the Enfield 7.62mm heavy barrelled series of rifles, did he not, & these just have 'his' look about them! Just wondered when they were made & if they were down to him.......

One of the last jobs he ever did was to modify a load of No4 butts to SMLE configuration (slim down general profile, cut safety notch, cut butt disc recess, & re-profile back end to take SMLE butt plate) for a dealer friend. I supplied the new No4 butts in return for half of the finished product at cost price!