Not Always what they Seem.

[muffett.2008]

Had a couple of rifles dumped on me for storage, both covered in surface rust. No way I was letting those pair into my storage like that.
So a bit of a cleanup was in order.

The sporting rifle was easy, not so the SMLE, which had my interest.

1943, misaligned dated action, 8'43 barrel with correct period proofs, but the serial number in large stamps - 653 on barrel, action scrubbed with remnants of an A prefix.

Nosecap has A38190, bolt although BA stamped has A18627, trigger guard is Star, all else is BA and OA.

Woodwork is all post war stuff, no dates. Action View stamps only go to 8 instead of 10, making me think this was a spare action, but the late proof marks question that unless assembled in 1943, no number over the gas port, which is correct for '43.

High position of S/N prefix letter is strange, remnants of number unreadable, and not located correctly, but started with a 1 and finished with 7.

Really just another Bitzer, but with a quiet forum, at least it gives you something to look at.
Attachment 116551Attachment 116550Attachment 116552
Attachment 116553Attachment 116554Attachment 116555

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.

[Bruce_in_Oz]

Something built up/ refurbished by a club armourer, when there were such things?

[Alan de Enfield]

Did Aussie Military armourers follow the same rules as the UK armourers ?

If they did, then it can only be a civilian assembly of parts as the "Instructions To Armourers" is very clear about 'matching numbers' on the No1 Mk3

[muffett.2008]

Yeah ADE,we kept pretty much to the script.

[pisco]

I have a 42 Lithgow stamped with large numbers like that but on the action