BSA Buttstock number question

[PrivateSnafu]

I have a 1923 BSA III* serial No. 4048 On the right side of the butstock is stamped L44L and the disk is stamped 2745. Is the buttstock original to this rifle or is this off another rifle? All numbers match on the rifle and has no import stamp.
Dave

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.

[jmoore]

Best to do a teardown of the fore end area at least and check barrel markings. Rebuild dates are sometimes on the butt socket as well. ('xy)- generally a rebuild date. Won't ensure a match if all dates are the same, but it may provide clues.

[PrivateSnafu]

Thanks jmoore.
Disassembled fore end and found nothing. All wood is unmarked on the inside.
The only date I found on the barrel is 28.
Is the L44L on the butt stock a rack number?
Also is the pitting on the barrel anything to be concerned about?

[bradtx]

PrivateSnafu, These rifles have had such a varied 'career' it's difficult to determine what some of the 'non standard' markings signify. Generally written off as rack assignment. Perhaps the other characters on the disk will jog someone's memory.

Good luck,
Brad

[Pattern14]

Anyone, Is that "Israeli star" on the wrist of the Mark III a BSA-related mark? I have a LSA Mark III with an asterisk.

[jmoore]

Thanks jmoore.
Disassembled fore end and found nothing. All wood is unmarked on the inside.
The only date I found on the barrel is 28.
Is the L44L on the butt stock a rack number?
Also is the pitting on the barrel anything to be concerned about?

Looks like a 1928 rebarrel there. Fairly normal for WWI rifles.

The pitting is OK as long as its on the outside.

Nothing really ties the front to the buttstock so far. Having been through rebuild, its probable that the entire thing got pulled apart at least once, w/ only the servicable S/N'ed parts going back to the original donor. Even then there's no surprise if EVERYTHING got replaced at least once and then numbered to suit.

Anybody else out there who can shed more light on this rifle? I'm not at home enough lately to do any research. No books here.

Speaking of which, Brian Dick has a reference work on the brass marking discs for sale at his web site. Might help you out there! See this thread:

Buttstock Disc ID - Military Surplus Collectors Forums

Also:

BDL LTD Rifles and Accessories

[PrivateSnafu]

Thanks for your replies guys.
The bore and chamber are in excellent condition. All the wood is matching in wear and color.
So I guess it's safe to assume that the only British Enfields that have the wood serial numbered to the receiver are the sniper variants.

Also, are the re-barreled rifles the only ones that are dated?

[Amatikulu]

I see nothing to suggest the rifle is not original, unless I'm missing something?

The date on the receiver is 1928, the date on the barrel is 1928- seems like the font on the barrel and the receiver are the same and I would believe that these are as originally mated.

The "star" mark is common to BSA rifles of that period and has the same meaning as the asterisk.

The butt stock disc is interesting - have you tried to remove it and see what's on the reverse side?

[PrivateSnafu]

I was going off of the date at the rear of the receiver under the bolt handle. If you save the image and enlarge it appears to be a # 3. But then again it could be an 8 with a small chip out of the left side. I can't really tell though.
I removed the ID disk and it is blank on the other side.
I'll share my method of removing the disk with you. I did not what to use something to pry it out and damage the wood so I screwed in a 10/32 Phillips head screw into the disk hole. The screw threads just barely grabs into the hole. Then I took a 3/8 ID pipe and placed the end against the side of the screw head and gave it a tap with a small hammer and the disk popped right out with out damaging anything at all. Many of you may already use this method, but I figured I'll share it with you in case some have never tried it.
Dave

[jmoore]

I believe you're right, Amatikulu!

I read the date from his post but didn't check the photo- D'oh!
I was a bit flogged this weekend, as well, so didn't double check when I had access to the "good" monitor.

Thanks for catching that.