-
Additionally......... Does anyone recall that China would and regularly did remove all markings that referred to the US. Not all of course because I saw many - well, quite a few - captured ex VC Brens and Enfields where the markings were crudely ground out. The ammunition as I recall was usually Canadian
too but second biggest lot, Indian Kirkee stuff. I regularly had to go to the Intelligence Cell at XXXXX to identify some of this kit and it was there that I first saw in real life, Inglis 7.92mm Brens. In fact I sent an Inglis 7.92mm Bren back to S/Sgt Jock Annandale at the Base Ordnance Depot at Ngaruawahia
Asking the obvious, but has anyone measured the side wall depth of an unmarked body. I realse that it'd be pretty obvious, even to a blind man because the roll-marked US property mark is fairly deep
-
-
09-03-2010 01:08 PM
# ADS
Friends and Sponsors
-
Legacy Member
And what happened to all those 7.92mm Brens I wonder!
-
-
-
-
Thank You to tlvaughn For This Useful Post:
-
Legacy Member
Lend lease started in late February of 1941, well before the US entered the war. I do not recall when the first shipments of No 4 rifles was made, but it was likley after Feb of 1941, I seem to recall that 1941 dated North Amercian No 4 rifles are relatively unknown.
-
-
Legacy Member

Originally Posted by
Frederick303
I do not recall when the first shipments of No 4 rifles was made, but it was likley after Feb of 1941, I seem to recall that 1941 dated North Amercian No 4 rifles are relatively unknown.
I believe the first rifle came out in June/July 1941 with 25,000 +/- to be completed by the end of 1941; however, only 1,300 +/- were completed. I'll have to pull the book back out to confirm this.
-
-
Legacy Member
There was a long-running attempt at surveying these rifles at Survey of Savage #4 serial number ranges No range could be identified which was not US PROPERTY marked.
-
-
Advisory Panel
For what it is worth, I own Savage number 0C1 that was made into a No.4 Mk1(T). Even though the former owner (butcher) went happy with a hand grinder, there are traces of the PROPERTY "Y" still visible next to the front mount base. I have a few more Mk1s in the 0C2000 range and all have the property mark. I have a feeling Ian believed what he was told at the time, that is why books are always subject to revision.
-
The Following 7 Members Say Thank You to breakeyp For This Useful Post:
-
Legacy Member
The serial number range I was referring to, was early 41. Nothing else. There aren't any visible markings or grind marks. When 303t gets home, he can measure the side wall for you and take pics. He's a decent fellow and isn't about to scam anyone.
The original owner of that rifle, had it since before he left the army. I don't have any idea where it came from.
Is there a possibility, that the receiver, was sent to Long Branch for approval or to speed up production? What happened back then, is anyones guess.
By the way, if you want to see more Bren Guns, in 7,92x57, go to Angola or the Congo. They used to be all over the place there. I'm willing to bet, their governments still have lots, rusting in some warehouses.
Last edited by bearhunter; 09-03-2010 at 08:37 PM.
-
Thank You to bearhunter For This Useful Post:
-
I have 0C864 and like P. Breakey's rifle, 0C1 it was converted to a "T" It also has the "Y" of the US Property mark sticking out beside the front pad.
-
-
Legacy Member
Peter, it has not been scrubbed as yes the markings are quite deep and would be quite obvious. I will take the gun to bearhunter this weekend and have him take pictures as he is good at that and being computer illiterate think I have a better chance of winning a lottery than posting a picture on this site. Beside illiterate I have a new anti-virus and holy crap it is a chore just to find the pictures after I TRY to load them on my computer.
Why use a 50 pound bomb when a 500 pound bomb will do?
-