Which is a more accuraate rifle? The No1 MK 3 or the No 4 MK1

[Brian Dick]

R = Rebuild

[Homer]

Or replacement maybe. Where is it?

[JerryB08]

at the wrist underneath on the stock. I bet it's the original stock. And they rebuilt it with a 1953 reciever. It would make sense.

---------- Post added at 09:48 PM ---------- Previous post was at 09:44 PM ----------

it is a 43

[Peter Laidler]

Like the UK, I'm not sure that Australia re-bodied worn out rifles unless anyone out there can confirm this. Certainly not in my time there although that was in the L1A1 era. The body was the 'master component' and WAS the rifle

[Homer]

Apparently they did Peter but I've only seen one example of it. A 1918 EFD body been replaced with a 1939 Lithgow action. The owner is a member here and I'm sure he would post it. I doubt it would have been commonly done and hard to understand why they would at all.

In the case of the rifle on this thread, I would think it highly unlikely they would have rebuilt an earlier rifle with a 1953 dated action. The 1953 rifles were purpose built to test the machinery and labor force (Ian Skennertons words). The serial number would confirm. They range from F39581 to F40580 from memory, I hope that's right.

An earlier butt could have been put on the gun at anytime after it's manufacture.

I suppose never say never in Enfield world but that would be my take.

[Pablo]

Not sure if this is what you're on about but......
I have a 1918 SSA that was ftr'd at Lithgow in 1951. Everything bar the receiver was replaced.
Timber, barrel, nose cap, bolt, and magazine are all BA or MA 51 marked and Seriel numbers all matched to the original SSA one.

[Peter Laidler]

With regards to butts/handguards, fore-ends, magazines etc etc and other bits that we called 'consumables', we would replace these when damaged until there were a few on the bench and someone would set about repairing the butts or a slip patch the handguards or knock dents out of the magazines - you see what I mean - until they were repaired and they'd go back on the shelf. Renumbered to something else later and so on. That way you'd have rifles in and out in no time and the 'back of the shop' stuff could be repaired at leisure.

So from that, you can see why I place no importance on replaced butts or re-numbered magazines. Mind you, just so l9ong as they were fitted properly as opposed to just 'stuck in and see if it fits' It's just something that happened in all Armourers shops wherever I worked on the floor with the Poms, Kiwis and Aussies

[5thBatt]

Apparently they did Peter but I've only seen one example of it. A 1918 EFD body been replaced with a 1939 Lithgow action. The owner is a member here and I'm sure he would post it. I doubt it would have been commonly done and hard to understand why they would at all.

It's/was a 1918 BSA

[muffett.2008]

The only thing on this rifle that is 1918 is the barrel. probably rebarreled with an early barrel by persons unknown and the serial number stamped on.
Note the finish of the knox on the right hand side in relation to the left, and the very faint marks above and behind the S/N.
When you compare the S/N on the Receiver with the one on the Barrel under magnification, they were not done with the same stamp.

[Homer]

The only thing on this rifle that is 1918 is the barrel. probably rebarreled with an early barrel by persons unknown and the serial number stamped on.
Note the finish of the knox on the right hand side in relation to the left, and the very faint marks above and behind the S/N.
When you compare the S/N on the Receiver with the one on the Barrel under magnification, they were not done with the same stamp.

So what are you suggesting Muffer?