Results 1 to 10 of 42

Thread: No4 Sniper rifle/Armourer's Bipod

Click here to increase the font size Click here to reduce the font size

Threaded View

  1. #27
    Advisory Panel
    Peter Laidler's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Last On
    04-20-2025 @ 11:18 AM
    Location
    Abingdon, Oxfordshire. The home of MG Cars
    Posts
    16,645
    Real Name
    Peter Laidler
    Local Date
    04-28-2025
    Local Time
    07:31 PM
    Australiaicon didn't make Mk2 Brens (thread 27). What you have is a Mk1 hybrid which most of them are, even those that were in service. Fitting different barrels*, butt slides, bipods, butts etc etc was the accepted permissible norm. The parts were designed/altered for ease of manufacture, simplicity and interchangeability between the mark/types. But regardless of how the gun was configured, the mark was that of the master component - the body. Mk1 body = Mk1 gun
    *Barrels had to be the same mark/type though

    Big ball bag (thread 25). Yes, but it was designed like that. Unlike the the No4 rifle. But even the FG42 had a different MPI when fired off the bipod.

  2. Thank You to Peter Laidler For This Useful Post:


Similar Threads

  1. An Armourer's Perspective: .303 No. 4 (T) Sniper Rifle and the H&H Connection
    By mjolnir2 in forum The Lee Enfield Knowledge Library Collectors Forum
    Replies: 23
    Last Post: 03-01-2015, 05:45 AM
  2. M14 rifle/M2 bipod failure
    By jmoore in forum M1 Garand/M14/M1A Rifles
    Replies: 11
    Last Post: 02-08-2010, 03:03 AM

Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts