Force matched - me no understand

[Seaforth72]

The term "Force Matched" is not normally used in the Lee-Enfield collecting field and the use of it can cause confusion as noted above by others. I recommend that the term "Force Matched" NOT be used regarding Lee-Enfields, due to the multiple possible meanings and confusion that can result. I believe that it is best to explain a firearm's condition in plain language without using that term.

Likewise, the term "original" is dangerously confusing unless explained in detail (e.g. Original as it left the factory? Original as it left the military as surplus? Original as found in "Bubba's" estate sale? Original as found dug up on a battlefield?)

The term "Force Matched" is commonly used in the Soviet rifles' collecting field to refer to firearms where parts that were changed during an overhaul or other repair in military service, had the old serial number cancelled (usually by striking out), or totally removed (e.g. Bolt handle ground down), and the serial number of the weapon it has now been installed on has been put onto it. The Mosin 91/30 rifle would have serial numbers on butt plate, magazine bottom plate, bolt etc. If a buttplate was changed, the armourer would strike out the old number and stamp in the new rifle's serial number. Sometimes, with both Soviet and with captured German firearms (the latter nicknamed "RC" or "Russian Capture" by collectors), the "new" serial number would be electric-pencilled to show that the part was now mated to a particular firearm (e.g. On Kar98k bolts and Mosin 91/30 scope mounts).

These were legitimate in-service repairs. Similar parts changes and renumbering occurred on MK.III / MK.III* Lee-Enfields, most often seen by me on the underside of rear sight leaves. We also often see a similar renumbering on scope brackets for the No. 4 MK.I (T) where many brackets were reassigned to one or more other rifles during their service careers. A friend has a No. 4 MK.I (T) where there were three different scope numbers assigned over the years, in-service, to that rifle. The earlier two numbers are cancelled out.

Collectors almost always prefer rifles where the parts only have the original factory marked serial numbers. When parts have been officially changed and renumbered in service, the rifle is still collectible but usually is not as valuable to collectors. Variable factors than can override this are condition e.g. special markings such as desirable national markings, Naval or Air Force issue markings or capture markings) or if a rifle is a rarer variant (e.g. Experimental or a very limited production run.) Thus a Mosin 91/30 or SVT-40 with Finnish "SA" capture markings is usually more valuable than one without such markings.

I had six Mosin 91/30 PU sniper rifles. Five of these had arsenal overhaul electric-pencil markings but one rifle did not and an advanced collector zeroed in on that one and added it to his collection. Lee-Enfield collectors usually prefer rifles that have not gone through F.T.R. Americans will understand this as almost all US WWII firearms went through arsenal overhauls and finding a factory original one is a treasure for them. Regarding WNO1958's I do not think that "Forced Match" would not apply as these parts, although they have part numbers and sometimes batch numbers, do not have serial numbers to change. Any firearm could have parts changed in service but if the parts are correct versions and not serial numbered, thus no numbers changed in service, who is to say if it was changed in-service or by a civilian later on? The best term I have seen about such a US rifle is "parts flying together in formation". ;-)

In summary: "Forced Match" is used by collectors of Soviet firearms and "Russian Capture" firearms to refer to parts where the serial nunbered replacement parts were renumbered to match the firearm and this was done in-service. The term is not usually associated with Lee-Enfields or with US firearms.