magazine cutoff

[Surpmil]

....This rifle is a part-finished or finished body from Enfield, taken to Faz with a lot of skilled staff to help start rifle production. It's finished at Faz and sent out into the world where it has emerged years later.

Interesting that the serial number is in the 20,000 range. Does that suggest that at least that many receivers/bodies were forwarded from RSAF(E) to Fazakerly to be completed/built up into rifles?

We know that No1 MkVI and No4 MkI bodies were both sent. Did RSAF(E) clean out their inventory of rifle parts entirely to Fazakerly when they changed over to Bren production, or did they send some to other start-up factories as well?

One wonders also at what date RSAF(E) ceased to produce No4 bodies and components?

Or did they retain the No1 MkVI and No4 MkI parts until they had finished the conversion of the 1400 odd No4 MkI Trials rifles to No4 MkI(T), and these parts arrived at the other factories after No4 production was already under way and this explains the higher serial numbers?

[jmoore]

The serial number ranges were pre-assigned - Fazakerly started theirs with 2s. So is this the 908th rifle or the 10908th? ( Like Bradtx, I think the 908th...)

To address this issue:
"Perhaps it is just a weird trick of the lighting or an odd wear pattern, but, the so called, "spotting hole" in the SMLE cut-off looks like it got the attention of someone's drill bit, or countersink. Wonder why anyone would do that?"
Its a removable part that doesn't belong, so it really doesn't matter with respect to the rifle. What does matter is the fact that it can be fitted!

I'm still not altogether sure that the action/body was of Enfield origin, certain machining operations aren't consistant w/ Enfield and I see no reason why they would have been added later if it was started at one place and finished at another. The manufacturing nerd (mechanical engineering and machinist) in me just won't latch onto that theory, yet. Of course I don't mind being wrong, if we learn something!

I think we'll have to wait on the new detail pictures of the various action and other '41 vintage bits to make any real progress revealing this rifle's secrets. Can't hardly wait!

[Brit plumber]

I used to have a Mk1 with exactly the same markings as this one. I've never seen another with the exact same faint markings but my rifle didn't have the cut off hole, however, it did have the lower wood with the low section for the cut out to clear. I never did ID where it was manufactured.

Just found a reference to my old No4s serial No. it was 16873, No prefix or suffix.

[bradtx]

Brit plumber, 16873 is a '41 Maltby, 6873'd off the assembly line.

"What does matter is the fact that it (the cutoff) can be fitted!" --jmoore
Exactly! A wonderful early look into the Fazakerley production history not likely to be found in a book or official records.

Brad


Brad

[Enfieldlock]

Does it take a normal No4 backsight? If not, then it is made from an RSAF made receiver. Components were made in 1935(ish) and shipped to Faz for assembly. Should have an "A" suffix to the serial number. Quite rare as most were destroyed in the 1950s due to them being non-compatible as regards to spare parts.

I have one.

The cut-off is a special (which we plan to make some day). The cut off screw is unique and does not use an Enfield thread.

[jmoore]

So, Enfieldlock, how about detailed pics of yours to compare w/ the subject at hand?

I'll pull apart my No4 trials and a SMLE to get cutoff screw measurements, if someone doesn't know them already.

Oldhound, do you have any calipers and a thread pitch gage? Cheap hardware store ones will do, or I can send you some, if you feel comfy giving me your address by Private Message function. It looks like you'll need to reomve the rear sight as well as the cutoff. (Sounds like a great time for a detail clean.)

[Surpmil]

Does it take a normal No4 backsight? If not, then it is made from an RSAF made receiver. Components were made in 1935(ish) and shipped to Faz for assembly. Should have an "A" suffix to the serial number. Quite rare as most were destroyed in the 1950s due to them being non-compatible as regards to spare parts.

Can one be sure that all of the receivers made at Enfield were made for the early ball-detent sight as seen on the trials No4(T)s for example?

I'm wondering when the standard No4 pattern sight was approved/produced?

Obviously they made at least 57 of the standard pattern in 1935 for the Model C trials No4s. Is it possible that rifles/receivers produced after that pattern was approved were produced or modified to accept the standard pattern backsight?

[jmoore]

Do you reckon Enfield had near on a thousand partially finished receivers that had progressed far enough to get the cut-off slot machined? It seems that operation would occur fairly late in the machining progress. Did any of the other manufacturers get old Enfield stock?

I'll be happy to have this issue decided either way, but I just can't help thinking Captain Laidler's first suspicion that this is an early Fazakerly built receiver w/ a quickly dropped feature is most highly probable.

Its going to take a much more detailed look to come to a conclusion.

[Surpmil]

Do you reckon Enfield had near on a thousand partially finished receivers that had progressed far enough to get the cut-off slot machined? It seems that operation would occur fairly late in the machining progress.

I couldn't say, and it may be that larger scale production of the No4 trials was begun and later suspended, if I remember my Reynolds correctly, possibly leaving that kind of number of partly finished rifles on hand at Enfield. I'll have a look at Reynolds tomorrow, or someone across the water may want to take that up as it's breakfast time there now!

[Peter Laidler]

On my trials No4 later No4T and later still L42 the cut-off screw thread is BA. And it's got a standard No4T backsight and a rounded top to the bodyside.

I think we're making too much of the rifle in this thread. Nice find and all that but it's an Enfield body shipped up to Fazakerley to be finished when the going was getting decidely tough. And they weren't going to waste it......, that's what the rectification bay was for. And that's presumably why it's got an A suffix

The other alternative is that it was forged and manufactured wholly at Faz to the original drawing spec. Shrivenham have got an identical un-numbered known pre-production rifle there. It DOES have a number, 37, but that is an identification number put on there for project/security/identification purposes.

I wouldn't mind betting that out in the big wide world, un-noticed and unloved are a few more similar rifles with the slot covered up. And it's difficult to notice the slot from the inside and outside when it's covered by the fore-end. I'm a firm believer that the answer is always simple with small arms.

A bit like why some No1's are marked Mk3* when there is a cut-off slot. It's because the EMER's say in as many words '.......fit a high side fore-end and add a star!