Is there any doubt with this one?.

[jss]

Thanks for the brave response Thunderbox. The stamp was indeed very deep as quite a bit of metal has been ground off and you can still just see "something". I had thought it was a recent operation as the ground surfaces are still bright metal, but perhaps this gunmetal stays bright for years when exposed. I did not know of the "dimple" type proof marks. Is there anything around, book or photo library perhaps, detailing these marks both civilian and military as they seem seem to vary quite a bit. I have spoken to the proof house a few times and couldn't quite work out their procedures so I wonder if they might occasionally mix the marks on a single proof.

Information

Warning: This is a relatively older thread This discussion is older than 360 days. Some information contained in it may no longer be current.

[Gingercat]

I have a SMLE that was proofed at Birmingham at the end of last year (came back just before Christmas) and I'd confirm that the font size is smaller than on your rifle. The bolthead does however have a definite, if feint, crown over BNP stamp, rather than 'dimples'.

Some of the lighter struck 'London' proof marks, often appear more of a 'dimple' to my eyes...

Looks a nice rifle. I was surprised at the 'Y' prefix on the serial number. I didn't think (from Stratton's book) that they'd manufactured that many in 1914. My own 1914 Enfield has a 'J' prefix.

All the best

Mike

[Thunderbox]

I did not know of the "dimple" type proof marks. ..... I have spoken to the proof house a few times and couldn't quite work out their procedures so I wonder if they might occasionally mix the marks on a single proof.

The rifle, or barrelled action, is inspected and then proof fired. At Birmingham, the four pressure-bearing components are then hand-struck with the same punch. They obviously have a range of punches, from sharp to very worn - it depends which one they pick up to do the rifle. The mark should appear the same in each of the four locations, because the same punch is used. The only small variance is when they punch the side of the extractor housing on the bolthead - sometimes the stamp is less distinct because the extractor housing is slightly dished inwards by the force of the blow.

[jss]

Thanks for that Thunderbox. I have just had a closer look with some of those special close-up spectacles, no sunlight, and it does look like a proper proof stamp on the bolt head, possibly even done with the same punch but as you say less distinct. The misleading center-punch mark on the far left (top in the photo) being just that I think.

Now what!. Should I clean it up or just leave it exactly as is, as my Enfield enthusiast friend says I should.
Attachment 25162