Is there any doubt with this one?.

[jss]

Just took delivery of this and I think it's a duff one. Perhaps I'll have to eat my words on the De-Act thing!.

Attachment 25122Attachment 25112Attachment 25113Attachment 25114Attachment 25115Attachment 25116Attachment 25117Attachment 25118Attachment 25119Attachment 25120Attachment 25121Attachment 25123

As it had already been stamped "EY" and barred out so I suspect that it's path continued to "DP" and it has had "DP" ground off the receiver and over-stamped with a new proof mark on entering civilian life, as I can't see any other reason for the removal of metal at that point. It also has some red paint in the middle right of the buttstock which looks like a possible slanted 2" high "F".

The Bolt, which also has a new proof mark, has I think "DP" on it although it is mis-matched and the "D" of "DP" looks like an "r". The bolt head(No proof mark) is marked X/H7 I think and has some 5 or 6 centre punch marks on it possibly obliterating something. It has a new barrel in 44 I think so I believe that it is a resurrected and re-proofed "DP" rifle around that time although the grinding looks recent. The bolt is sloppy and I suspect too much headspace, the body looks as though it's seen some rust and I think the star on the receiver aside the knox form means it had a barrel problem with rust.
Lovely rifle, fantastic workmanship to possibly original woodwork, volley sights........
Any comments?. Do the proof marks look VERY recent?.

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.

[Thunderbox]

The proof is possibly about 15 years old (Birmingham don't use such deep stamps currently), but is not particularly ancient.

Lack of proof on the bolthead is, of course, an offence by whoever "offered it for sale" to you. At the minimum, I'd hand it back to them and ask them to have it reproofed at their expense. Probably someone has been swapping boltheads in the days when most shooters used to have such spares off-ticket.

(Edit: the lower group of four "centre punch stamps" on the bolthead is quite possibly a BNP proof mark - or someone's attempt to replicate one. Current BNP stamps often are just four "dimples"; having said that, if the bolthead had been proofed on the rifle, it would have the same deep stamps as on the bolt and receiver.)

If the rifle apart from the bolt is otherwise all-matching, then its probably a normal example of a DP rifle that has been used as a civilian shooter for decades. Unfortunately, contemporary alarmist internet postings about DP rifles have caused some owners/dealers to start grinding off the DP stamp. Mind you, the professional gun trade also used to do this - one indication that not all DPs (particularly pre-WW2 No1s) have anything wrong with them.

Have the rifle checked over by someone who is familiar with Enfields. If the bolt/bolthead are properly fitted and it re-passes proof without anything moving, then it may be ok to use.

I appreciate that my comments may well re-inflame the whole "DP" debate, but the fact is that the UK civilian shooting community have been using such rifles for decades without any documented issue.

[Peter Laidler]

Ah, yes Thunderbox, the thorny DP saga again. As our mum's used to say '.. better be safe than sorry............. Just as you expouse with having the bolt head re-proofed. It's already BEEN proofed once, albeit a military proof. Better safe than sorry

[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.

[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

[Thunderbox]

Leave it exactly as it is, if you want to preserve its provenance and resale value.

If you clean it and remove the patina, it will look very much like someone's dodgy rebuild.....

[smellie]

Gentlemen, pardon kindly my abysmal ignorance.

I understand (although I do not like) the silly pressure rating in BAR, but what is the "2.02" in the Proof marks?

Thank you.
.

[Alan de Enfield]

Gentlemen, pardon kindly my abysmal ignorance.

I understand (although I do not like) the silly pressure rating in BAR, but what is the "2.02" in the Proof marks?

Thank you.
.

Its the cartridge overall length (COAL) but is normally 2.22"

Wrong punch used ???????