Do you have a 1950 Long Branch?

[Lee Enfield]

I see what you're saying, but hte greeks could be refurbs. I've had TWO 1950 LB's, both 95L's and both with factory blue on every part. Of course, they could be aberrations. One had an RSAF Enfield front handguard and was ENGLAND stamped (re-import) and the other came slathere in cosmo from a gunshow - likely unissued. Sadly, both have been sold off a few years ago I did have pics, but lost them in a HDD crash

The 15 or so rifles in your survey are hardly representative IMHO as with that small a sample most might be refurbs - who knows?

Everything I've ever read in books (as oposed to forums) indicates the switch to park happened AFTER 1950 at CAL.

This whole subject (date LB changed over to parkerizing from blueing) was launched after someone regurgitated a book (Stratton No4 & No5s) which contains the obvious error (LB started parkerizing in 1943-44) caused by too small a sample & the practice of unmarked Canadian FTRs.


I certainly never said that this survey COULD be DEFINATIVE, though it certainly CAN be REPRESENTATIVE.

Books are sometimes even corrected during their second printings (if I had a dime for everyone who has told me that they wrote a letter to "Cartridges of the World"...). The best explanation I've seen for books is that as soon as they are printed it leads to people actually looking into their basements for their "evidence" which they recall as disproving the printed "facts".

I'm sorry, but IMHO guns which you (or I) owned several years ago actually cannot be taken as evidence of anything. My memory is not perfect, and neither is yours.

My own understanding has grown so much in the last few years that what I saw & miss-understood or forgot about things I own or owned previously cannot be counted on today.

10 years ago I also thought that my 1950 LB was blued, then tefloned, then realized it was parkerized after I had something to compare it to.

For this "survey" I personally examined (within 3 days of each other, not several years ago):

CDN FTR parked LB 1942 MP
CDN FTR parked LB 1942 MP DCRA
CDN FTR parked LB 1943
CDN FTR parked Savage 43/44 serial
84L brit FTR matt blued? 1945
90L8 blued 1945 NIB CES
90Lx blued 1945
91L0 blued 1949
91L250x blued 1949
92L0 Blued
94L0 Parked
94L3 parked
94L9 parked
95L4 parked in cosmo (from original shipping crate)
95L8 parked

[Lee Enfield]

Originally Posted by Lee Enfield
editing problem solved, first post updated...

For some reason I can't edit the original post??

[Claven2]

I'm afraid it's not alot of help, but here is yesterday's correspondence with Ian S.:

Hi from the Gold Coast,
Just back from the UK Museums Tour and Thailand where we are publishing the final edition 'Lee-Enfield Rifles'. There is some more in the Canadian chapter. Don't recall from the top of my head about the bluing re. parkerising debate. The .22 later CNo.7 production was all blued from memory? Maybe that is a clue. Long Branch production details seem scant, and it is not reliable to quote from specimens given ordnance depots or factory refits.
Sorry I can't add more,
Ian


From:
To: idskennerton@hotmail.com
Subject: question about longbranch manufacturing
Date: Wed, 13 Dec 2006 18:41:49 -0500

Hi Ian,

Some of the Canadian Enfield collectors have been having a debate at www.milsurps.com about the timeframe in which Canadian Arsenals switched from Blued metal finish to Parkerizing.

Most everyone acknowledges that wartime No.4Mk1* Longbranches with a parkerized finish are post-war FTR. The debate centers around when in 1950 (or beyond) did Longbranch begin producing new rifles with a parkerized finish at the factory.

Some people maintain it was in the 93L block, while others think 95L block. As you know, both a 1950 serial ranges.

Do you have any information or insight which may prove useful?

Thanks in advance,
Claven2
www.milsurps.com moderator

[Lee Enfield]

While Skennerton's comment about "specimens not being reliable" is true, unfortunately that is all we have to go on.

I'm going to try to get ahold of some people about an air cadet squadron which used to shoot at the local club.

They had 7 of 10 consecutive c.no7s which were dated 1953 IIRC.

What I find quite curious is that the 91L-94L0 region is so lowly populated. Of course this whole thing has lasted a total of 1 1/2 weeks.

The Savage survey on gunboards has been going what 2 years now?

Personally what I was hoping for is 2-3 95L 1950s which are blued, that would have put paid to the whole question to my mind. This has not (yet) occured.

Oh yeah, for the last 8 years or so I have totally ignored the 1950 LB as being uninteresting. I guess that has changed...

[tiriaq]

Is it possible that many rifles from the 91-94 group were shipped/used/supplied in such a manner that not too many of that group were ever sold surplus? Apart from the rifles supplied to the Belgians, what happened to the 1950 rifles? Were they primarily Cdn. issue? I could see 1950 rifles being selected for private purchase by target shooters, because the rifles would have been recent, fresh and not made at the height of wartime production. Don't know if that would be a valid quality concern, though. Of Long Branch rifles now in private hands, how many were actually released in Canada, compared with how many came back to Canada from who knows where? As far as that goes, what percentage of WW2 production LBs were actually issued to Canadian troops? It would seem that a large quantity found its way to Turkey, from the UK, in the post WW2 period.

[Claven2]

I know for 100% certain that a number of 1950 LB's went to England. I have no idea why as the Brits had enough of their own No.4's in inventory, but I've owned one and seen many 1950 LB's that came back to Canada with the odd Brit small part or handguard on them bearing British nitro proofs and stamped "England" on the buttsocket. I don't recall any being suncorited though and I've never seen one electropencilled from an FTR...? Maybe issued to cadets or something? Or used by Canadian troops serving in the UK? Dunno... but there's more to the story of the 1950's LB than is commonly known I think.

I wonder if maybe a Brit unit or two in Korea got equipped with Canadian kit and a Canadian unit or two equipped with British kit for logistics reasons and the the respective rifles returned to the respective countries of issue with the troops?

[Lee Enfield]

Because the Brits paid for @ 50% of the LB facility during WWII, I believe that @ 50% of the guns (@450K) went to meet British contracts. Also I understand that Canada was in the British NATO supply chain in Western Europe.

Canada traded alot of our armament as (NATO orientated) "mutual assistance" during the '50s and early '60s in exchange for credits towards American equipment.

I suspect that a lot of them (91L-95Ls ect) ended up being sold on the commercial markets in Europe (and of course the 'States) ala the recent Italian Navy sale....
There are apparently lots of LBs in Australia as well. Lawrance Ord advertised barreled actions & stripped receivers until quite recently.

I have been told that the Dutch destroyed ALL of their enfields in the early '90s.

Between GCA '68 in the 'States & the '86 GOPA, Canadians saw a lot of "milsurp" that we would never see today.

[tiriaq]

As far as the Dutch go, there were some 74L series 32TP scopes with rings sold in the UK, apparently from rifles the Dutch scrapped.

[Lee Enfield]

1949 (blued) & 1950 (parkerized)

[tiriaq]

Further to our previous discussions, my '50's receiver more closely resembles the one in the photo, rather than the '49 illustrated. Go with Parked for your survey.