Interesting Long Branch No.4 MK.1*

[lawrence_n]

[QUOTE=Alan de Enfield;311510]An extract from an article by some old Brit guy who was something to do with REME

[I]If your butt has a letter R over the word REME, either painted or stamped, it means REJECTED BY THE REME EXAMINER. It doesn’t mean repaired or repairable, it means, listen to me – REJECTED. It’s marked with the REME logo to show those back in the Base Ordnance Depots that it is a REME reject as opposed to an Ordnance reject. Only the highest level of REME in-inspector will mark this and the REME overrule the Ordnance in all things engineering. That’s why we are called engineers.

Now, the next thing………. The R-REME or ZF is painted or stamped onto the butt because there’s nowhere to paint it on the rifle body. Imagine a Bren with a jammed-up solid gas cylinder needing a FTR to replace it (and they do jam solid too…..). Would the examiner paint the ZF on the gas cylinder? OF course not! Look and think logically those forumers who think and write otherwise………… When we write off vehicles, we paint the word CAST in yellow paint on the bonnet, even if it’s a well worn out Bedford with a cracked and buckled chassis. Is that clear enough?


Crystal! One last question. If a rifle is "rejected" for whatever reason, should there not be a stamp on metal somewhere obvious? I've seen the "DP" stamp on firearms and they're not hidden. They're stamped large where a cursory look is all that's needed to find it. Considering the stamp on the butt is lightly struck, and a butt can be replaced in a matter of moments, it doesn't make any logical sense. Understand, I'm not questioning your obvious knowledge, just asking for clarification. One would think the REME mark on the wood would have a corresponding rejection stamp on the metal. I tried to find British Ordnance or Engineers rejections stamps on Google and no joy. Ian Skennerton's book is excellent, but a little thin on marks and stamps.

[stevebc]

Crystal! One last question. If a rifle is "rejected" for whatever reason, should there not be a stamp on metal somewhere obvious? I've seen the "DP" stamp on firearms and they're not hidden. They're stamped large where a cursory look is all that's needed to find it. Considering the stamp on the butt is lightly struck, and a butt can be replaced in a matter of moments, it doesn't make any logical sense. Understand, I'm not questioning your obvious knowledge, just asking for clarification. One would think the REME mark on the wood would have a corresponding rejection stamp on the metal.

My thoughts exactly. Something doesn't add up here.

[Peter Laidler]

It must be something in the water in Canada Steve if you can't understand this. It all adds up...... I try to make it as simple as I can, believe me......... Just take the Land Rover that has had a major pallet landing by parachute. The chassis is bent and buckled but it looks perfect. It goes into the REME workshop and the examiner looks at it on the pit and finds damage to the chassis that cannot be repaired or that makes it beyond any form of economic repair.

Now, my question for you lads! Does the examiner
a) paint ZF/BER - CAST on the chassis in yellow paint and then drive it out to the cast vehicle park or does he;
b) paint CAST in xxxxing great big yellow letters on the drivers windscreen (and a big dob of yellow paint on the cover of the vehicle record book)

On Radio sets, the big yellow marker is on the operating face........

And just in case you ain't not read all of the articles that relate to this subject, DP rifles and machine guns DO have xxxxing great white bands (or yellow in Oz or Red/White/Red in India) together with an equally xxxxing great big DP in black in them. And....., I know that you're not going to believe this, it's painted on the wood too! And there's probably nothing wrong with the wood. There's even a xxxxing great stack of pictures to amply illustrate the point.

Sometimes I didn't understand the Army system of doing things but I just accepted it for what it was and did it. Or is it me that's missing something?

Incidentally, the rifle might NOT have been rejected for the barrel, it could be many other things that perhaps your advisers aren't aware of, such as magazine stop face or sear stop height or...... or.........

[Alan de Enfield]

It must be something in the water in Canada .........

Peter - there is always some one with more/better knowledge - all you'll end up doing is disturbing the flies, give up now !!!!

[stevebc]

Peter - there is always some one with more/better knowledge - all you'll end up doing is disturbing the flies, give up now !!!!

Excuse me to both of you- I'm not claiming to know better, nor am I thick. I'm trying to understand why, if the rifle was REJECTED, stamps would only be applied to the butt, and not to the receiver, or barrel, or some other part made of metal. You know, the equivalent of the big blotch of yellow paint on the radio face. With the OP's "radio" it would seem that REME decided to put a small dab of yellow on the back.

The sarcasm doesn't help, nor was it called for.

[Surpmil]

Could just be a butt exchanged from from a different rifle to which the stamps were applicable; I believe we've seen that before here.

What length is the butt?

[lawrence_n]

Could just be a butt exchanged from from a different rifle to which the stamps were applicable; I believe we've seen that before here.

What length is the butt?

The butt is marked "N" for normal. It's not a replacement butt as the flitch that the stock came from was close to the sapwood and the lighter colour carries over into the butt itself. As well, all the Long Branch stampings match. I have gotten more information from Charles Stratton's book "British Enfield Rifles, Vol. 2 - Lee Enfield No. 4 & 5 Rifles". According to his book and the stamps on the barrel, this rifle was checked over at Fazakerly, which was when the British proofs at the muzzle were applied, and then stamped "England" prior to export. I've had 2 very knowledgeable folks go over the rifle with a fine-toothed comb and we've had it all to bits. The chamber was cast, the bore was slugged, and it was checked for head space. Why was the "Rejected/REME" stamp applied? Without actually talking to whoever stamped it, we'll never know. Given how lightly the stamp was struck, for all we know the tech was testing how much pressure was needed to make an impression on walnut as opposed to beech or birch. All I can do is speculate. Though none of us could see any mechanical or functional issues with this rifle, to err on the side of caution I'm going to put it into a rest and fire the first few shots from a safe distance. As a representative of a Long Branch wartime rifle, it's still one of the nicest I've ever had.

[Alan de Enfield]

.... I have gotten more information from Charles Stratton's book "British Enfield Rifles, Vol. 2 - Lee Enfield No. 4 & 5 Rifles". According to his book and the stamps on the barrel, this rifle was checked over at Fazakerly, which was when the British proofs at the muzzle were applied, and then stamped "England" prior to export. .

The proof marks could not have been applied by Fazakerly as they are not authorised to proof firearms.
In the UK firearms can only be proved (proofed) by the Government appointed proof-houses in either Birmingham or London. These are civilian proof marks and would have been applied when the rifle was sold from the military to the UK civilian gun market.

The England 'export' mark is actually a US import mark required by the US prior to the 1968 change in import regualations. The UK does not 'export' mark anything.

Whilst Stratton has a lot of good information - if it is ,as you state, then he is incorrect regarding the UK proof marks.

[Peter Laidler]

To be honest Lawrence, and don't take this the wrong way, but if these two knowledgeable people who checked the rifle in thread 27 over are the same knowledgeable people who have given you the info you have stated in the previous threads, then I'd say......... How do I put this diplomatically............. You need to find a few more LESS knowledgeable blokes!

Just give us their qualifications for stating some of this pure, er...., misinformation. The REME stamp was probably stamped pretty hard when it was stamped. Wood does 'heal' over time. My No5 rifle has the BIG 40BW 69 marks on the butt, but they're pretty shallow now as 1969 was a long time ago!

Maybe you could ask these knowledgeable people where their Armouring-world experience came from because they've been proved wrong - not just wrong, but embarrisingly wrong a couple of times so far. I wish I was in a position to examine it is all I am going to say

[Surpmil]

Butts and stocks were not made from the same "flitch" of wood so any matching is coincidental.

I asked about the length because if it was a L butt it might have been fitted by a previous owner who preferred that length for shooting. As L butts are not easy to find, he might have used one with such a stamp, and then in the course of time or change of ownership the original butt was never refitted to the rifle. Such things happen.

One wonders why a rejected rifle, and that presumably means one Beyond Economic Repair, would not simply be stripped for parts and scrapped or else converted to DP status?
No need for parts and plenty of DP rifles on hand already? A single stamp and off it goes for disposal?

Interesting that we see so few rifles with that marking anyway; I don't ever remember hearing of another. Anyone else seen one? Thinking about it though, that doesn't seem so odd since policies change over time and a rifle that might have stripped/DP'd in say 1950, might at some later date have just been just sent for disposal?

And in case I give that impression, I am not second-guessing what you say Peter; it's not my place to do so, though I do reserve the right to form my own opinion. This thread must be a matter of very little interest to you after handling an innumerable number of rifles, but it is a slightly interesting question to us amateurs, like so many of the S.A. minutiae we discuss on these forums.

Without any cues but our style of writing, it's difficult for us not to give false impressions at times. I don't think anyone here feels they know "as much as you do and that little bit more they already knew" since we all know, or should, that we don't even know how much we don't know on these subjects; but hopefully we're learning all the time.