HELP - ID this prototype (?) LB sniper scope & mount

[Claven2]

Some more info:

According to the guy who brought the scope it, it had been in his brother's basement over 40 years. Also, the scope is exactly 1" aft of the turrets, but between the turrets and the front bell, it's only .940" in diameter. The ring does bear here, but not evenly.

Still no further ahead on this

Of course, it's also possible the scope has nothing to do with the military and was later meted to an altered Enfield bracket and tin. That said, the scope itself looks ruggedized and military-like in its build and robustness. It is definitely over-built and heavier than any commercial steel-tubed scope.

[browningautorifle]

According to the guy who brought the scope it, it had been in his brother's basement over 40 years.

I heard that said about a Sten bayonet one time upon sale. Thing is, it had just been procured and marked by the vendor so someone was selling and buying a story.

[Claven2]

You know what's funny? It is NOT being sold as an expensive treasure. It is in a real case. The mount was once real. The knobs definitely are real.

Yet half of you guys think one of my good friends made this yesterday in my basement. Can we please get past that? It's not trying to be a faked ANYTING. It doesn;t even look like an established Enfield sniper pattern scope. A fake would look like a No.32!!!

If it turns out that nobody can ID it, it's a $200 curio - but it's not a recently made Chinese fake anything. Please don't bother commenting if that is all you have to offer.

FWIW, the brother was questioned about it - he didn't even know it was an Enfield bracket and was basically looking to give it to the shop for near nothing. It was buried under a whole bunch of old stuff in a long-forgotten box of other military in some old codger's house.

[browningautorifle]

I see, another one that wants to regulate who can speak and who can't...

[Badger]

Easy now folks...

Please and thank you....

Regards
Doug

[Gil Boyd]

Claven,
What could be helpful to try and assist you, would be if you could open the lid of the sight tin, as I asked earlier in the thread, at least that might help identify that, by the stamped marks.
My comments about China were simply made, to again help you as a consideration, no more no less, as clearly you didn't know where tjhe scope came from.
Have a good weekend

[Roger Payne]

I have resisted commenting up to now as I believe there are people on this forum who know far more about Canadian production than I do, & I can't pretend to know anything about this item. However, I would not write it off as a modern fake by any means - as Claven said, it COULD be something interesting, but if we cannot find out any more about it to clarify its history then it is just a curio with a big question mark over it, its value held down because of this.

It looks to me like the bracket once clearly was a genuine Canadian example. It has been extensively modified, & in my opinion rather roughly. However, the workmanship of the scope looks to me to be of a decent standard. As Lee Enfield said, it looks very much like there may be a lateral adjustment prism in the objective housing, similar to later Aldis & Model 1918 scopes. I'm not absolutely sure if this is the case but it looks like it may be. The range adjuster looks to be workmanlike. All in all, if everything works like it was intended to, then the person(s) who made it clearly had a degree of skill. Is it just me that thinks the back end of the scope tube looks like it may be the back end of a No32 (or a skimmed down No42 or 53), cut off at the level of the segment? If a No32 was cannibalised to make it then I would imagine it was a long time ago as I can't imagine anyone in their right mind destroying one now, even for a project like this.

[smle addict]

There was a mount like that for sale on ePay earlier this year, and there was a discussion about it here. I cant find the thread, but i did find this pic on another website. From the details, the owner was putting together No 4(T) clone. I believe this was the same mount that was for sale earlier this year. Very similiar to the set-up deing discussed here.

I post this only for discussion purposes, and not to offend or irriatate anyone.

[PrinzEugen]

If I can't find any proof that points to option No.1, it will get sold as No.2. Either way, it will get sold - the owner is not a collector - I just don't want my buddy to let a potentially significant treasure go cheaply to some local hunter for a nothing price to do time on a cut-down deer rifle.

Thing is, as you admit, no-one knows. Selling it as 'no.2' without someone coming forward who can prove it either way would be somewhat disingenuous as you don't know. If you're a well known Lee Enfield expert and you sell something with no proof claiming it's a Canadian Arsenals prototype I would suggest you might potentially harm your reputation. The safest thing is sell the scope case and as for the rest.... bin it?

[Roger Payne]

Thanks for the pic of the other mutilated mount, but this latter one is/was a British Rose Brothers example. The one Claven has shown is Canadian, so I think whilst they have both suffered a similar fate they are not one & the same.

I agree with you Prinz that it would be disingenuous to sell it as something it is not, but Claven only posted the thread yesterday in the very hope that someone else may be able to shed some light on it. If it was mine I wouldn't rush to do anything with it for a while. But that's just my two cents' worth.

In my view it is the scope itself that is potentially interesting, not the bracket & scope tin.



P.S. Apologies SMLE addict. I thought you were saying in your post above that the mount you showed a picture of & Claven's were one & the same. On re-reading your posting you aren't - sorry - mea culpa!