Canadian Lee Enfield No. 4 Mk I (T)

[superbee]

I thought the first LB snipers were dated 1943?

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.

[stencollector]

The first snipers may have been done in 43, but they may have used earlier rifles. Problem is there are so many fakes (like this one) with early numbers, they skew any hope of forming a list of correct ones.

Agree with Roger on the bolt handle....it was the first thing I looked for. The serial number has been polished....you can still see some of the machining marks right up until the serial number starts. That is not to say that the army didn't re-number bolts, because they certainly did. I recently picked up about 80 LongBranch bolt bodies that came directly from Cdn service. Of those, maybe 25 had been renumbered, and it wasn't pretty either. The area was left in the white after grinding.

The serial number on the repro/doctored scope mount also look very suspect to me, as would be expected on a fake scope mount. However the numbers on the receiver wrist look fine.

[limpetmine]

Yes. In the 40L block. I've never seen or heard about a '42 LB sniper that wasn't a fake.

I thought the first LB snipers were dated 1943?

[Lee Enfield]

Yes. In the 40L block. I've never seen or heard about a '42 LB sniper that wasn't a fake.

one of the Long Branch No4 T's which was converted to L42 status was a 1942 dated action according to its recorded serial number.

one of the other ones would have been a 1941 dated action assuming the serial number on the list is correct.

Having said that several of the recorded L42 serial numbers are incorrect or incomplete - the guns (and in one case the transit chest) having surfaced for examination.