Surface Finish on Wartime No 4 and No 5 Rifles from ROF, ROM and BSA

[Peter Laidler]

You'd better start reading up the article of setting up bolts and then the bit where it goes into fitting the bolt head. Not just a take off and screw another in task. It is a mine of inter-related mechanics just waiting to trap the amateur enthusiasts that seem to ................... anyway............
Pete the Pom, Ex Australian Army 1967-70

[22SqnRAE]

22sqnRAE: Keep in mind that, from a collectors perspective, rifles that have obviously been through one or more in-service refits generally have less value than examples that may have factory original finish even if badly worn or heavily patinated (is that a word?). "Restoration" to factory new condition is effectively impossible and restoration to something emulating an in-service refit is probably best done with "shooter grade" rifles. For example, I have a mechanically excellent No. 4T that a talented previous owner parkerized and painted which is now, effectively, a "range rifle". It would be much more valuable (and just as good a shooter) had it been left worn and dinged. That is the perspective of the "collector" and certainly differs from the perspective of those that are mainly interested in shooting them. While I'm firmly in both camps, I think it is important that the message gets out that sometimes it's best to just leave them alone.

Ridolpho

Ridolpho, Thanks for the comment, I am completely in support of your views. Some are worth leaving 'as is' some are worth restoring, to a certain level.

The rifle this thread started on is a pig, and worthy of being bypassed in its current state by many. However, with some TLC and effort, I see merit in cleaning it up, gaining some experience in several technique refinements and having a better example to sell on to a less fastidious collector, or better - as you rightly point out - a range shooter.

I am buoyed by the comments several have made and the general feeling of concern over the 'fakery' of some restorations. There are several US based companies turning out 'new' rebuilds of old service rifles (I'm thinking K98, M1903A3 in particular.) These rifles may look 'new' and 'flash' but I feel quite cold about them. That others feel similar is a good sign. Authenticity is essential to a collector. Accuracy is essential to a preserver, I feel.

---------- Post added at 08:32 AM ---------- Previous post was at 08:29 AM ----------

You'd better start reading up the article of setting up bolts and then the bit where it goes into fitting the bolt head. Not just a take off and screw another in task. It is a mine of inter-related mechanics just waiting to trap the amateur enthusiasts that seem to ................... anyway............
Pete the Pom, Ex Australian Army 1967-70

Good advice, sir, thank you. I've been reading a few of your articles and am grateful for your generosity to share your knowledge and wit with us. Not sucking up here, just saying 'Thanks, Dig."

[Peter Laidler]

There's something quite satisfying about turning up on a range with a beaten up old dog - the rifle I mean and not my old VW Polo - and putting up a good show and score. I took an old clapped out almost ready for scrap No4T borrowed from the local TA/Reserves just before they were finally withdrawn for L42's. It was cold and wet and I was huddled under a big winter warfare parka at 1000 yards with hood pulled over my head and telescope and shooting against some really top stuff. Got 4th place at that range. Good feeling. People were stood around watching but I couldn't see then as I was all covered up and warm.

[No4Mk1(T)]

No4Mk1(T), a good question. This rifle is a bit of a pig. Its not particulalry rusted/damaged etc, it's badly treated and worn. It not a keeper to me with the barrel being probably, at best, a 5/10. As it is, it is not a valuable specimen.

I'm using this one as a trial for several techniques to restore some other rifles in the near future, back to 'as issued' condition. Peter's suggestion of 'blast, Park and paint' is with merit, as it's what a Base Armourer would do, as he suggests. I'm thinking this would be a fairly low-risk trial for my much higher value rifles.

Ok I'll offer an alternative option for your consideration.
You could use this rifle to hone you preservation skills. In my years of collecting I've found the ability to preserve a firearms original finish well stripping away years of crud and neglect to be of greater value to me than being able to refinish something to as new condition.
You could then resell your rifle to a collector who will appreciate the rifles originality and use the funds to purchase a sportterized rifle to restore. Ultimately there is a market for both preserved and restored rifles however an original preserved rifle will continue to appreciate in value where a restore rifle will rarely be worth more than what you paid for it. In many cases you will lose what you invested in the restoration. These comments are not intended to impugn anybody who decides to restore a rifle. Ultimately the choice is yours and you will draw no negative comments from me either way.

[englishman_ca]

It is oh so easy to buy a $300 rifle, spend $500 on it in parts and end up with a nice $400 one.

I concur with No4MkI(T) in that sporter rifles are great projects to practice upon.

When I restore, I often replace modified, broken, worn or poor finish parts. The take off parts just get tossed into the junk drawer. Eventually, I will have enough parts to assemble a complete rifle. When I do, it feels like a freebee!

This is when I get to test out some of my more severe processes for restoration. With the less than stellar parts I can draw file, sand blast, acid soak, drill and tap, weld or paint without any quarms.

I'll play the Devil's advocate;- There are lots of No.4 rifles out there. They are not an endangered species. I say go for it and apply your techniques, you won't devalue it from the way it is now.
The English seem to not worry about refinishing a gun like collectors in North America. Like a collectable car, if the paint is bad,,, then repaint it.
If your rifle has no finish to start with, so you are destroying nothing, its collector value has already been lost.
You could however, bring it back to presentable.

[22SqnRAE]

Ok I'll offer an alternative option for your consideration.
You could use this rifle to hone you preservation skills. In my years of collecting I've found the ability to preserve a firearms original finish well stripping away years of crud and neglect to be of greater value to me than being able to refinish something to as new condition.
You could then resell your rifle to a collector who will appreciate the rifles originality and use the funds to purchase a sportterized rifle to restore. Ultimately there is a market for both preserved and restored rifles however an original preserved rifle will continue to appreciate in value where a restore rifle will rarely be worth more than what you paid for it. In many cases you will lose what you invested in the restoration. These comments are not intended to impugn anybody who decides to restore a rifle. Ultimately the choice is yours and you will draw no negative comments from me either way.

Thanks No4MkI(T) your advice is the path I have decided to take. The rifle is (formerly) a No 4 Mk 1/2 that has been modified to 'look' like a No 5 Mk 1. As such, from the collector's point of view, it is worthless. For the novice, it may have some residual value as a '...good looking gun...' (I shuddder using that term...) The value to me in this rifle is a test-bed where I can experiment with some restoration techniques, get them slightly wrong and not be worried about the lasting damage, if it goes that far. The benefit will always be in increasing skill and knowledge to apply on much better specimens worthy of genuine preservation.

Appreciate your advice, thank you.

[22SqnRAE]

It is oh so easy to buy a $300 rifle, spend $500 on it in parts and end up with a nice $400 one.

I concur with No4MkI(T) in that sporter rifles are great projects to practice upon.

When I restore, I often replace modified, broken, worn or poor finish parts. The take off parts just get tossed into the junk drawer. Eventually, I will have enough parts to assemble a complete rifle. When I do, it feels like a freebee!

This is when I get to test out some of my more severe processes for restoration. With the less than stellar parts I can draw file, sand blast, acid soak, drill and tap, weld or paint without any quarms.

I'll play the Devil's advocate;- There are lots of No.4 rifles out there. They are not an endangered species. I say go for it and apply your techniques, you won't devalue it from the way it is now.
The English seem to not worry about refinishing a gun like collectors in North America. Like a collectable car, if the paint is bad,,, then repaint it.
If your rifle has no finish to start with, so you are destroying nothing, its collector value has already been lost.
You could however, bring it back to presentable.

G"day englishman ca, thanks for the comments and viewpoint.

As I just managed to tap out to No 4, I am adopting your (collective) suggestions of using this as a test bed for techniques.

I'm thinking about Peter Laidler's accurate comments regarding in-service repairs and maintenance. Aside from the first issue of the rifle from the Factory to the District Logistics Unit armoury, Service rifles are 'used' in varying degrees. Whether there is FTR work, or Unit EME work done on the rifle, it will have been changed, maintained, repaired along the way. So, if one is to restore a rifle, sympathetic to the period finish and material and process, then I wonder just how much arguing the fastidious collector can make over the 'authenticity?'

I really like your analogy of a collectible car. If one was to present a 1926 Model T Ford at a Concourse d'elegance, in "as stored condition" meaning dragged to of the back of a shed from the back of Old Jones' farm where it had been parked up since his grandfather died, it would be certainly 'original' but in a very shabby state of repair. Conversely, a three year restoration process, new paint, new upholstery, new tyres and current spark plugs that work certainly don't diminish the value of the artifact, but enhance it. Each to their own point of view on that.

I'll qualify my understanding of restoration. The commonly discussed US based commercial re-manufacturers of Service rifles, with rock or river in their logos, are certainly not restoring rifles. They are manufacturing, or re-manufacturing reproductions. Often very well to good quality. But never the less, not genuine.

This is a very helpful forum and in a short time I have been impressed by the passion and the genuine interest by others in expressing what is held important to them in authenticity and relevance. If one can't learn from others like the people in this forum, then I doubt if one could learn much at all.

[bigduke6]

22SqnRAE, i was looking at your "collection" , very nice.... I,ve a soft spot for the M1903 but have sold the two I had, in fact selling a lot of things to fund something else, you mention trade of parts etc, I've plenty of No4 front and rear Handguards ........

[Peter Laidler]

Now, if you'd SAID that your 'No5 rifle" was in fact a home made lash up, made from a now useless No4 (presuming that it's been lightened too) right at the start, this whole thread might have taken on a different tack............

[muffett.2008]

awe shucks Pete, then you wouldn't be able to hop on your hobby horse