Long Branch No4 MK1* with Savage serial No's

[Chubbs]

Hi Guys

I have just bought a No4 MK1* which is clearly marked Long Branch 1944 on the receiver. However the bolt and stock collar have the number 16C62##. Is this a mating of the 2 factories. When would it have been done much later or at the time of fabrication.

Regards Chubbs

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.

[Peter Laidler]

Let me mention a typical scenario that could explain the situation as it has occurred many times to my knowledge in the UK - and probably in many other Armourers shops throughout the world.

85 various No4, No8, No5, Stens, Sterlings, L1A1's (notorious.....) etc etc go from the Ordnance Depot or a unit for some reason, into the main workshops for a total overhaul/rebuild. During the rebuild, following a complete, every last nut and bolt strip down and examination of every part, the slow assembly takes place. At the final out-inspection stage, there are 85 like brand new rifles but because of the actual bead blasting process, the phosphating and hard oven bake painting, 7 of them don't have easily identyifiable serial numbers. So the under worked R&I clerk double checks the paperwork against the rifles ready to go out and identifies the serial numbers missing from the rifles. He then send a note back to the In Inspector at the Armourers workshop that tells him that these 7 rifles are missing OR have unidentifiable serial numbers. But don't worry, the serial numbers, identified from the paperwork OR the unit WOCS books are these, xxxxx, xxxxx, xxxxx and so on.

So a supplementary job card/number is allocated and the Armourer will renumber each of the rifles with one of the numbers on the list. So 85 rifles come in and 85 fully identifiable rifles go out............... Naughty but that's a fact of how life works at the sharp end!

The alternative is for some form of fraud in its past

Some of the real experts will chime in and give other plausible (and some total rubbish too I expect......) explanations but that's my experience.

[green]

Cdn army practice was that if a rifle body was beyond repair a new body would be stamped the n/s body serial number and reissued.

[breakeyp]

The ones I have seen over the years made me think the shop jacked the serial number up and built a new rifle under it.

[Peter Laidler]

Your explanation is ambiguous Green. Are you saying that a new body, fresh from Canadian Ordnance stores would have an LB serial number on it?

That policy always seemed a bit strange or alien to us UK Armourers because if the BODY (the master component) was beyond repair/worn out - or whatever, then by default, so would or might be the remainder of the parts. And you'd STILL have to fit the barrel which was always by selective fitting in the first instance, that's why we had a rack full to try the best fit from. And you'd still have to fit the fore-end and the bolt. A bit like putting new uppers on a pair of shoes because the soles haven't worn out yet!

[Lee Enfield]

Your explanation is ambiguous Green. Are you saying that a new body, fresh from Canadian Ordnance stores would have an LB serial number on it?

That policy always seemed a bit strange or alien to us UK Armourers because if the BODY (the master component) was beyond repair/worn out - or whatever, then by default, so would or might be the remainder of the parts. And you'd STILL have to fit the barrel which was always by selective fitting in the first instance, that's why we had a rack full to try the best fit from. And you'd still have to fit the fore-end and the bolt. A bit like putting new uppers on a pair of shoes because the soles haven't worn out yet!

I would note that pre 1926 ish, I'm told that the British practice was to use the barrel serial number as the master serial number - and have observed several actions with cancelled original serial numbers "force matched" to the barrel serial number.

So from that observation, the Canadian practice of using replacement receivers was similar to an earlier British practice.

Bare Long Branch No4MkI* actions dated 1944 + 1945 were available from ord. stores with no serial numbers.

1954,55 & 56 dated Long Branch actions usually show out of year sequence or LB manufacturer serial numbers, demonstrating that they were ALL? Used simply as replacement receivers rather than for any production run.

This practice extended to (i've been told) Inglis High Powers and I have seen FN C1 & C2 rifle receivers with no original serial numbers.

Having said all of that, nearly all of the Long Branch No4 rifles that I have personally seen with Savage (or out of sequence/manufacturer) serial numbers show signs of the original serial number being removed.

[Peter Laidler]

I would respectfully disagree with whoever told you that L-E (thread 6, line 1. The body was always the master component (the accountable part) as we call it and never available as a replacement part from Ordnance in UK service and Aust/.NZ, certainly up to Base workshops where I worked. Look in the parts lists and the body is always marked as N/A for not available. There has been some discussion that this wasn't quite the case with later L1A1's in NZ for logistical reasons. But that's another matter.

[browningautorifle]

Some of the real experts will chime in

Pretty funny...

[Chubbs]

[QUOTE=Lee Enfield;394090]I would note that pre 1926 ish, I'm told that the British practice was to use the barrel serial number as the master serial number - and have observed several actions with cancelled original serial numbers "force matched" to the barrel serial number.

So from that observation, the Canadian practice of using replacement receivers was similar to an earlier British practice.

Bare Long Branch No4MkI* actions dated 1944 + 1945 were available from ord. stores with no serial numbers.

1954,55 & 56 dated Long Branch actions usually show out of year sequence or LB manufacturer serial numbers, demonstrating that they were ALL? Used simply as replacement receivers rather than for any production run.

Thanks for the replies

I guess then there is no way of knowing whether its a repaired savage or Longbranch.

Regards Chubbs

[Peter Laidler]

Without a photo of the bodyside markings there's no chance of identifying the originality of it.