Force matched - me no understand

[englishman_ca]

I used to restore long Lees in much the same way as the Garrand collectors. I would switch out parts to create a rifle with parts of all the same manufacture. I would spend a lot of time and money chasing the right acceptance marks and inspection stamps for a rebuild. All cool and groovey when finished and just as it left the factory!

Then one day I bought a beater of a long Lee Enfield. 1896 LSA. It had been sent to RSAF enfield in 1898 and 1899. A visit to the Birmingham Repair facility in 1903. Then it went over to the Royal Navy through Chatham Naval worlkshop #3 in 1909, had a new barrel fitted before it was shipped out to where it had a rack number applied in 1910.
I determined all this by reading inspection stamps and the little date marks. The thing was a treasure trove for parts for my other rebuilds to make them correct. I had Enfield parts, BSA parts, Sparkbrook parts to switch out and harvest.

It then struck me what I was doing. Looking at this beater, I had a good idea that the Enfield marked nose cap was put on this LSA rifle in 1898 or 99. The rear volley sight and rear barrel band had been switched out by Sparkbrook in 1903. Instead of improving collectability, I was removing the history from the rifle. The next owner would now look at the rework stamps and wonder but never know what had been done in 1899 as now, much of the rework evidence was gone.

So now I take a different approach. If I restore a mix match rifle, it stays mix match. It tells a part of the rifle's story.
Yes, very tempting to switch out and put that BSA marked barrel band on that BSA. But no. Part is parts.

As my collecting experience grows, I can usually tell a restored or de-sportered rifle. Or at least I like to think that I can. I have noticed too many 'all correct' rifles. I am sure that some would be possible, but if everything is correct on a hundred year old service rifle, I am very suspicious.

I only ever restored one rifle that got the full works with new made replacement wood, replacement barrel and a full reblue. All matching manufacture and acceptance mark style. The thing looked like brand new when finished. There were no two serial numbers alike.

The thought did cross my mind that the rifle would be worth more money if it was all matching. But that would be faking, plain and simple, and easy to detect.
The term used for that would be 'humping the rifle'??? I think that one came from Australia?

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.