John Rigby & Sons No. 1 Mk.III Sniper

[Surpmil]

Very interesting, but looking at the photos I still don't see how the sight protector would clear the tube, but apparently that is just the photos, or me!

If the scope was soldered into the front ring, why have a quick-detach mechanism in the rear ring?

And the locating stud you mention Georg, no doubt fitted into that recess inside the rear ring which is half in the upper and half in the lower parts of the ring, although the stud looks to have grown from a simple round into something more like the shape of a No.32 erector cell locking segment, and perhaps a plate soldered to the scope tube with a screw or rivet to hold it?

The drawing shows an angle of declination in the mounting of 0".2', so that explains the difference in alignment I noticed. Not sure how to read 0".2' though!

Whatever was in those dovetail grooves inside the rear ring might have been an afterthought when it was found that just the nut and screw were not enough to hold the scope in zero.

I wondered about pieces of rubber as Simon refers to, or some sort of fibre in those dovetails, but if the front mounting was rigid and non-detachable what would be the point of allowing movement in the rear mounting? It would merely allow the front mounting to "work" from the vibration of the scope when the rifle was fired.

So, we come back to the mystery of the front ring attachment: it must have been detachable or the rear ring design would be a pointless and expensive complication. Not that there haven't been pointless & expensive designs fielded of course!

I wonder if the scope was taken off to be refitted to a P14 by Alex Martin in 1940/41?

The forend and handguards look like a very early pattern for the SMLE; what year is the rifle if you don't mind telling?

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.