1942 Long Branch No 4 mk 1*/3 barrel ID

[jstr303]

I'm new here and this is my first post. I hope the pics attach ok.

I have a newly aquired 1942 Long Branch No.4 Mk1*/3. I'm trying to ID the barrel on it. I had assumed it was re-barreled during the upgrade, but there is no date on the barrel, and the rifle has no FTR marks. The proof marks on the barrel look as though the barrel was made in the UK and not Canada (as it should be because of the upgrade), and in 2 places it has the letter "I" stamped. The rifle looks like it has never been fired since the upgrade. The barrel has 5 lands/grooves, looks shiney and crisp with excelant depth. The feed ramp is still painted from the rifle refinish process with no scratches from cartridge feeding. The bolt head is a "0" whose face looks blued with no evidence of firing. The bolt body also looks new. The crown is great with the new finish from the upgrade still undisturbed. With no FTR marks and no date on the barrel, it's difficult to figure out what year it went through upgrade to Mk 2 specs.

By the way, I've looked around the internet and have not yet found a pic of a receiver like mine with a nice anvil stamped /3. If anyone has one or knows where one is I'd like to see it.

Attachment 103260Attachment 103261Attachment 103262Attachment 103263Attachment 103264Attachment 103265Attachment 103266Attachment 103267

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.

[limpetmine]

The /3 is the FTR marking.
Odd that there is no '54 or such date on the barrel. Nice rifle. Please PM me the serial # so I can include it in the data base. (Let me know when you're ready to move it)!!!!

[jstr303]

Yes, I know it was test fired after upgrade. I ment that it it appears not to have been fired as an issued rifle. I fitted a new bolt assembly on an older No4 Mk1 action, and after 20 rounds of test firing, that bolt face also looked unused.

[jstr303]

If you notice, the crossed flags proof mark has no crown or letters included. Its just crossed flags. One of the inspection marks includes a crown, a Z1 or 21, and the letter E on it's side. I assume that the E is for Enfield, the Z1/21 is the inspector ID, and the version of the crown image consistant with inspection marks from Great Briton.

On the subject of the FTR mark, during my intial search for pictures of /3 versions, the examples I found show a date like 49 and the letters FTR. I admit that I've only been searching for a few days, but i was hoping someone here has exaples of the "/3" mark being the only mark.

[jstr303]

With out a date on the barrel, and a marked FTR date, it's difficult to figure out when it was upgraded. The barrel looks like what Stratton's book referred to as a "First Variation" barrel, which he states would have been available on British made Mk 1s and found on some Fazakerly and P.O.F. No 4 Mk 2s. So I assume that type of barrel was available for the 49 thru early 50s Mk 2 upgrades.

[Peter Laidler]

I don't recall seeing a Mk1/2 opr 1/3 rifle that has hasn't been marked with the FTR marking. How do you know that it is in fact a Mk1/3 and not a Mk1/1 with a Mk2 fore-end?

[jstr303]

If you look at one of the pictures at the begining of this thread you can see the cut for simplified bolt removal as all No 4 Mk 1* rifles have. One picture shows the markings on the left side of the receiver. It's stamped No 4 Mk 1*/3, Long Branch, 1942. When I took her apart, you can see the block that was added for the new trigger location. You can tell it's a modification, nicely done, but not a Mk II receiver.

[jstr303]

Here are some pictures of the /3 modification. These were taken the other day when I took her apart for quick acceptance inspection. I had only a few days to accept the rifle or return it and get a refund. I happily accepted the rifle. Soon I will take her apart for proper cleaning and lube. You can see by the pictures that there is a light dusting on the sear. The picture makes it look like surface rust, but at the time with the naked eye, I didn't see any rust.

[limpetmine]

An FTR is "factory through repair". It is a repair. Not an "upgrade". As in "upgrade in mark", which is what the /3 is. It is the upgrade to the hung trigger from the receiver, as your pictures show. An FTR is parts replacement/wood, but not a change of mark.
FTR's have (usually) the year stamped on it, change of marks don't always have the year.
But some do. Here is an example of this.

If you notice, the crossed flags proof mark has no crown or letters included. Its just crossed flags. One of the inspection marks includes a crown, a Z1 or 21, and the letter E on it's side. I assume that the E is for Enfield, the Z1/21 is the inspector ID, and the version of the crown image consistant with inspection marks from Great Briton.

On the subject of the FTR mark, during my intial search for pictures of /3 versions, the examples I found show a date like 49 and the letters FTR. I admit that I've only been searching for a few days, but i was hoping someone here has exaples of the "/3" mark being the only mark.

So the question here is, did the FTR happen after the /3 conversion, or part of the conversion process?

[jstr303]

Myself, I would have not referred to it as an FTR, but then I have very little experience with the Enfields. Many others on this forum and other forums I've read keep wanting to refer to the upgrade to Mk 2 specs as an FTR. I've read a few books and checked out websites or blogs over the past year that indicate that rifles in for the upgrade were treated the same as if they were in for FTR. They say rifles would would come in by the crates in all sorts of condition from rusted/muddied/bloodied to top of the line. They indicate that rifles were still stripped down to barreled receivers.

Parts went one way and the barreld receivers went to the proper technicians to be examined. If they were determined to have at least 80% life left, they kept their original barrels and went on for cleaning, prep, upgrade, refinished. From that point they were rebuilt with refinished or new parts, restocked, tested then processed for final distribution to where ever. Is this true? I have no idea.

We all like to think that rifles in fantastic shape were sent in specifically for upgrade. To imagine that they were treated differently. We want to believe that they got most of their original parts back, restocked, tested, then sent back home to their units. Is this true? I have no idea.

The receiver of my new rifle looks too good to be true. There looks to be very few anomalies or artifacts lurking under the refinish job. I'd like to believe that this was an original unissued rifle that was sent in for just an upgrade (that it really didn't need.) Then it ended up not being issued again. It's fun to dream and fantisize, but the reality will be quite different. It's a service rifle that was upgraded and refinished. I didn't look for, or pay for, something that was suppose to be unique. I just wanted a factory serviced and refinshed shooter with an excellent barrel.

Once I learn more about this rifle, I'll start a new thread to show it and to report on the possible history that everyone can chime in on. Right now I need everyone to chime in on their opinions and facts on what really happend on this rifle's upgrade. Did she get to keep her oringinal barrel? or who made her replacement barrel? In fact who knows how many barrels she had had over the years or how many times she has been refinished.

Let the chimming continue. Please continue with the facts, photos, and opinions. Help me figure out this barrel.