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

[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?

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.

[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.

[jstr303]

I don't want to get off the barrel subject, but I thought I should mention that I am researching the distinct possibility that this rifle is a South African Enfield. I found a few marks on the stock after I received it on Tuesday. There is nothing marked on the metal, but the fore stock definitely has some South African marks. I've had a private discussion with limpetmine starting with the serial number. He mentioned it looked like a South African. I could not find the possible import marks he suggested I look for, but I was going to take a closer look when I tear it down for cleaning and lube. I thought if I could prove it's South African, then it would validate why its in such great condition after all these years. That topic is for another thread later.

Now back on topic. Still looking for barrel information, and no, the barrel does not look to be South African made.

Sorry for the spelling on that previous post. That is chiming not chimming