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

[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

[Peter Laidler]

Yes, I see all of that BUT..... actually stamping on the bodyside was definitely NOT allowed (the small T excepted and that was actually sanctioned in writing!) I'm sure that the factory wouldn't stamp the rifle as Fazakerley were already geared up to engrave zillions more to boot. There's something strange there that I can already see............ I say that it is a home comverted Mk1* to Mk1/3. Not bad...... but no cigar!

[jstr303]

Peter,

Anything is possible. /2 and /3 Enfields are a little more rare, but no premium is paid for them. There is no reason for someone to go to the trouble of not only marking it, but installing the mod, then duplicating the Fazakerly finish.

This thread is not about claiming anything. It's about barrel identification. Please stay on topic.

I only paid for a nice looking rifle with an excellent barrel so I can put her to work shooting. The seller made no claims other than she had a great barrel, a nice stock, and metal finish, and that she doesn't appear to have been used alot. He's happy, I'm happy, why don't you be happy. After all, we all love to own and shoot Enfield Rifles.

[Peter Laidler]

Sorry about that jstr. You'll have to forgive me going off at a tangent. I'm a bit of a novice on the forum and Enfields generally, not having seen many. I just assumed that even being off topic slightly, it'd be worth mentioning something. Sort of like showing your new car and someone notices that it's got bald tyres. I'll consider my wrist well and truly smacked

[Sunray]

"...stamped No 4 Mk 1*/3, Long Branch, 1942..." Means the receiver was made in 1942(an early LB at that. Highly likely it has been reblued by somebody not government too). It could have been FTR'd by anybody doing that at any time. Without the BNP stamps means it was very likely done here vs anywhere that sent stuff through England. However, it's also possible that no government arsenal had anything to do with it.
It doesn't seem to have any broad arrows either.

[RobD]

I'd be very interested to see the marks on the wood that you think may be South African.
Rob

[jstr303]

In the interest of Enfield truths (fun, debate, historical learning, and education), in a day or so I will start a new thread with more pictures of the receiver body. It will be an opportunity for everyone to do battle or have a few laughs. I will state my updated theory about this receiver, but I have no intentions of participating because to me, for a rifle made to shoot, it does not really matter.

If from that point someone needs more pictures or has questions, you guys and girls can draw straws as to who will private message me to get what is needed for your discussion. If you come up with the answer, have some one put it in an Enfield book.

For now I will be safety checking and preparing "Nora" for an up and coming day at the range. Yes, from day one, I named her Nora. I've heard stories of men that carried their rifles into battle named them. I have never named (yet) any of my rifles or pistols. Not even my cherished M1 or 1903/A3. Darn, another /3 thing. She was named that because of something that came up the day I brought her home. The name was a perfect fit.

I'm not mad and I'm not being sarcastic. I just can't figure out how a forum on Enfield collecting has such expertise on receiver markings (that I did not ask about), but nobody knows what an Enfield barrel even looks like (what I did ask about.) Surely some one has seen these barrel markings before, or has pictures of their own barrels that may be similar

[jstr303]

RobD,

Thanks for not asking about the receiver. The markings on the stock that I previously had never seen before, at first glance, looked like alien marks from a crashed UFO. I'll attach pictures.

Zoom in and look close at the first string. It first looks like OW, but there is a very faint D infront of the O. I believe it is DOW, which I have seen marked on South African made Enfield parts.

The second character down looks like a South African inspection mark I've seen in pictures of of South African Enfield receivers, metal parts, and stocks.

The third character down is the U with and arrow inside pointing down, which I've also seen in pictures of South African Enfields. Although, sometimes the arrow points up. The last one I can't make out for sure.

The receiver and barrel have no such marks. If the stock is South African, then it may have been replaced after it the rifle was brought into the United States from somewhere. I've heard that at one time South African Enfield stock sets were available in the US. I did not want to claim that this is a South African Enfield for sure.

The marks are on the fore stock near the bore end. That stock has an "M' stamp on it near the middle band. I have not looked into that yet, but my first thought it might refer to Maltby.

I hope you can help me with that part of the rifle. I understand that South Africa's war reserves back in the day had a number of /2, /3, and Mark II Enfields stored.

Is it true that some were issued to police, security forces, and rangers?

[jstr303]

Take note of the squared "S" mark on the ring. I thought it was a Savage made part, not S.A.

The band itself is Long Branch marked.

Mixed refinished parts that I thought was consistant with (not proof of) an official upgrade or FTR.

[RobD]

The U with broad arrow certainly would fit with a SA acceptance mark... though I am used to seeing such markings on the metal rather than the wood.
I can't comment on the significance of DOW.
As far as I am aware, SA did not manufacture wood for .303s, so even if the rifle saw service in SA, the woodwork and metalwork would have been made elsewhere.
I think your front sling swivel is made by Savage [the square S mark].
.303s in SA were used by various uniformed services, incl. the police, into the 1980s. But without specific stamps on the rifle, I can't say which service.
TerryLee, a regular forummer, is the world expert on British rifles in SA, so it may be worth sending him a PM in case he hasn't seen this thread.
Rob