Interesting long branch

[Surpmil]

I fail to see how the stocking up could be so different on one of the lightweights as compared a standard No4 or No5: the one piece stock is no advantage in that respect as far as I can see.

Whatever "black art" there is to fitting a forend to a Lee Enfield action, the fact that a buttstock is attached merely means when the forend is scrapped, the butt goes with it!

Had the one piece stock been made in plywood, we would really have been on to something. I suppose the more straight-line stock would appeal to modern tastes.

No doubt in my mind that nothing "invented in the Colonies (sic)" *sniff, sniff* could be accepted as better, whereas invented in Czechoslovakia was no problem at all!

Silly? Yes, but the student of history will not be surprised.

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.

[Alan de Enfield]

Whatever "black art" there is to fitting a forend to a Lee Enfield action, the fact that a buttstock is attached merely means when the forend is scrapped, the butt goes with it!

It is interesting to note a comment by PL in a very long post about FTR's

Extract :


Woodwork that was went to a specialized woodwork shop where the expensive butts were patched as necessary. You’ll identify these perfect toe and heel patches with their perfect oak pegs. Strangely, the butt was more expensive to produce than the fore-end. As for the fore-ends, you will identify some of these by the internally patched reinforces and occasionally, when the need arose, small dovetail patches at the rear right hand side of Mk1 fore-ends to close off the bolt head catch opening to suit needy Mk1* ‘no bolt head catch’ rifles. Mk1* rifle type fore-ends were not produced in the UK. Converted yes, produced, no!