Longbranch No4 Mk1* grip mark

[Surpmil]

One can think of other scenarios in which such a stamp might be applied, such as intended exports that never were exported for some reason, or rifles overhauled for NATO (or non-NATO) allies etc. In the latter case, as so many Long Branch produced weapons remained in UK hands, among others, such a mark might have had a purpose in making clear that the weapons had been supplied from Canada, and not some other source.

As for the purported destruction of large stocks of weapons before the Korean War, I am highly skeptical. I know someone who worked in a facility in the late 1950s and into the 1960s where huge quantities of Long Branch No4s, Stens and Inglis Brens were comprehensively overhauled, refinished and repacked for supply to Turkey, Greece and probably other countries, and these were all or almost all WWII production weapons.

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.

[doca]

Yea, we exported a bunch but the War Assets Corp. destroyed WW2 surplus.

At the time of destruction, LB was still making No 4's mainly for export, as I understand it. Pakistan, India, NZ for sure ended up with thousands, but that mass exportation occurred after the CAF dumped the 4's altogether in 1954, with the issue of the C1 FN. I remember reading that 10,000 4's were sent to India, or was that Pakistan. Regardless, it fits well with your friend who saw them in the late 50's.

From what I could see, the only LBs left in England post-war were those left behind in part bins, or acquired by allied troops and likely written off.

One other thing you clipped was the NATO marking.

As I said before, the CAF has marked every rifle marked with CANADA since the FN, for sure. I see no reason why the CAF wouldn't stamp CANADA on rifles from the Korean war (UN) period. Especially if you consider that the No 4's were still the main battle rifle and that we sent less than 27,000 people, including a bunch who bunch would wouldn't be carrying a battle rifle; cooks, chaplains, officers, admin staff, machine gunners, anti-armour and the list goes on.....

While a lot of those Korean 4's could easily have been exported to the US, they'd already be marked from the UN mission. This would explain why the 4 I've found (only on Canada from BC to NS) are all marked in exactly the same place, with the same uniformity. That doesn't smell like an import stamp to me because it implies uniformity across US importers, before any was mandated. Alternatively, they were Korean wartime and never exported. In the end, who knows; I just can't conform to the impression that is an import stamp because while some personal opinion supports it, there's actual evidence that suggests more logical hypothesis.

[Surpmil]

From what I could see, the only LBs left in England post-war were those left behind in part bins, or acquired by allied troops and likely written off.

The fact that so many went through UK FTR in the 40s and 50s, including to Mk1/2 status, proves that was not the case.

Would be interested to see reproduced whatever evidence there is that War Assets Corp. destroyed large numbers of No4's etc. in the immediate postwar period. There's good evidence that large quantities of older arms were destroyed: Rosses, pre-SMLE Lee Enfields and perhaps SMLEs as well. From reports I've heard years ago, there was a surprising amount of pre-WWI weaponry still on hand even after WWII, and most of this went to the smelters.

[limpetmine]

What is your documentation for the purported destruction of rifles? Never read that, never heard that, not once. You ask for "proof". Let's see yours.

Yea, we exported a bunch but the War Assets Corp. destroyed WW2 surplus.

At the time of destruction, LB was still making No 4's mainly for export, as I understand it. Pakistan, India, NZ for sure ended up with thousands, but that mass exportation occurred after the CAF dumped the 4's altogether in 1954, with the issue of the C1 FN. I remember reading that 10,000 4's were sent to India, or was that Pakistan. Regardless, it fits well with your friend who saw them in the late 50's.

From what I could see, the only LBs left in England post-war were those left behind in part bins, or acquired by allied troops and likely written off.

One other thing you clipped was the NATO marking.

As I said before, the CAF has marked every rifle marked with CANADA since the FN, for sure. I see no reason why the CAF wouldn't stamp CANADA on rifles from the Korean war (UN) period. Especially if you consider that the No 4's were still the main battle rifle and that we sent less than 27,000 people, including a bunch who bunch would wouldn't be carrying a battle rifle; cooks, chaplains, officers, admin staff, machine gunners, anti-armour and the list goes on.....

While a lot of those Korean 4's could easily have been exported to the US, they'd already be marked from the UN mission. This would explain why the 4 I've found (only on Canada from BC to NS) are all marked in exactly the same place, with the same uniformity. That doesn't smell like an import stamp to me because it implies uniformity across US importers, before any was mandated. Alternatively, they were Korean wartime and never exported. In the end, who knows; I just can't conform to the impression that is an import stamp because while some personal opinion supports it, there's actual evidence that suggests more logical hypothesis.