Skennerton vs Stratton

[breakeyp]

B52, Short answer...Skennerton heavily researched the L-E pedigree. Lots of useful and interesting data. Stratton used previously published data and a very extensive poll of collectors to gather data. Brad

Would someone knowledgeable please state how many entries Stratton had in his data base? It was generated by responses to his request in the now defunct Lee Enfield Collector's Digest published out of Alaska. This was before email/ internet and everything was done by postal mail. A sample questionaire as included in one LECD issue mailing and respondents were expected to duplicate the form for each LE.

In my opinion and memory, the survey was flawed in that he expected the correspondent to know what model he had (greater knowledge than most had at the time) and made no provision for identifying conversions, unique markings or receivers with several different serial numbers.

I was suprised that he made no statistical analysis of the data but that lends support to my contention that he did not have sufficient data points to work with.

Sadly he is gone and we may never know the details. My comments are not intended to take away or disparage the service he has provided to the collecting community but rather to put things in perspective.

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.

[krinko]

Buy Skennerton and skip Stratton---so to speak.
-----krinko

[5thBatt]

Buy Skennerton first, collect all the others later.

[Enfieldlock]

The two authors' books tend to serve different purposes. Skennerton wrote a history of the Lee-Enfield. Stratton approached the subject from a more technical viewpoint, detailing how various components changed over the years and through various models of rifle.

Both are valuable sources of info to the serious collector. I am privileged in having a signed set of Stratton's books. It is a shame he passed on before his mission was completed. He was going to incorporate all the research on Enfield threads into later editions of his work.

[Son]

I'ts easy to tell which book a new collector has read when they start refering to their rifle having "third variant sight ears" and "second variant" something else... A total load of hogwash. If they read and understood Skennerton's work, they'd be able to read 95% of rifles from the markings and know where to find the information as to how the piece was supposed to look.
Personally I think the best reference material on the subject is the LOC. (trust the makers to know all the details...) The easiest way to understand/ find what you want in them is to go via Skennerton's books.

[breakeyp]

I'ts easy to tell which book a new collector has read when they start refering to their rifle having "third variant sight ears" and "second variant" something else... A total load of hogwash. If they read and understood Skennerton's work, they'd be able to read 95% of rifles from the markings and know where to find the information as to how the piece was supposed to look.
Personally I think the best reference material on the subject is the LOC. (trust the makers to know all the details...) The easiest way to understand/ find what you want in them is to go via Skennerton's books.

You make a valid point. I was suprised that the pattern room collection did not include manufacturing variations until it was explained to me that the collection was expanded based on donations from confiscated Police arms, turn ins and rifles evaluated by the services that had no further use for them. There was no stated intent to collect all manufacturing variations including rebuilds.