A suffix on serial number - what parts were typically non-interchangeable?

[Frederick303]

Another related question. How about the combined YF Fazakerley serialed No 4 FTR rifles? I have seen them running from 1950 (~8,500), 1952 (~17,800) to 1953 with final serial numbers in excess of 30,500. Why were these FTR rifles reserialed? I known the standard answer is that was done to rifles that had unreadable serial numbers. Were there really that many rifles returned on which the serial number was unreadable or is there another reason? Also it seems that unlike other serial number ranges, these rifles had a no year associated with the serial number number assigned, and did not rollover each year. Any details you could provide would be of great interest.

Thanks in advance

[Peter Laidler]

All I can tell you is that, as I have known for over 40 years and told the forumers for many years, that the engraving of Fazakerley kit was done with what we call a 'scratchy-pen' in a sort of stencil frame. As such the numbers were virtually scratched on and soon became illegible. This applied to both Stens and rifles equally. The first time they came into an Armourers shop you'd find yourself re-stamping them.....and that caused problems when you couldn't read or decipher them too. When there was some dispute between, say a 5 and a 3 or an 8, then it's no use stamping the wrong figure on because it'd make the Quartermasters War Office Controlled Stores register (the WOCS books) wrong and so on. So we had to ....well, you get my drift.

There were big problems. This could be cured by the major workshops who would write off the books, say, 50 rifles or Sten guns from the unit, refurbish them and re-engrave the apparent numbers. THEN they'd go back onto the books with the new numbers but this time, there would be the usual paper-trail indicating why!

Before the 60's or so, new serial numbers were allocated from batches starting Z-xxxx, then backwards to Yxxxx then Xxxxx but these ran into ORIGINAL serial numbers in these sequences so, after the 60's or so, and I'm repeating myself here, new serial numbers were allocated using the new format of SA-63-Axxxx.

So, regardless of what you rifle serial number reads, if it started its life at Fazakerley, then it could be, well, anything by now.........................

As for the question 'were there really that many rifles with illegible serial numbers....'. Then you've got to believe it. There were thousands upon thousands of 'em until we banged new numbers on the butt sockets

And for those still asking about the A prefix, the same applied to No2 revolvers and Brens too. DP Brens, usually Mk1's and 2's regularly feature with an A prefix presumably for this 'non-interchangeable' parts reason. So unless anyone has another reason for it............................

[louthepou]

Peter, (I know that I've said this before) - but these tid bits of info are 100% enjoyable. Thanks for giving us access to the unique info in your head. Funny how as a kid, History was one of my least favorite subject. I guess books in a classroom simply weren't the right environment for sparking the interest.

Lou

[Peter Laidler]

Thanks for that Lou, but Engineering Physics is my subject..... I'm just repeating what I've learned working at the Armourers bench and what's written down. The trouble with what's just written down is that it's all pretty cold and matter of fact. It's knowing just what is behind the plain writing down that's interesting and I hope that I pass it on in an interesting way........

[jmoore]

Dang, now I'm confused.

Is it the prefix or the suffix 'A' that indicates non-interchangable parts?

Pardon my muddle-headedness!

[Peter Laidler]

Oooooooops, sorry about that JM, I meant to say the A suffix! Who can I blame this time? Ah, yes....., son Robert. He hasn't been blamed for anything since yesterday evening.