Warner & Swasey scope mounted on a Patt. 14 (T)?

[jmoore]

Completely forgot the WWII pic! Anyway, the thing to make sure of is whether the P'14 bracket is same-same as the '03. One moment, there are books here! Novel concept. (I'm not at work for once). Back shortly.

According to Brophy, the Ross scope bracket has longer feet. No mention of P'14 brackets in his book.

Skennerton shows a picture of a Ross bracket -two long legs and one short(on the receiver ring). Pg 173 "The British Sniper" 1st ed.

Canadian W&S scopes number in their own series- only 3 digits long at most rather than Brophy's stated 4 digit S/N. (At least per the examples shown in print and previously seen w/Mk I eyeballs- not mine- just near by!)

_Apart from zeroing issues, having a spare set of scope guts might be nice- Even after a good cleaning, trash will still get on the lenses inside and drive you mad. The extra hole in the cover was a later service mod to keep the reticle from rotating. The down side is that the sealant is still on the cover screws on the balance of the scope, be a shame to pull it apart if it wasn't resealed recently.

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.

[Peconga]

Completely forgot the WWII pic! Anyway, the thing to make sure of is whether the P'14 bracket is same-same as the '03. One moment, there are books here! Novel concept. (I'm not at work for once). Back shortly.

According to Brophy, the Ross scope bracket has longer feet. No mention of P'14 brackets in his book.

Skennerton shows a picture of a Ross bracket -two long legs and one short(on the receiver ring). Pg 173 "The British Sniper" 1st ed.

Canadian W&S scopes number in their own series- only 3 digits long at most rather than Brophy's stated 4 digit S/N. (At least per the examples shown in print and previously seen w/Mk I eyeballs- not mine- just near by!)

Although I don't have an Enfield P14 or P17 on hand, I believe the base for the Springfield 1903 may fit without alteration, since the diameter and curvature of the left side receiver rail on both rifles is nearly identical. The mounting base on the 1903 has three "feet", all of which are the same length (unlike the Ross, apparently); as a reference I have attached some close-ups of the W&S base for the 1903.

However, the key question may be whether the "horns" on the Enfield's rear iron sight interfere with the body or rubber eyepiece of the telescopic sight, using the unmodified 1903 base. I intend to do a bit of field research on the question this weekend, by taking the scope and mount with me to a local gun show and doing a trial fit of the pieces on a P17.

As for the serial number, do you know where the Canadian W&S scopes were stamped? On the U.S. contract scopes, the serial number is stamped on the ID plate on the main body. In addition, those that were put into service are also stamped with the corresponding rifle number on the back of the mounting bracket (the female side, attached to the scope); the one shown below was never issued, so only has the scope number (4 digit) but no rifle number.

Cheers,
Peconga in Boise, Idaho