-
I'm not sure that theRSAF would have released L39's with No8 butts as the whole production was destined for the UK
MoD. And doing so would have necessated a relaxation in the contract. Additionally, if this were the case, then the Armourers EMER and parts list would reflect this. Alas, it doesn't! But you never know.............
-
The Following 2 Members Say Thank You to Peter Laidler For This Useful Post:
-
10-13-2009 07:45 AM
# ADS
Friends and Sponsors
-
Legacy Member
I do wonder if the majority were done ala "Fultons"!
When TR came into being in 1968 and SR"b" was dumped by the NRA it took a couple of years before shooters realised that they could have a differant butt fitted to their Enfield's if they so wished due to a relaxation in the rules of shooting, as dictated by the NRA at Bisley.
-
-
-
Legacy Member
Hmmm? Seems like a lot of work.
-
-
What sort of fore-end and butt is that? It doesn't look like anything I recognise having seen in my time as an Armourer
-
-
Legacy Member
What sort of fore-end and butt is that? It doesn't look like anything I recognise having seen in my time as an Armourer
Almost an Enforcer but not 'right' - I'd go for an Envoy ?
-
-
Legacy Member
Little sticky says Envoy.
-
-
Not that either as there is no BOLT, tie, fore-end or PLATE either. Any other guesses?
-
-
Legacy Member


Then what could it be?
-
-
Jeeeees... it's a cross between a wotsit and a thinggy...... Those are two other REME Armourers technical terms indicating that he hasn't got a clue. At this stage, the querie would be passed to the senior Armourer Sergeant who would come back with an answer, tell me, then I'd get the credit!!!!!
But seriously, after the first recoil from a No4, the back end would split like there's no tomorrow!
-
-
Legacy Member
Could the forend (albeit No4 based) be for a .22rf, which would obviously not have the recoil ?
Maybe an unfinished No8 forend ?
-