x westie, A simple question that could create an answer pages long!

That said, of the three BSA was the only privately owned manufacturer, both Fazakerley and Maltby were government Royal Ordinance Factories.

Fazakerley was designed as a 100% in-house manufacturer. Maltby was designed to make use of subcontractors for the minor parts and made only the action body, barrel, trigger assembly, bolt and bolt head. BSA was also a 100% in-house manufacturer. Fazakerley and BSA small parts were also in part augmented by the subcontractors.

From an old poll I conducted, Maltby was the first to manufacture 2-groove barrels, starting in 1941 and sometime in '43 became 100% 2-groove. Fazakerley started 2-groove production in '42, but continued 5-groove production through out the war years. BSA doesn't look to have manufactured any 2-groove barrels.

Maltby apparently was up and running first as 1941 production included a D prefix by one report, Fazakerley second and BSA last. BSA may've been last to commence production due to helping the ROFs during start-up.

Only Maltby and BSA were officially involved in the (T) rifle program, tho' Fazakerley certainly could've been included quality wise. As more and more Maltby's production became 2-groove, BSA became the dominant (T) rifle.

Only Fazakerley and BSA were involved in No.5 production.

All three were very equal quality wise. Cosmetically BSA ranks number 1 and Maltby generally last. Part of Maltby's plan to speed production was to reduce finishing work. Through perhaps mid '42 all three were at their best and quite equal cosmetically.

Brad

PS I've tried to keep my unreasonable fondness for Maltbys at bay throughout this post.