Markings on 1943 Lithgow SMLE

[Stumblebum]

I'm new to this board, so greetings everyone. I'm looking for a little assistance in understanding what a couple of markings might represent on a 1943 Lithgow No.1 MkIII* I recently got my hands on. First, an "R" I find on the bottom of the butt stock grip next to the trigger guard: Attachment 44775 Next, the prominent "B" on the bottom of the fore stock: Attachment 44776 Here are a couple of views showing the general condition and configuration of the rifle: Attachment 44777Attachment 44778

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.

[aussietomcatter]

I'll look the markings up for you, but I'm sure someone will get in first.

That rifle appears to be in beautiful condition though mate, good job.

[Stumblebum]

Thank you very much Aussietom, I hope you can turn something up. The rifle is indeed in remarkable shape - the condition of the wood and finish on the metal so much so it makes me suspicious that they have had some help along the way, but I am yet novice enough to not be able to determine that on my own for sure. All I know without Kennerton's book or the help of someone such as yourself is that other than the expected manufacturer's marks from Lithgow and other appropriate Aussie part suppliers - I'm unable to recognize any markings to indicate how or to whom the rifle was issued or did service. This puzzles me. Oh, yeah - the numbers all match and there is no importers mark on it anywhere I've found.

[Ridolpho]

Stumblebum: Very nice rifle. I can't help with the mystery markings but as to the general appearance and finish, it looks very similar to my '21 Lithgow ('43 refurb)- especially the colour of the parkerizing. Mine doesn't appear to have been used hard after the refit as the bore is like a mirror. Has proven very accurate. Have you shot yours yet?

Ridolpho

[Stumblebum]

No I haven't shot it yet Ridolpho. It does not have the recoil pads inside the forestock, which until I know more (or do something about it) makes me slightly nervous. Apparently it's one of the ones made during the run at Lithgow where they omitted them.

[Homer]

Stumblebum: Very nice rifle. I can't help with the mystery markings but as to the general appearance and finish, it looks very similar to my '21 Lithgow ('43 refurb)- especially the colour of the parkerizing. Mine doesn't appear to have been used hard after the refit as the bore is like a mirror. Has proven very accurate. Have you shot yours yet?

Ridolpho

Ridolpho, I'm curious about your rifle. What detail indicates it was refurbed in 43?

[Ridolpho]

Stumblebum: If the wooden draws are nice and snug it should be OK to shoot. If the forend fits tightly against the butt socket and the front triggerguard screw is clamping the forend nicely then the draws don't really deal with much "recoil" force (my opinion, anyway). And Homer- I was going from memory (big mistake) at work about the dates of refurb on my Lithgow. Looking at it now, it has two dates stamped on the right side of the butt: "MA Lithgow SMLE III* 1942" and further forward, "R MA 5/46". The buttstock and forend are both replacement Slazenger and the barrel is a replacement though I can't recall if there is a date stamped on it. The bolt serial# matches the body: A91999 (1921). Got a chance to shoot it on a proper range with real scorers at 400m and was surprised how well it did. My favorite MkIII*.

Ridolpho

[Homer]

The recoil draws absorb all of the impact snd the trigger guard screw does little to assist. Its a trigger screw and the clamping force between trigger guard, bush snd action is perpendicular to the forces created from recoil.
If there is no wear or shrinkage present in the draws and the fit between action and forend is snug without any allowable movement, it maybe ok to shoot as is but there are other factors and I believe some risk. If there is any notable wear and movement, you need to rectify it. How you do this is another debate.

[Ridolpho]

Homer: The analysis that makes the most sense to me is that upon firing, the recoil is primarily transfered directly through the action body into the butt and shoulder (this is rather obvious). A secondary effect is the alteration of the angle between barrel and butt which is where the forend comes into play (or is stressed). If the forend fits tightly and is held firmly by the front triggerguard screw then the forend resists this bending. Note that the lugs on the body are never referred to as recoil lugs in any original drawings or descriptions- always "sear lugs". Now, on the other hand, I believe it's Son who feels that a tight grip on the forend with left hand and pushing out with the arm on firing actually sees the draws supporting some direct recoil which does make sense. I do believe the front triggerguard screw is very important and would refer to examples RJW shows in his accurizing book of old target rifles that had transverse ridges milled on the underside of the body to increase the resistence to slip between body and forend. Excuse the lengthy post but I find this aspect of Lee Enfields fascinating and enjoy the debate.

Ridolpho

[Stumblebum]

Well fellas, you've given me some things to check on the rifle in more detail, and some thoughts to mull over, that's for sure. Here's a peak at the appropriate point inside the stock if it helps with further discussion: Attachment 44790

The one time I've disassembled the rifle so far, it took some gentle persuasion with a wooden dowel and hammer on alternate sides of the stock at the back of the receiver in order to get them apart.