No 1 Mk VI Converted to No 4 Mk I Sporter

[tikkathreebarrels]

Why do you intend to restore from sporter conversion back to military spec?
Wouldn't life be simpler all round just to buy another rifle with everything matching in the first place?

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.

[Brian B]

Why do you intend to restore from sporter conversion back to military spec?
Wouldn't life be simpler all round just to buy another rifle with everything matching in the first place?

You are absolutely correct, but I have never seen an original for sale!!

This isn't your everyday No 4 Mk I rifle.

Brian B

[bigduke6]

Why do you intend to restore from sporter conversion back to military spec?
Wouldn't life be simpler all round just to buy another rifle with everything matching in the first place?

Maybe it has something to do with this being a Milsurps forum, and is one of the things we do here.

If you can find an original, No1 Mk VI for the same price as Brian B paid for his sporterized one, i will double the money and buy it from you.

A lot of rare Milsurp rifles were sporterized, the owners at the time probably never had a second thought about the value in the future, and were probably more concerned at putting meat on the table.

Rare examples (which have been sporterized) do show up from time to time, in auctions, dealers shops etc, and can be purchased at a cheap price and can be lovingly restored to its originial spec, at a very reasonable cost to the new owner and at the same time preserving a piece of history. ( some of us even enjoy doing it)

[Beerhunter]

If you can find an original, No1 Mk VI for the same price as Brian B paid for his sporterized one,.

But, as I believe has been agreed, it isn't one of those rifles.

[Surpmil]

Interesting pass with a cutter down the side of the charger bridge. Don't recall seeing that on a No1 MkVI before.

[jmoore]

This rifle has me rethinking the longish thread a while back titled something similar to "Magazine Cutoff?". If the subinspector marks and other clues on this rifle are like that one, then maybe it too was an unfinished action as postulated by Thunderbox and others.

Regardless, that rifle (aside from the addition of the cutoff) ought to be a reasonably good guide as to the appearance of this rifle in it's original build up.

Something to try- RJW NZ's No.1 Mk.VI won't take a regular Singer rear sight assembly, due to a difference in the recess below the sight. How about this one?

ETA: the link to the old thread (I haven't reread it in a while, but I'm pressed for time!):

magazine cutoff - Military Surplus Collectors Forums

[Brian B]

More info as I pulled the rifle apart tonight after reading the old thread that jmoore referenced.

Rifle definately has the cutoff slot.

Just above the sear pivot under the woodline, there is a deep cutout. This is in addition the the lightening cut near the safety toggle.

Under the triggerguard on the action body is stamped "SBN 8".

Sear is stamped SM over 41

Mag release is broad arrow marked with crown and two more rows of marks that are hard to read. Opposite side is stamped "D 29"

Barrel is a 2 groove stamped with the serial number. I can't find a date mark, but it is stamped with the following:
Crown over N over 23, an "8", a "B", Crown over "N" over "31".

Also, there appears to be a Crown over a number stamped on the action just under where the bolt handle rests.

Pictures to follow later.

Thanks,

Brian

[RJW NZ]

Good onya, mate! Awesome find, I've been surprised at how much real enjoyment I've gotten on my mk6 project that has taken years to get right. It'll be a bit of a let down when I do. Have to find another. But,, the feeling of rescuing history is great.

If that front sight is in the stock position then you only need ? 2 inches of barrel? 100% bore out a smooth bore section and weld it on, tee hee, make it .45 to throw people. you know, it was a one off for winston churchill etc.

Go to messages, I've got some ideas, I'll write today/tomorrow

[Enfieldlock]

See first line of the chart on the link below.

http://freespace.virgin.net/j.frankl...al_numbers.htm

The engraved mark "ROF over 41" is an ROF Fazakerly mark. Faz was assembling RSAF made parts in 1940/1 while the production line was being built by Enfield. The output was a mix of Mark VI parts and later No4 parts made in 1935(ish). See line 5 on chart. I have one of the latter rifles, with an "A" suffix.

Many of these early Faz produced rifles were sought out and destroyed in the 1950s.

[jmoore]

Oddly enough, that chart doesn't fit either of the early Fazackerly rifles under examination, i.e. Brian B's or oldhound's.