Could the N actually be a Z? seems that I saw that explained once beforeInformation
![]()
Warning: This is a relatively older thread
This discussion is older than 360 days. Some information contained in it may no longer be current.
Could the N actually be a Z? seems that I saw that explained once beforeInformation
![]()
Warning: This is a relatively older thread
This discussion is older than 360 days. Some information contained in it may no longer be current.
I found a post explaining the "Z", from Peter:
Still haven't gotten a chance to confirm it's an "N" yet.
I think it's a serif letter, so I will check to be certain.
I've seen a couple of "N"s on the knox form; they don't appear to relate to the condition of the rifle in any way, so presumably might be a property mark instead. It is plausible that its a relocated Navy "N", as the ones I've seen are a very similar size & font.
Thunderbox that seems to make sense, if it had been some condition mark I suppose that it would be somewhat well known.
---------- Post added at 05:45 PM ---------- Previous post was at 05:38 PM ----------
A "Z" for certain, the barrel is dated 1943 so it's a replacement to the original action body.
Just as a little associated aside, pretty well after the start of the war, the government factories were taken over by the old Ministry of Supply and the marking of Navy/Army or Air Force stocks ceased pretty well because if RAF Armourers wanted parts, they went through the normal RAF stores chain who got them from the Ministry of Supply in any case. I suppose there'll always be exceptions of course but the only odd parts that I ever encountered were Lanchester parts in Singapore that were all in heavy thick grease and in boxes marked with NOD with the store location in a code afterwards. Small arms were always a place near Portsmouth as I remember.
I just realized I made a mistake on my last post, it's an "N" for certain not a "Z".
Seventeen posts but still no photo?