Enfield 1983 dated rifle??

[mrclark303]

Well, there we go, I never noticed the difference in machining cuts between the Lithgow and British rifles, only ever noticed the finishing.... Thinking on it, I have never had them out side by side, always worked on them individually.....Never too old to learn

I will fetch out my Lithgow, Enfied and BSA L1A1's this weekend and compare and contrast!

So, the C1A1, different again chaps???

Did Lithgow produce un-numbered bodies as parts ???, I do know you can find "in the white" unissued Lithgow gas blocks, so perhaps they did...

Just can't see why Enfield would bother doing this in 1983 though, unless it was as part of some sort of components compatibility trail perhaps, but in 1983, just can't see it.

All very odd...

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.

[mrclark303]

Sorry guys....my post vanished...so I did another one...then it reappeared as if by magic

[mrclark303]

Well there we go, always something new to learn, I noticed the difference in finish, but not the different machining cuts between inch patterns. I cant say I have ever compared British and Lithgow L1A1's directly side by side, always worked on one or the other, I will grab my Lithgow, BSA and Enfield L1's.....contrast and compare, this weekend.

Are there differences between Enfield and BSA production I wonder, lets see??

What about C1's....different again?

This is an interesting rifle, did Lithgow produce spare receivers ........ if so, why would the UK bother doing this in 1983 ..... some trial perhaps???

[Peter Laidler]

We didn't have spare bodies in the Ordnance system in Australia, even at our big Base workshops at Bandiana. Body worn (No1 was locking shoulder recess) then the rifle was ZF

[nzl1a1collector]

Body's were available in Australia, but were highly restricted according to my source they had to be accounted for each week to ensure none had gone missing.

Body's were available in New Zealand as well and its not uncommon to find rifles with replaced bodies, done at New Zealand Base Workshops. There are some that even have a variation of the Serial Number e.g.
NB AD6001234

NB of course standing for New Body.

[enbloc8]

Body's were available in Australia, but were highly restricted according to my source they had to be accounted for each week to ensure none had gone missing.

Body's were available in New Zealand as well and its not uncommon to find rifles with replaced bodies, done at New Zealand Base Workshops. There are some that even have a variation of the Serial Number e.g.
NB AD6001234

NB of course standing for New Body.

I have pictures of an ex-New Zealand rifle with a replaced body...the serial number is upright and centered below the ejection port (as for an early rifle), but below the forward end of the ejection port is an inverted "AD", as for a post-1971 serial. Really had me stumped for a while.

[Peter Laidler]

Nope......... The body was 'the rifle' or 'the classified master component' was not available as a replacement part from Ordnance stores in Australia. Rifle body damaged, then it was ZF. You don't put new uppers on a good sole and heel! Saw loads of damaged ones too. Even on active service in SVn, damaged bodies (and therefore ZF rifle) were what was called RHE'd (don't know what that stood for) but were deemed as 'classified scrap'. New rifle issued.

I was at the huge Northern Dist Ord Depot in NZ doing major Base Workshop repairs for the whole of the North. I realise that it was a long time ago, but we didn't have replacement bodies. The parts list does LIST them but a parts list is a list of parts and not a list of AVAILABLE parts.

As I always say.... I stand to be corrected. But if there is any serious dispute about this I will quuote the big guns - if you'll excuse the phrase

[enbloc8]

Here's some pics of the rifle I mentioned earlier. If it's not a 1960 rifle with a post-1971 body, what else could it be?

(For the record, the rifle and these pics are not mine; it's owned by somebody in NZ. I downloaded the pics as references of what a real Lithgow would look like, and only later did I notice anything odd about the markings.)

[IMG][/IMG]

[IMG][/IMG]

[nzl1a1collector]

Peter you are right for the early days of the rifles service. The body's weren't avilable. NZ had a batch of early 1959/1960 rifles FTR at Lithgow in 1971 and this seems to been the only time we got rifles done. Personally I think the cost put the defence force off from getting any more done. We had the ability at 1 Base Workshops to rebuild the rifles to D118 standards. Its common to find replaced bodys on early NZ Rifles, this is why finding an original N/|\Z marked rifle is so hard to do. The body replacement/rebuild program was going on in the late 70's and till the rifles were withdrawn. The spare bodies I have seen dste from the 70's.

[tankhunter]

Armourer's Note: Hinge Pin screw incorrectly assembled!.........it SHOULD be 180 Degrees the other way!...........