Enfield question

[Nigel]

I guess scope no. 1265 is not a million miles away from 1180. Bracket shown on the scope is original whilst the bracket on its own is a repro.

[bradtx]

jwtietz, It's amazing that a non FTR'd/rearsenaled trials T rifle in that good of condition exists. The least you do cosmetically is the best you can do.

The original 'scope is a Watson and Son Mk.1.

Congrats on such a fine trials T.

Brad

[jwtietz]

Yeah, i know but i feel real bad that i messed up as much as i did. I found that cheek piece and i can see how much got sanded. Do you think i should pick up a replacement stock and install only the butt portion? Possibly the hand guard? I know it wont have the # but it would look better. I guess either way i messed up. I really do feel bad and stupid. I have seen others do worse so that is a plus. Thanks again for all your help.

[bradtx]

jwtietz, I may be flamed, but I think the original cheekpiece is far more appropriate. What's been done is done and originality of parts trumps cosmetic appeal.

Brad

[Steve H. in N.Y.]

Agree with Brad 100%. Keep in mind that while the rifle was in military service, if the wood was in rough shape it would have been scraped and sanded as necessary.

[Sht_LE]

I agree with Brad and Steve..... Keep it original, and my compliments on a fine rifle.

[jmoore]

The Enfield marked buttstock definitely should stay! You'll not find another short of robbing another trials rifle.

[Bindi2]

Leave as is.

[Bindi2]

Leave as is.

[Brian Dick]

There's something you should know about the cheekpiece too. I think it's been mentioned here before. They were originally designed for the Enfield Pattern 14T rifle, don't fit the buttstock on a No. 4 perfectly and never did. The fact that it appears to be a "not quite so perfect" fit may be what you see and not the fact that it's been overly sanded.