11/44 ROF(F) No5 MkI with MkII rear sight

[Brian Dick]

I've had hundreds of No.5's through the years and very few fitted with wartime Mk.2 rear sights. In fact, I could probably count them on one hand if I could remember. It's a nice, honest rifle.

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.

[browningautorifle]

Mk.2 rear sights

Are those the cheap thin type sights? Not the simple two range flip...and I know what the Mk3 looks like...

[shmlnaaa]

Are those the cheap thin type sights? Not the simple two range flip...and I know what the Mk3 looks like...

The MkII rear sight for the No5 is pressed sheet metal with a flip up ladder that's graduated to 800 yards. It's the rear sight that's fitted to the rifle in the OP.

[browningautorifle]

Got it.

[Homer]

Mate you posted pictures of your rifle so people would make comments didn't you? Ok so now people are making comments. To me, cocking a rifle for a photo is a strange thing to do. It's just my opinion as it is others so time to move on I think.

[shmlnaaa]

Mate you posted pictures of your rifle so people would make comments didn't you? Ok so now people are making comments. To me, cocking a rifle for a photo is a strange thing to do. It's just my opinion as it is others so time to move on I think.

I would have preferred more discussion about the rifles themselves. Decocking a rifle requires extra effort and is impossible to do with many designs without dry firing.

---------- Post added at 08:48 PM ---------- Previous post was at 08:41 PM ----------

I don't think that they were ever declared obsolete. We still had them in the 60's. Obsolescent maybe but that meant that they could continue in use until there were no more stocks available from Ordnance

Just to make sure, you're talking about the pressed sheet metal rear sights on No5's and not the ones on No4's? If so, that lends evidence to them being less common during WW2 also, versus them being common during WW2 and mostly and purposefully swapped out later. Just speculation.

[Ridolpho]

shlmnaaa: Thanks for showing us your rifle. Can you make out what the lettering in paint is on the buttstock? Incidentally, I can't believe that storing a mainspring cocked wouldn't fatigue it in time. I've taken to storing most of my bolts fully de-cocked in a separate cabinet mainly to allow me to fit more rifles in the safes. Also my two-cents worth- absolutely no safety issue taking a photo of a cocked rifle that you know to be in a safe state in your own home. Anyone that thinks there is should consider taking a job writing manuals for the Canadian government.

Ridolpho

[vintage hunter]

I would also like to thank you for showing photo's of your No.5. I have a well used 4/45 Faz.
IMO, how a person stores, displays or photo's their firearm(s) is his/her own business. As long as he/she feels they're safe then that should be plenty good enough for the rest of us. I keep certain rifles, shotguns and pistols from my collection at various locations throughout my house and cook shed that are not only cocked but fully LOADED as well. Safeties engaged of course.
I learned during my Millwright apprenticeship that as long as a spring is properly made from good quality materials storing it under tension has very little to no effect on it weakening over time. Working the spring is what leads to eventual fatigue and failure.

[jmoore]

I keep certain rifles, shotguns and pistols from my collection at various locations throughout my house and cook shed that are not only cocked but fully LOADED as well.

Sounds like the "rich" side of my family growing up. Loaded firearms might be found anywhere. Behind the kitchen door, in the barn, chicken house, shed, bathroom, wherever. Not a bad neighborhood, as there was no neighborhood!

I learned during my Millwright apprenticeship that as long as a spring is properly made from good quality materials storing it under tension has very little to no effect on it weakening over time. Working the spring is what leads to eventual fatigue and failure.

No disagreement there.

Like Brian Dick (see Post #18), I've only seen a very small number of sheet metal No.5 rifle rear sights.

[shmlnaaa]

I cannot totally make out the painted numbers on the stock, only have a good guess at what some of them were. There appears to be at least thee rows of them, with two larger numerals on the upper right side of the stock and the rest being around the rear of the comb. The paint that they were made with protrudes from the surface quite a bit and didn't get into the wood grain very well, so it probably wore off easily in field conditions.

There is also a 601 over a 91 stamped, not painted, on the right side of the buttstock. Numerals are about 1/3" tall.

I concur about the spring thing. It may seem odd, but keeping them under constant tension within the parameters the spring was designed for for long periods of time should be perfectly fine. I've had some basic engineering training, and how metal generally acts under stress/strain was one of the first things I remember learning.