HELP - ID this prototype (?) LB sniper scope & mount

[Roger Payne]

Thanks for the pic of the other mutilated mount, but this latter one is/was a British Rose Brothers example. The one Claven has shown is Canadian, so I think whilst they have both suffered a similar fate they are not one & the same.

I agree with you Prinz that it would be disingenuous to sell it as something it is not, but Claven only posted the thread yesterday in the very hope that someone else may be able to shed some light on it. If it was mine I wouldn't rush to do anything with it for a while. But that's just my two cents' worth.

In my view it is the scope itself that is potentially interesting, not the bracket & scope tin.



P.S. Apologies SMLE addict. I thought you were saying in your post above that the mount you showed a picture of & Claven's were one & the same. On re-reading your posting you aren't - sorry - mea culpa!

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.

[Warren]

The company was only in business during the war and shortly thereafter.
Usually you can find a clue or a re-cycled component that is the giveaway.
How are things with you ???

[bigduke6]

The company was only in business during the war and shortly thereafter.
Usually you can find a clue or a re-cycled component that is the giveaway.
How are things with you ???

Warren understand about REL but I was meaning if a scope has a few REL parts it doesn't necessary pin point it to an experimental scope or prove it was made in the 1940's.

I,m fine by the way.

Agree with the comments in post 23 and 24, being in a tool room for a small amount of time during my Apprenticeship some of the Fitters/Turners there were gods when it came to producing something off the cuff, one was a Model Engineer enthusiast also so you can imagine his passion for the job, a small lathe and miller or milling attachments for the lathe and the skill and patience the world is your oyster.

[Claven2]

I phoned the shop and the owner pulled off the brass front fitting. It is threaded on hand-tight, but beneath it is a traditional slotted lens nut that would have to be removed to get at a lens edge.

I'm beginning also to wonder if it started life as a No.32, 42, or 53 tube. The fact the front half of the scope is 60 thou smaller in diameter than the rear might point to markings having been turned off of it. The section where the turrets are mounted is recessed similarly to a No.32.

Still not sure what to make of it. It could be a talented machinist was trying to turn a surplus No.32 scope into a more easily adjusted hunting scope back in the 1950's. But I'm just speculating.

As for ethics - this is not my scope. I don't own it and have not financial stake in it. I thought it would be fun to bring it out of the shadows and see if it can be attributed and help the owner out at the same time.

Sorry if I've offended anyone in doing so.

[Warren]

Sort of my thoughts from square one. A shaved tube and made from home made parts.
As I said, a bit of this stuff has shown up lately however most originated from the west coast region. When I opened the last one up I received for evaluation it was reasonably easy to pinpoint the components and possible maker.
There are some very talented machinists and optical people out there and some of what I have seen is just bloody brilliant to put it mildly. It is not rocket science.
Some is also horrible, but we won't go there. It is amazing what people will do to try and make a scope work, or at least appear to function and resemble a valuable scope.
I'd love to see the scope we are discussing and maybe then we can call it fish or fowl.

[Surpmil]

Sort of my thoughts from square one. A shaved tube and made from home made parts.
As I said, a bit of this stuff has shown up lately however most originated from the west coast region. When I opened the last one up I received for evaluation it was reasonably easy to pinpoint the components and possible maker.
There are some very talented machinists and optical people out there and some of what I have seen is just bloody brilliant to put it mildly. It is not rocket science.
Some is also horrible, but we won't go there. It is amazing what people will do to try and make a scope work, or at least appear to function and resemble a valuable scope.
I'd love to see the scope we are discussing and maybe then we can call it fish or fowl.

Can you shed a bit more light on this work Warren; my curiosity is aroused and I'm sure others as well!?

---------- Post added at 01:42 PM ---------- Previous post was at 01:37 PM ----------

Looking at this again, the sunshade was probably a later add-on in an attempt to make it look more military or "official" in origin. If the original builder had added it, he probably would have cleaned off the fugly old paint, but why would he bother with one of those anyway, since they are generally agreed to have been mostly a liability to the user and the scope (corrosion).

Caps may be reversed and what's with that great big gap between the ring and the tube?

These may be completely unrelated parts from some estate that were slapped together to put on the market.

Attachment 58629Attachment 58630

From the design of the adjustment mech. it looks like the smaller knob is simply to lock the elevation/lead screw rather than adjust for windage, which suggests this scope was built for a windage adjustable mount, not this one!

[Brian Dick]

I have a friend in Ontario that retired as the Senior Armourer in the RCEME in the 1970's. He's in his 80's now and still a wizard of a machinist. He was building a miniature working 155 howitzer in .45-70 the last time we had a visit a couple of years ago. His son also retired as the Senior Armourer in the RCEME in the 1990's and is every bit as talented. He world for Colt Canada now as an Engineer and designed/product improved the British L119SFW. They do amazing work!!

[Claven2]

I can answer that! I played with the adjustments and the windage knob is functional - it's not a lock. The reticle moves in both axes when the respective knobs are turned. The elevation turret is marked whith a "0" over a hash line, but no other rangi9ng marks are present, leading me to believe it was never tuned to a caliber or load.

[Peter Laidler]

Looks like someones tried to convert a turret-less No42 or 53 to take some mickey mouse turrets. Loads of similar conversions were sold in the UK by all sorts during the 50's. I had one apart a few months ago and it was............... Anyway. Not to my liking. So crap, I could hardly get it back together so I just used the spare optics.

Just my thoughts after a cursory glance at it and saw alarm bells.

There was one particular trial No32 that hasn't appeared and that was a Mk1 (I presume) with a slide-to-focus erector as per the old Patt 18 system in order that snipers with less than perfect eyesight could be trained as snipers with the otherwise fixed focus No32. Documented as trialled at sniper school Bisley winter/spring 40/41

[Claven2]

Not sure what to say, I no longer have access to the scope, so it may remain a mystery forever (?). Someone who saw the scope in this thread phoned the shop and bought the scope from its owner earlier today.