Collector restoring SMLE MkIII* HT

[SMLE Aussie]

Ok - please let me start by pointing out a few things as I wasn't intending on getting into a debate, but was hoping to find a bunch of people that had some knowledge to share to help me rebuild a rifle that was in a completely unshootable state and about to get cut up - I was, after all, only after the wood when I found it and bought from a local gun shop for $100 (which tells you what they thought of it - they would sell their grandmother if they thought it would make a quid).

Firstly - the rifle was significantly more worn than anything I had issued out of the armoury to me (with due respect) - there is, indeed, a great difference between an end of life F1 or L1A1 that I can assure you I had issued to me when I wore a set of starched greens and this hunk of rusty junk - in fact, I can honestly say that my no.10 boot would have gone so far up the rear end of any Q-store Staff that had tried to issue me with something in that condition that he would have been untying my boot laces through his nostrils. Worn is one thing, having been left in storage after floods, covered in water and mud is another. The only positive about its condition when I bought it was that it was so bad (and its origin was so obscure) that I got it for $100. A bonus indeed... Bottom line - without restoration it was not even a museum piece, but a hunk of junk. Most of the collection ended up cut up, only the timber saved it!

Secondly - conservation vs restoration. I spent nearly four years in the Qld Museum. During that time I assisted the History and Technology section conserving part of their firearms collection. I do understand the debate between conservation vs restoration. Every piece was considered with the assistance of the conservators in regard to what level conservation was appropriate. This rifle, as far as I know, has no historical significance and therefore the discussion in regard to conservation vs restoration is somewhat mute. Unless someone can show it was used by Billy Sing, then its conservation value is insignificant. My goal, then, is to restore it to a point where it can be safely shot - indeed, I would like to get it to a state where it can once again shoot better than I can (which probably isn't that difficult)! This isn't like the old MG in the shed, it's like the one that has spent 10 years out in the paddock!

You can burst my bubble if you wish - in many ways I really would have preferred it to be simply a hunk of junk. I would have re-used the timber with a good condition sporter and turn it back into a full wood SMLE. Easy. Anyone who knows the fabulous gun laws in Aus would know that you can do a like for like swap of an action without going through the drama of a Permission to Acquire (PTA). That had been my original intent. Unfortunately (in respect of simplicity), the serial number indicates that the rifle is indeed a MkIII* HT - well, at least according to Skennerton. The stock indicates it was taken back in for refurbishment 2/45, which also coincides with the records... and the beloved nose cap matches as well, so I would suggest it is more than likely not just an H rifle converted around 1934 (??) on a 1917 action. If only it was - I would have simply swapped it out.

OK - have I covered everything? Probably not. But I was simply after some friendly advice and information... the condition of the firearm was such that the rust needed to be removed. I can't justify buying a bead blasting cabinet for a single project (my wife would be less than impressed, as much I would like one), or believe me I would have bead blasted it. So I had to find another solution to remove the corrosion (the rust was such in the action that the bolt had to be hammered out after soaking in penetrating oil for three weeks, and it would not have been able to be cycled without the rust in the receiver being removed). Hence the molasses... I am sure electrolysis would work as well - probably better (I do understand the chemistry having taught it in high school). Bead blasting - if only I had access... I might add, the jury is still out on the action - off to a gun smith tomorrow for an opinion now that the rust has been removed.

Cinders - I agree - it seems anything to do with sniper, H, HT etc seems to stir significant comment and debate (and seems to implicate large $$). My goal (as I can't justify spending a fortune) is to try and do as much as I can to get it shooting again without spending a fortune! Yes, it is a challenge... I really don't care that much if I get a scope on it or not, but I really would like to do it justice. I have a real problem seeing firearms end up in such a condition. They were designed and built to shoot, and I really would like to see this one get back to a shooting state. Also, I'd like to do some justice to the poor fellow who had previously owned what was clearly a wonderful collection, pay him some honour - he had become ill and had to store the collection with the Qld police while in hospital, and during that time their so called 'secure' storage was flooded, and his entire collection sat in mud and water for over a year before he passed away and his family claimed it. Nearly all of the collection has now been destroyed, but based on what he had I dare say it was a great collection that he had spent years and many dollars acquiring. Surely that is good enough reason to try and salvage this firearm and do it justice?

Anyway, that is really all this is about. The finish was fairly much shot, so whether I file it, blast it, soak it, electrify it - whatever, I would like to at least use a similar finish to the original. As I indicated before, I know the action and barrel were painted as was the practice. I can tell by observation that the inside of the nose cap, trigger guard, rear sight protector and outer band were also painted. The corrosion was such that I couldn't tell if the outside of these parts was simply blued or also painted drab... (same question in regard to the rear and forward sight). I was hoping that someone could let me know so I have some guidance as to how to best finish these components? If not, I guess I will simply blue them.

Peter, I understand that you have lots of information also on the 1918 pattern scope. I actually have one (no pads or mounts), but someone has 'modified' the rings, so I need to remove them (they have cut the claws off and drilled/tapped them!). I am guessing this requires some dismantling of the scope. If you have any instructions on how to do this, or you could point me to some, I would be most grateful.

Guys, I simply want to try and get this rifle back to a reasonable shooting state - that's all... any help would be very appreciated.

With thanks (and due acceptance and tolerance of differing views)
Lee

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.

[Seaspriter]

I simply want to try and get this rifle back to a reasonable shooting state - that's all... any help would be very appreciated.

Great job Lee. The nuances of "conservation," "restoration" and "preservation" are important. Thanks for sharing your objectives and for the effort you put into keeping this gun out of the hands of the scrap man.

[MikeInAussie]

Yes, I also inspected this batch of guns that smleaussie got his Lithgow, I grabbed a low serial number Saimese SMLE out of that batch (3 digit serial) and regrettable they were all very seriously damaged by flood waters and mud and just left.

I also inspected the Lithgow that is in the process of being restored and noted that the 'disposer'understood what htey may have had and appeard to strip off the scope mount base pads, and scope and this was evident by the 3 charger bridge holes and the 2 receiver ring holes - but in saying that based water/mud damage they would have a significant issue with the scope.

I do understand that the serial numbers are identified by Skennerton as being among the sniper production in Feb 1944.

I myself intend to conserve the Siamese SMLE as I would expect that Siamese parts would be even harder to come by than even sniper parts as there were only 10,000 made.

There were a great deal of wonderful arms from all around the world and times lost in that collection but at least 4 that I know of are being slowly rescued including 2 early Stevens Favorites.

Regards


Mike in Aussie

[Peter Laidler]

Well, that's told us! Seems to me like you asked for advice from what is in fact a discussion forum. We discussed and you got advice. And re para 2, when I say that we saw weapons as bad as that going into our big workshops and coming out rebuilt, then I mean it. I did it, you didn't!

[bigduke6]

You don't need a bead blasting cabinet, (it would help) but an easy cheap option is to get one of the spray gun types that you fill the can with the medium..... I,ve used this one in the pic and a similar one with good results. Either do it in an enclosed room or open space and use a backstop to recover some of the medium, NEVER use in the vicinity of machinery etc and use a full face mask.

[SMLE Aussie]

Thanks Bigduke6, I'll give that a try...

[Seaspriter]

fill the can with the medium....

What does the Milsurps team of master experts recommend for medium based on experience? (I live next to a supply of fine beach sand, it's cheap, extremely abundant, environmentally safe, and easy to dispose of the aftermath, but perhaps not as good as glass beads or other types). Any recommendations on air pressure, masking off areas, etc.?

[browningautorifle]

You might find that sand a bit harsh. You can actually remove markings like that. If you use silica sand or glass beads you'll get a nicer finish. Masking is hard but we used to use masking tape and try to stay off it. I've used electric tape too. Why would you need to mask any of that off? The whole thing needs a blasting to start...I should think. Then you have a nice even finish that matches.

[Seaspriter]

Thanks for the good ideas.

My beach sand is, fortunately, very fine.

Why would you need to mask any of that off?

I was thinking of a No.4 Mk2 I have -- the receiver is very chipped but I don't want to remove the finish from the area around the electro-penciled serial numbers.

[henry r]

does anyone here know how to contact the original poster?

this is up for sale and it's condition had me wondering if it might be the original scope for this rifle.

Pattern 1918 Sniper Scope for SMLE Enfield with Case