1918 mk.III* finish

[gew8805]

My apologies bob4wd, keep in mind that it has been a while since I bought oilers or Enfield Rifles so my prices may be lower than today's values. The last No.1 Mk.III rifle that I bought - in NRA VG+ condition - I purchased for $125 and I thought that was too much but I liked it at the time and bought it. Standard WW1 era oilers were selling for $5 to $10 each at the time (up from $1 each just a few years before that). Things have gone up over the last 10 or so years so don't allow my statement to over value your oiler, it is nice but worth only what someone wants to pay for it in today's current market.

[bob4wd]

OK, so we've established that I'm not gonna get rich off of the oiler (LOL), or probably anything else as far as that goes. From what I've gleaned from the responses so far, and thank you all btw, I conclude that what I've got here is a desirable rifle that can be accurately described as :
-all original, except barrel
-rebarreled in 1918
-was in Canadian service
-was reworked/refurbished at some point in it's life, but no idea when
-was parkerized at some point. The pics don't show it real well, but under a strong glass, the "acne" or small pits, are easily discernable and are inside of the serial number stampings and especially on the edges of the Canadian broad arrow stampings, proving that it was grit blasted after the stampings were made.
I Still wish somebody knew who or when.

[browningautorifle]

I Still wish somebody knew who or when.

Problem is, I don't think any records really ever existed. I know from my time in, and Peter has reflected this too, rifles are controlled as they go along and when they go out of service we simply didn't care any more. The records didn't matter so they went right into the burn barrel. As we controlled them while they were in service, they were shown and where they currently ARE, not a trail of who had it before...

[bigduke6]

Regarding the finish looks just like the standard bluing at the time, although we say bluing it was actually controlled rust, the solution applied at the time to start and quicken the rust has etched the metal could of been a strong solution at the start or left too long.

[Flying10uk]

bob, I'm not sure that your rifle ever has been parkerised; as I've said previously I don't believe that too much attention was given to the quality of the surface finish of the metal parts during 1918. Remember things were quite desperate for the allies during the early part of 1918 before the arrival of significant numbers of American soldiers. The name of the game was to turn out as many rifles as possible and not worry too much about the quality of the surface finish of the metal.

[Ridolpho]

I agree- just normal bluing but maybe a bit of light surface corrosion giving the rough surface. Are you sure the barrel is a replacement?

Ridolpho

[browningautorifle]

I'm not sure that your rifle ever has been parkerised

Regarding the finish looks just like the standard bluing at the time

just normal bluing

I agree and said that in the beginning(post 7)...just the new bolt head is Parked, I'll bet it's an Aussie bolthead too. Probably made about 1945-50...right at the end. The rest is bluing and hand wear/patina.

[bob4wd]

I agree- just normal bluing but maybe a bit of light surface corrosion giving the rough surface. Are you sure the barrel is a replacement?

Ridolpho

Regarding the replacement barrel, I have seen no documentation to support this, but I have read numerous times on this and other forums that a replacement barrel was dated using the format 'xx, ('18). Or "apostrophe number number", the two numbers being the last two numbers of the year of installation. An original barrel would have been dated with the full four numbers of the date, as in 1918.
I would love it if someone more knowledgable than I were to show me otherwise - still learning.

[jrhead75]

I have yet to see a full four digit year on any British military rifle barrel. Month/Year (XX/XX) or just year ('XX). Going back to the Snider era at least. I don't remember seeing month stamps on British SMLE barrels either. Aussie ones, yes.

FWIW, I agree that this is a worn/maybe slightly pitted original finish...it can be hard to judge from a photo though. I don't see anything that says "replacement" on the barrel either. Like I say...FWIW.

[5thBatt]

Both my 1918 SSA & NRF have '18 dated barrels & the font on the barrels differ from the rest, we had a discussion on just this over on Gunboards a while back & another example was posted, in short, the barrel is not a replacement.
My photos are missing in this thread so will post the photos tonight
NFR No.1 Mk.III*