1944 Lithgow

[5thBatt]

i used to agree with you on this peter but somebody from nz ( 5th bat maybe ) has an english rifle with a Lithgow action all with matching numbers. The action and bolt have been numbered to match the barrel and nose cap. There were no barred out numbers or grind marks.
Hope he sees this thread and puts up the pictures again.

Attachment 39414Attachment 39415Attachment 39416Attachment 39417Attachment 39419Attachment 39418Attachment 39420Attachment 39421Attachment 39422Attachment 39423

[muffett.2008]

Thanks 5th, good recollection for an old drunk Bindii, yes this one has a few unanswered questions too.
Demo I will have to admit that there is a lot out there that will continue to perplex us, we'd get awfull bored if we only had the same old same old every day.
It's a pity the owner of this one is not able to assist with a few more photo's, proof marks and view marks might give us a lead on where it's been if nothing else.
I may just be getting more sceptical as I get older, I'm just starting to see a few odd stamps coming in to the equation, just fractionally different fonts and sizes, just not sure enough to say fake.

[Brian Dick]

This one isn't a Jovino import. It was imported by Pacific Arms Corp in Sacramento, California. I had a dozen Aussie SMLE rifles from them in 1990 when I first got licensed and they were honest, as imported directly from Australia. My guess is it's an anomaly but correct. My Dad even bought one that's a straight 1945 Mk.III* in minty condition and still has it in Florida.

[Detroit-1]

Here is some more pictures.

[muffett.2008]

Just a couple of questions, maybe my eyes, the S3377 appears slightly different, the 33 stamp on the bolt handle has not the rounded fullness in the 3 that appears on the action. Despite the curve, the roundness should be struck deep if it were the same.
The barrel date '51, when did they stop putting the number on the barrel? 43?
The action appears to have been scrubbed, note the change of direction and the deeper marks are partially removed. yes?......the different size numbers on the action.
The nosecap and bolt are the same font, along with the timber they are probably the only original bits.

[Detroit-1]

So what are you saying? If the reciever has beeb scrubbed to make the gun worth more, then why put the FTR on. Or the MA51? If scrubbed by who? It does not made sence to me for someone to go through all the effort to mark this gun for no increase in value. I too have heard that they quit marking the seriel number on the barrel in 43 but I also collect Japanese firearms and you learn that there is no absouluts.

[jmoore]

All I can say at this point is "Never say never with L-Es"!

That's just very strange. Which at this point seems to be a good thing!

Nice photos, BTW!

[Homer]

Lithgow stopped serial numbering barrels mid 1943 but began again in earnest in 1950 with the commencement of the FTR program.

The action and bolt numbers look identical to each other as do the barrel and nosecap, indicating they were numbered at different times. My feeling is still that the action and bolt were a replacement on a much earlier rifle that was serial numbered 36662 in 1944 and then past through an FTR in 1951 where all parts were discarded and the action was rebuilt into a new rifle. The barrel, nosecap and wood were serial numbered to match the action at this time and no parts original to the rifle prior to 1951 would remain now.

I still can't see any signs on the action to indicate it was scrubbed nor can I see anything unusual or abnormal about the batch assembly numbers. It has the D^D that looks completely legitimate and in character with FTR'd rifles and also present are the proof and inspection stamps. I've had a quick look at PAA numbers on some of my rifles this morning and they are a mix ranging from very poorly stamped to some being a very neat arrangement. I couldn't call it when comparing to the style of that time.

The bolt has no sign of being scrubbed and it has a PAA number so it couldn't be a civilian stamp on a surplus unnumbered bolt. It must be a legitimate factory stamp and most certainly matches the barrel, nosecap and wood.

The only way I see that this gun could be a civilian put together is if a proofed action, bolt and barrel with matching batch assembly numbers but no serial numbers was somehow kept in surplus and got into the civilian market. I would think this highly unlikely. Particularly since the action has D^D, FTR and MA51 stamped in standard font.

[muffett.2008]

Where's your glasses. The stylised font on all but the first number of the S/N on the receiver, and the FTR, are the only ones other the the import signature to use this style, all other numbers and script is in standard font.
Here's my view of the receiver scrub.
Attachment 39463

[Homer]

Where's your glasses. The stylised font on all but the first number of the S/N on the receiver, and the FTR, are the only ones other the the import signature to use this style, all other numbers and script is in standard font.
Here's my view of the receiver scrub.
Attachment 39463

Muffer I don't identify that as a scrub mark. I've seen this sort of variation in machine marks before particularly on 40's Lithgow production. The 3 does look odd I agree but is identical to the bolt and I've also seen this sort of variation in letter size many times before.

I've explained in full sequence how I believe this rifle is legitimate but you haven't described in sequence how it is fake. Do we agree that the barrel, wood and nosecap are legitimate? What about the bolt? Is it just the action that is dodgy? Do you think that the action was numbered by the importer to match the bolt and barrel? It seems the importers or someone did a fair bit of humping(I hate this word) to this gun to make it right.