The Elusive Mk IV or 4

[phoenix44]

So why is the MKIV or 4, I'm not certain how the receivers were marked, so hard to track down? This model has become something of a mystery,even pictures being next to impossible to find.I'm led to believe that even the Royal Armouries do not have a specimen for viewing, so where do you go to see one in the flesh?
Were they all converted from Monotype Mk II's?
Were only 350ish made?
Were some converted to L4 variants?
answers on a postcard,
thanks Pete.

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.

[Peter Laidler]

The Mk4........., yes....... They were all(?) converted from the T and U series Monotype Mk2's and some went to Australia with a view to converting some of the Canadian Mk2's that were there or possibly, as ideas for a lightened Mk1 because Australia was well involved in the order of battle to fight to re-take Malaya, the major part in re-taking Hong Kong etc. Some also went to India where the Mk2's were (?) converted because the term 'GUNS, M/c Bren .303" Mk4' features in their VAOS lists. But after they started production of the Mk3, it was pointless in converting Mk2's. After all, in the world of production engineering, conversion work is another way of doing something twice! However, I have seen two Mk2 butt/butt slide assemblies in Indian Import Mk1/3 Brens (Mk1's lightened almost to Mk3 spec don't forget.....) lightened right down to Mk3 Bren spec.

The PR does have a 'part' Mk4 I seem to recall. We have some pictures of the prototype Mk4's and the Mk4's used on the trials at Pendine and you can still see traces of the old Mk2 engraving. We do have some 'Mk4 gun' parts that have been converted from Mk2 bits such as lightened butts and barrels

Whether some were used as prototypes or as trials for the L4A3 guns is open to some debate. This might have arisen because some of the early pictures of the L4A3 (a converted Mk2) shows a much lightened body. Could this be a Mk4 (a lightened Mk2) body? Or was it the initial intention to lighten the Mk2 bodies right down to Mk3 spec (in effect a Mk4 body.......... I know it's complicated, but stick with me.....) while converting them to 7.62mm L4 spec.

Over the last 15 years I looked hard at those remaining L4 guns in service and at a thousand or so prior to destruction to see whether there were any odds and sods that might sway me one way or the other but all I saw were L4A4's and 5's with the odd A1 thrown in for good measure

Hope that's answered the question Phoenix in a roundabout sort of way............

[phoenix44]

Thanks for the informative reply , it does answer some of my questions.But,were these guns converted at Enfield or was the work undertaken by Monotype group? Were the original receiver markings barred out as in L4 conversions ?Was it necessary to change the rear sight? Were the Mk5 barrels conversions and any idea why they reverted to the smaller Mk2 flash hider and did they have the barrel locator as on the MK1 barrel.
Thanks Pete.

[Brit plumber]

I think it was Enfield who did the work but I think I remember reading that in the BGS and there are many mistakes in that book so I could be wrong. From photos I've seen of Mk4s it appears the Mk2 markings were partly removed in the conversion and the remaining parts look quite sharp so unless they are barred out with a fine line, the remaining markings remain unaltered. Again the photos show the Mk5 barrels with the barrel locator portion so cant be conversions of British barrels, more likely a new produce item as it wouldnt take much to machine from scratch.

Wheres Mr L when you need him.

ATB, Chris.

[Peter Laidler]

The guns would definately have been converted at Enfield because Monotype were simply a manufacturing/assembly base. The original Bren markings weren't barred out because those areas were milled down for lightness. In doing so, it took away some of the markings.

Barrels. The lightened Mk2 barrels would probably have been 'just Mk2 barrels' from any manufacturer. When you mention the barrel locators with the flash eliminator (the F/E's), did you mean the barrel to body locator or the flash eliminator to barrel locating ears? Because the barrel is shortened, the flash is greater so different 'strangulation' types of F/E's were tried and many tests carried out. To save time and delays the same flash eliminator was utilised on the lightened Mk2 barrels. BUT, this wasn't the best option so for the Mk3 gun, a slightly longer 'stangulated' stule of FE was designed and fitted. That's the reason!

No, the backsight wasn't changed. It remained the standard leaf. But, later, for use in the jungle, a shorter stubby 0 - 800yard backsight only with a much larger backsight aperture was trialled to make the Bren more jungle friendly. But in the interests of standardisation, it was abandoned and the standard leaf remained. However, it was tried again in the 60's to my knowledge, this time with a 100 metre battle sight because I was involved in that part of the L4 trials

It was agreed that the lightened butt slide could end just forwards of the trigger because the forward bit was superflous in jungle warfare. It only held the front tripod mount and a tripod in the jungle was worthless! But in the interests POF standardisation, the long butt slide remained