Questionable Lithgow No.1 Mk III*

[ct241]

Hello everyone

Been quite a while since I've posted. Anyway, quite a few years back, I got a Lithgow No.1 Mk III* in a private sale on an online sales board. Its been somewhat puzzling to me and I've gotten a lot of mixed opinions on what its origins may be.

An album of detailed photos can be seen here: Lithgow SMLE No1 Mk III* - Album on Imgur

Before I get started, I will note that it is a "JJCO NY NY" import, which immediately throws up red flags, but I'm aware of what typically is seen on those parts guns. I'll list details as evidence towards two different options.

"Its an original rifle":

• It has OA and MA stamps all over it.
• The barrel and receiver are proof marked
• The barrel is dated 9-'44
• There are broad arrows marked on the rifle
• There are a number A in star of inspection stamps on the rifle
• There appears to be a very faint '46 stamped into the buttstock
• Recoil pads are installed in the stock and there is cracking in the stock. Its clearly been well used.

"Its a JJCO parts gun"

• Its marked JJCO NY NY
• The receiver is dated 1945, which was typical on JJCO NOS parts guns.
• The serial number is lacking a prefix indicating it's from 1912 to 1918, so this would have had to have been a replacement receiver.

Below are a couple photos to attach to the thread. I've got too many to warrant directly uploading to this thread. See the imgur link above

If anyone has any thoughts, I'd be very glad to hear them! I can get more photos of specific things if necessary as well.

[smle addict]

Interesting rifle. I see your concern regarding JJ CO and their practices. I'm leaning towards your explanation of a receiver being replaced sometime in its life, but the serial number font does give me pause. I agree its a parts gun, but the Jovino put-togethers have a different finish altogether, and usually show evidence of post-service tinkering.

If it had been through a proper arsenal FTR, it would be marked on the left side of the buttsocket with something like "MA 53" for example.

Your rifle is showing evidence of post-service cadet use (remnants of paint on the stock). Could be it was pieced together to keep it in going for their needs. I am unfamiliar with the practices of the cadet forces in Australia, so maybe someone can expand on this.

And not all of Jovinos rifles were suspect. In the early 90's, JJ Co imported some very beautiful Lithgows SMLE's. Here is a link to some of the ones I picked up when they first came in to the US.

https://www.milsurps.com/showthread.php?t=71965

[pisco]

Hi from oz I have a 1942 lithgow with the serial numbers stamped like that and it was a cadet rifle it was like new only the barrel was neglected it’s the only one I’ve seen like that but there would be heaps of them

[22SqnRAE]

It's a Bitzer. (Bits of this, bits of that.)

"...would have had to have been a replacement receiver." No such thing. The body (action) IS the rifle in the Commonwealth system. Everything else is replaceable.

Check the Proof Action Assembly numbers on the top of the butt socket and the bolt underside Small stamped numerals usually in the 1000's to 10,000's range. If not matching or absent, then it's made up of parts. I can't see any PAA numbers form the photos I looked at.

EDIT: Just revisited your photos. You have no PAA, so the body and bolt have not been proofed and matched during manufacture. Hence, this is a parts rifle. No further investigation necessary. Will it work? Yeah, sure. Is it safe? Well, JJCo had a legal obligation to sell fit for purpose firearms. Is it authentic? Parts are, but as a whole, no. Should you be worried? Depends whether you wish to shoot it or look at it as a collector.

The serial in 1945 should be in the order of F37,000 to F39,000. Your number has been applied ex Lithgow.

The Butt is from a 1943 assembled rifle. It's been through Lithgow for a refurb in 1946. But the rifle was only made in 1945 so that tells us the steel and furniture are not from the same rifle.

The font of the serial is not typical Lithgow, most likely JJ Co.

The muzzle cap number on the bayonet boss is... wrong.

It's a real Lithgow. Its simply been assembled from parts of unfinished, or disassembled rifles and spare furniture components.

[Alan de Enfield]

The body (action) IS the rifle in the Commonwealth system. Everything else is replaceable.

Prior to WW1 the 'master component' to which everything else was numbered was the barrel, this was changed and even in the WW1 instructions the 'body' was the master component (see para 18 in the instructions to Armourers for No1 Mk3 rifles)

[22SqnRAE]

Thanks, Alan, yes that silly idea did take some time to remove from the system.

I suggest it came from muzzle loading days, when the barrel was the body, for better words. The British Army and its traditions are difficult to separate...

As we were focussing on a Lithgow of 1940's vintage, that matter was history and no longer of practice to the Australian Army. Thank heavens...

I think Mr Laidler frequently highlights the point that bodies were not consumable issue.

[Alan de Enfield]

Attachment 114610

I think Mr Laidler frequently highlights the point that bodies were not consumable issue.

Yes, he was adamant that the body was NEVER available as a spare part, even in my 'Parts Lists' the body is shown only available WITH a barrel as a complete assembly.

Ref No2 on the attached list is for the body - there is no Vocab number for the body alone.

Attachment 114612






May 4th 2008

Now, to cater for the vagaries of mass production, the designers cater for two of those points, the bolt and the bolt head. Why not the body then you ask? Once again, I can only sing from the hymn sheet that I know. That’s because in the UK Military, bodies were classed as the ‘MASTER COMPONENT’ and the master component was NEVER available from Ordnance Stores. NEVER, NIX, not EVER, contrary to what your grandma’s uncle Jim who knew a bloke whose friend met someone in the NAAFI at Tidworth might have told him. It was, is and always has been a blocked VAOS number. I know that it’s shown and illustrated in the parts list but just remember this. The parts list is a list of parts and not a list of AVAILABLE parts.

However, Peter did have to back-track a little:

Some weeks / months later Peter did issue an apology having found out that "The Canadians" did allow No4 bodies to be issued as separate parts.

Found it :

But now, it’s time to eat a bit of humble pie to JohnR. I said on a previous thread that what we call ‘the master component’ was NEVER available as a spare part. This was obviously to prevent a budding Armourer making up a rifle out of spare parts. I even related the story of Craftsman ‘Tiny’ Davidson in Malaya who did somehow manage something similar in Malaya with a No2 pistol and being caught with it in his locker by Sgt Doug Baker (later killed with 8-RAR in SVN). Doug told Johnny Cotterill, our Armourer Sergeant later ‘Tiny does 28 days in the can (as we called Holdsworthy Jail) or I lose my pension. It’s simple. Tiny does 28 days'! I have learned that at the big combined RCEME/REME workshops in WERL in Germany, Canadian No4 and Bren bodies were available as replacement parts but only from Canadian Ordnance. This was cut short very quickly but quite clearly, Canadian Ordnance did supply master components and I should imagine, was awash with unlawful weaponry……….. But not in the UK, Australia or New Zealand.

[browningautorifle]

Canadian Ordnance did supply master components and I should imagine, was awash with unlawful weaponry…

Well, I wouldn't want to have been the one caught building a weapon from spares. The jail time would be substantial and career ending. We weren't exactly awash in odd weapons...

I understand that was Peter's quotation, I know he's reading these...here somewhere...

[smerdon42]

Hey all it does look like it was added on post military to me but I have a lithgow with no date stamp on it the serial number suggests it is a ve.ry early 1913/1914 year. Here is the kicker it wa srefurbished in India 1932 and has the mark for India on it rebarreled answer stocked as well . Every thing is same serial number as action . But not year tamp on the receiver it was common for India to scrub all traces of the rifles origin and restamp . This one is not done I have it in a storage box I will dig it out and post pictures . If only they could talk !!!

[5thBatt]

https://www.milsurps.com/showthread.php?t=18100&page=1 link to my thread on my 1918 BSA with a replacement 1939 Lithgow receiver, 10 years have passed since that thread & at that time believed it was replaced at Lithgow, however over the years i have noticed a few rifles in NZ with 39 dated Lithgow replacement parts so now believe the receiver came to NZ as a spare part & fitted here in NZ, this line of thought also helps explain some of the questions i had 10 years ago.