Alright, what have I got, LB question

[RJW NZ]

I've been offered a 1942 Longbranch, two groove, no4mk1*, in good average condition with the back story that an uncle who was in the army in NZ bought it from them as he left for civilian life, common enough story here, the army were offering new LBs from the crate for $10-$20 way back.
The thing is, it has serial number like no other I've ever seen on a Longbranch.. The serial number is 18487. Thats it in its entirety, its on the bolt handle, left wrist and fore end. Its is quite small letters, deep and sharp, there's no sign of any other numbers, or having been scrubbed off, and on the bolt handle its obvious this is the only one its ever had.
I could post pics in a few days time.
My take is that its a very early model of the * models, but seeing as the number and letter serials were well established by then, this should have been in sequence with the others and had a normal number.

So what do you all think, is there something collectible and out of the norm here?

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.

[jona]

New Zealand put its own number on those rifles. The number you gave is typical of the added number. It may be that the original number was scrubbed before the new was added.

[Peter Laidler]

When I was in NZ Jona, the NZ serial number was always prefixed by the N - arrow - Z logo. The old number was usually (but not always) present too. We also have a post-war ex NZ Army Bren at work and that is NZ serially numbered and that Inglis number is present.

If I was you RJW, I'd measure the thickness of the butt socket to seee whether the original has been linished off

[krinko]

So, is it a Long Branch bolt?
Every Long Branch rifle I own is marked at the root of the bolt handle with the "LB" mongram, or the Canadian Arsenals "CA"...like this photo of the bolt out of a "3L" rifle.
18487 could be a Maltby serial number---especially if it's stamped on the rear face of the bolt handle. Is the machining of the bolt handle at the transition from round to square a little rough, off center, hasty?
Wouldn't be the first time a rifle was renumbered to match a replacement bolt.
-----krinko

[RJW NZ]

Thanks for the tip, I'll get to take another look on the weekend, and get a few pics with the ol camera.

[S-A-M3]

The rifle may have been made up from unumbered replacement parts, who knows how it got that serial No! Maybe an armourer made it up for himself?
I have seen Savage manufactured rifles in NZ with Longbranch serial No`s, obviously made up with what ever parts were at hand!

[Sunray]

All Savage made rifles, parts and machinery got sent to LB when the Savage contract ended.
"...bought it from them as he left for civilian life..." Don't know about how NZ did it, but no troopie anywhere else was allowed to buy or keep any of his issue kit, of any kind.

[RJW NZ]

yes, I agree. In this case it not the issued kit. Late 60's and early 70's the NZ army was surplusing longbranch rifles from new in the crate. Soldiers could buy them, one or more I don't know, for $10 or half of what civys were paying.
I've heard this from several sources who were buyers at the time.
Otherwise I love seeing stories that enfield x was grandads rifle in the war, the last one of those I saw recently was drastically sporterized and was promoted as a special lightweight model the army was testing...rofl, some people take the cake.

[John Sukey (Deceased)]

I can top that. a seller at a swap meet had a No4 with the section for the rear sight milled off. (obviously to mount a scope) BUT the story was "The Royal Navy didn't like the reciever mounted sight and preferred the rear sight mounted on the barrel instead!

[limpetmine]

I'd look thru a stack of rifles, and toss out the ones that were odd balls. I wanted a "typical" rifle. Hate to think what I passed on. There are so many anomolies in Enfields, I'd never say anything for sure. If it looked ligit, I'd jump on it. jmho
limpetmine