Lithgow 22 trainer question

[218bee]

I posted this on the .22 forum but got no replies.
Can someone shed some light on this one?..It is a beautiful Lithgow, 1944 built rifle...It's stock isn't marked like UK 22's, as there's no trace of the large stampings on the buttstock's right side...There is, however, a brass unit disk with the correct serial number of the rifle...Is this correct for the Lithgows? As the pic shows, the wood is very proud of the metal, and I don't think it was ever sanded...There is a scar (or old stamp?) about midway up on stock in pic...No clue what this is...Anyone?..This is an all-matching rifle that came with the correct sling and M stamped Lithgow oiler as well..

My first Lithgow, so any input would be most appreciated on this..

Thanks

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.

[Amatikulu]

NSW = New South Wales

The wood looks like coachwood in the picture.

Never seen a F series serial number on a Lithgow but maybe that's common to the .22 conversions. More pictures of the rifle would be useful.

[218bee]

just added more pics...thanks

[Steve H. in N.Y.]

These usually have the .22 conversion markings on the right side of the buttstock and no disc but this could have been replaced at some point. Do you see a "batch" number stamped under the bolt handle and at the rear of the receiver as shown in the pic?

[218bee]

Steve....is this the number?

[Steve H. in N.Y.]

Yes, that's it. A batch number was stamped on the receiver and bolt (and barrel?) to keep them together before the rifle got it's serial number. I suspected your rifle might have been one that the John Jovino Co. of NY put together from new Australian parts. Since it has a batch number I think my theory is a little wobbly.

[5thBatt]

I can see IA CO SAC CA . stamped above the inspection marks, on the receiver in front of Australia.
Using Ian Skennertons book, F prefix- from 1944 to 1945 to F39580.
F39581 to F40580 in 1953
So far, the only problem i see is the butt, otherwise nice rifle

[tbonesmith]

That's a beautiful looking trainer, I wish I could find one similar.

[Son]

Your rifle was a No1 MkIII* in .303 calibre made in late 1944. The low "F" prefix serial number is correct for the receiver date. The "batching" number or assembly number was applied to the bolt body and receiver when the two parts were brought together and the surfaces of the locking lugs lapped. It shows the bolt body to be the factory original.

It was converted to No2 MkIV* spec sometime after WW2, obviously retaining it's original bolt body. I would suggest that the absence of conversion marks is not unusual, depending on when and where they were done. The best way of dating yours would be the foreend marked SLAZ 55, making it 1955 or later. There may also be a date on the barrel knox...

They were still being converted well into the 1950's by both armourers and the SAF Lithgow. Having the woodwork looking a bit full in fit seems to be common for post WW2 Slazenger production. It most likely had all new furniture fitted at conversion. Not sure about the inclusion of the butt disc, and the hole looks a little rough, BUT, I definately won't say it's wrong, I've seen a few like it before... and these particular rifles vary quite a bit in the "norm".

All up I'd say it's a very nice piece!

[5thBatt]

Were receivers made at Bathurst?