1941 Long Branch

[spinecracker]

Well, here it is. I did mention under another thread that I had found a 1941 Long Branch No.4 Mk.1, and I will be posting photos as soon as I have had a good night's sleep (this insomnia is a pain in the posterior). The serial number is 1L2702, and the bolt, receiver and barrel serial numbers match. The stamping on the bolt and barrel appear to match the ones shown in the relevant Canadian Knowledge Library article on the 1941 Long Branch, and the bolt handle has the hole in the knob. The cocking piece is the button-type, stamped with LB. The magazine that came with the rifle is not serial numbered. The lower band is the milled type, and the upper band is not hinged, but thicker than other upper bands I have seen on other No.4s. The only part I have found that is not stamped with the LB stamp is the foresight (stamped for Savage). The fore-end has the lower cut-out on the right as expected on 1941/early 1942 Long Branches. This rifle does not look like it has been refurbished at any time (but I do not know the specific detials to look for). As mentioned, photos will be forthcoming, as soon as I have cleaned up all the crud and repaired a small crack in the rear hand guard (just needs a little wood glue).

I hope to put the rifle back to the proper configuration, with help from forum members. I may keep it, or it may be sold to fund my Enforcer collection (only one Enforcer at the moment, but that may not last for long...)

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.

[rgg_7]

Congratulations Robert. Look forward to seeing the photo's. i can tell you much more after looking at them.

Your serial number is late 1941. The total number produced has never been confirmed however does not exceed 15,000. Yours is 12702. The heavy front band matches a 42 dated barrel. All the other details can be corrected.

Ron

[spinecracker]

Ron, the barrel is dated 1942 but the receiver is dated 1941 (I am under the impression that this did happen) so the heavy front band would be correct, I assume. I will make out my shopping list for the missing bits as soon as I can lol.

[madcratebuilder]

I'll check my spares box, I think I have a LB marked fore sight, several sight protectors. In fact I have a bunch of LB marked parts, a new mag, wrapped in the box.

[spinecracker]

Really awful photos at:

1941 Long Branch pictures by spinecracker - Photobucket

The back of the bolt handle looks shiny. The machining marks on either side of the shiney area look identical and have the same orientation as the machining marks in the shiney area. The serial number runs from shiney area to the unshiney area, and the font of the "2"s (one in shiney area, one in non-shiney area) is identical and the same size. It looks more like wear to me, but I am not an expert. If the bolt is a replacement, would they have replaced it with parts correct for a 1941 Long Branch (i.e. early style cocking piece). When did Long Branch stop making the bolts with the holes in the end of the bolt handles?

Edit - I just thought about this - I only became an official Enfield collector yesterday now that I have 3 of them - woohoo!!!

[gunner]

Fine work for the weekend! I like to do such jobs. It looks not so bad as my Savage looked. Congrats spinecracker! Make a good looking Lady out of the old girl!

Regards

Gunner

[Surpmil]

It looks very original to me. Too bad someone took a belt sander/spokeshave to the stock, but at least you can see what was on it originally. I'm sure someone can help you find a 'new' set of wood.

With a good cleaning, the metal will look a lot less brown and a lot more blue/grey as it did originally.

Overall patina looks very original and I think you can be pretty sure those parts, including the magazine have seen long service together.

Your backsight aperture is probably repairable with a bit of careful welding and filing/machining. The matching patina and wear would suggest that rather than replacement with another MkI sight that is likely to be near-new, as most of them seem to be.

A close-up of the SN on the bolt would be useful, but unless your rifle's bolt was replaced with one a few numbers off for some reason, it sounds and looks likely to be the original.

Is the mag a LB-made one?

The thick muzzle band is not one LB made for long I believe. They went to a light, cheaper thin steel that is much easier to remove/refit and does the job just as well.

Not sure what the point of that thick band ever was actually! Trying to add weight at the muzzle end of the rifle perhaps? Savage stuck with it for some reason.

[spinecracker]

The magazine is so worn, I can't really make out what is stamped on it. I will try and get a good close-up photo of the bolt handle and the magazine markings as soon as I can borrow my father-in-law's camera.

I am inclined to think that this rifle, apart from light bubba'ing (may the miscreant suffer from boils in a very painful place), has not been tampered with or refurbished at any time. If someone can repair the rear sight, I would be VERY interested in knowing a price. As I said, if I can get this rifle restored, then I would be happy. If not, then someone gets a project gun lol.

[limpetmine]

Early Long Branchs' did have a LB milled front band. See the pictures of such a band on my No 1 Mk VI pictures. Clearly a Long Branch stamp.
I would not go about swapping parts just yet. It is confirmed that Savage and LB swapped parts back and forth, and one could easily infer that they (Savage) helped them get going on the smaller stuff, especially early on.
I'll check my pair tonight for milled or flat bands, as well. One is a re build, one is not. Nice find!

[spinecracker]

My mistake - it is only the front sight blade that is stamped with the Savage "S"