1942 Longbranch No.4 MK1* T .. original?

[limpetmine]

I'll pull it out and get a better picture of it. I guess it's any one's guess as to how each of these rifles get to us-buy the rifle, not the story, we've all heard. And while this one "speaks" to me, it's not telling me! lol
The story on this one was it was hunting deer in Arkansas for the past 30 years.
I've heard and read the same about the "T" stamps not being applied in Canada. There must be more than a few with the T, here are a few I've saved along the way.

[Surpmil]

I see a "D" and a small Broad Arrow on the front pad. What's that all about? Very authentic looking "T" stamp as well, except that AFAWK no Canadian Ts got them except where applied retroactively on the individual initiative of armourers or civilian owners.

Is it possible some RSAF(E) made pads were sent over at the begining of the program at Long Branch and your rifle has them?

Quoting myself now, but I remember a thread here or on Gunboards that showed photos of another LB No4(T) that definitely had RSAF(E) pads, at least the front pad; (though the pad was loose and could have come from another rifle. I can't remember if the rear pads displayed any markings...Roger?

Perhaps have a close look at your 1942/43 dated rifles, those lucky enough to have them?

It would have made sense to send some along, and RSAF(E) may well have had some extra after finishing converting the 1400 odd trials No4s to "T" specs. Just as H&H did when they finished their contracts

[Surpmil]

Is it a D/broad arrow on the front pad or could it be an upside down C/broad arrow? Just a thought.
ATB

The broad arrow I see at about 5 o'clock on the left hand screw of the front pad, and the "D" at 9 o'clock on the right hand pad. I could be wrong about both...

[Peter Laidler]

Sorry to disagree a tad chaps but I have the most serious doubts about Enfield body pads being used on a LB sniper rifle. Seriously......... If Canada were already making rifles, Brens and pistols from drawings, then they were well capable of making body pads....., surely! Enfield were virtually divorced from the T project by the time LB were even getting started. H&H had, presumably, told LB that in order to get a move on and switch from bit part production to actual production line production techniques, they needed to do exactly what H&H were doing. You're all aware that the shop foremam from H&H went to LB to get the line into production line type output. As for sending some pads over.......... That wouldn't help beyond 10 minutes machine tool time per pad.

In any case, a finished pad is of little use as the spigot part is finished while it's on the rifle in order to collimate the bracket to the bore

Thinking off the top of my head, the only reverse supply of parts that I can think of is Bren bipod legs from Hercules Cycles who supplied thousands of the part finished taper rolled bipod leg tubes to help with a botleneck in Canadian production. The legs are rolled into a taper before being squeezed oval for use in much the same way as bayonet scabbard ends.

Rifle body pads......... sorry I just don't think so chaps

[Roger Payne]

Surpmil, my eyes are getting old & tired, & I agree with you about the broad arrow, but what you are reading as the 'D' I suspect may be an upside down C with or without broad arrow. I've had other rifles with upside down markings. I guess an enlarged photo would settle it, FWIW.

Out of curiosity, if the rifle is held muzzle to observer, & one looks back down it towards the receiver, does the front face (that that a sizeable proportion of which butts up against the receiver ring) have a radius on it nearest to where it is soldered to the receiver? This, & the hall-mark faint but definitely present transverse machining mark running horizontally across the front of the front pad near the top tend to help to distinguish Canadian pads. However, I must admit I don't know how rigidly their presence holds true on the early conversions. All of the 90L's I have seen have been pretty consistent.....

ATB

[jmoore]

The resolution of the photo isn't quite good enough even on this gigantor monitor to be certain about the mark between the screws on the front pad of the early rifle pictured on post#3(?), but it surely looks like a smaller version of the mark in the roughly 10 o'clock position of the front bracket screw. That mark appears to be a "C" w/ some additional gunk inside it's curvature. An arrow? Possibly. I'm pretty sure someone knows if it's "real", but he's wisely silent on these matters.

(The individual pixels mean there's nothing much more to see from this version of the picture, I reckon, but an expert in these matter I'm very NOT!)