FrankenLithgow or Fun De-sporter? (**photos)

[Son]

There was a period where they were left out as a "wartime manufacturing expediency". The dates escape me at the moment, but they were re-instated when Slazengers took over wood production IIRC.
Point of interest, there were a lot of coachwood foreends about a while back, raw timber, no recoil pads fitted and all 1942 dated. It was a supply of these which were used by John Jovino Co to assemble many rifles from parts he bought from the Aust.Govt. The absence of the recoil plates and more so, a suffix on the serial number were the ways of identifying likely JJ Co built rifles.

I have a few clues/ theories as to why so many foreends all '42 dated were still unissued, but haven't been able to confirm it. Anyone have any ideas they' care to share...?Attachment 24879

[Arlo]

Thanks all. Looks like I'll keep it as it's nice and tight otherwise.

Will send in a range report. Although I think I'll skip any "mad minutes."

[Demo]

I wouldn't get too carried away without reinforcing the draw area of your forend.

[Demo]

[QUOTE=Son;182095]There was a period where they were left out as a "wartime manufacturing expediency". The dates escape me at the moment, but they were re-instated when Slazengers took over wood production IIRC.
Point of interest, there were a lot of coachwood foreends about a while back, raw timber, no recoil pads fitted and all 1942 dated. It was a supply of these which were used by John Jovino Co to assemble many rifles from parts he bought from the Aust.Govt. The absence of the recoil plates and more so, a suffix on the serial number were the ways of identifying likely JJ Co built rifles.

Son before I make a suggestion why, I need to confirm, who installed the plates, Slazengers or Lithgow after receiving to forend from Slazengers?

[Son]

[QUOTE=Demo;182306]

There was a period where they were left out as a "wartime manufacturing expediency". The dates escape me at the moment, but they were re-instated when Slazengers took over wood production IIRC.
Point of interest, there were a lot of coachwood foreends about a while back, raw timber, no recoil pads fitted and all 1942 dated. It was a supply of these which were used by John Jovino Co to assemble many rifles from parts he bought from the Aust.Govt. The absence of the recoil plates and more so, a suffix on the serial number were the ways of identifying likely JJ Co built rifles.

Son before I make a suggestion why, I need to confirm, who installed the plates, Slazengers or Lithgow after receiving to forend from Slazengers?

Not sure... I've seen a lot of Slaz foreends that were cut identically, suggesting they were machined that way and possibly fitted the pads at Slaz (or Lithgow- I suppose it wouldn't matter). Logic would say they would have been set a bare spot tight so they could be hand finished for fit at assembly of the rifle.
On the other hand, I've seen quite a few that looked to be hand cut out for the pads, to a totally different shape, but all very similar. This made me think these were cut out by the tradesmen at the SAF at the time of assembly. All supposition of course, and I have nothing to back up my thoughts other than my observations. Machined & identical vs slightly irregular...

[Demo]

Mate all the surplus unused forends I've seen floating around have not had plates installed and no machining to allow for them, exactly like yours pictured. I always assumed because of this, they were installed at the factory by armourers on assembly. Incidentally, the dates noted on all these forends have been slaz 42 or 43. Also, the deletion of the plates seems to have coincided with the transfer of assembly to the Orange plant. So what if it was the case that Lithgow installed the plates after receiving the stock from Slazengers, but, when assembly was transferred over to Orange, they were deleted for speed of production, until it was realized that they were in fact again required and they were required to be installed by Slazengers. This would have left the factory with a surplus of forends without the plates installed and these placed into stores as a reserve if required, but by mid 1944 production was ramping down and they weren't used.

Something else I've noted with these unused forends floating around is the barrel channel seems to have been machined way off center so perhaps they were out of spec and rejected.

Probably way off, but just a couple of thoughts.


---------- Post added at 06:23 AM ---------- Previous post was at 06:17 AM ----------

Just had a quick read of TLE and Ian has written that the plates were fitted by armourers, but then he writes further on that when it was decided to re-install the plates as previous, Slazengers were so advised.

[Arlo]

I wouldn't get too carried away without reinforcing the draw area of your forend.

Makes sense. Any guidance on how to do this (for me and anyone else who hasn't done before)? Thanks.

[PS: no JJ Co marks anywhere to be seen on the metal or wood.]

[Peter Laidler]

There's a full photographic article on how to patch or reinforce the draws in a fore-end in the start threads part of the Lee Enfield forum. It's quite simple if you follow the instructions