Black Paint on No 4 Enfield

[Aragorn243]

I just picked up a No4 Mk 1* Dated 1944 and made at BSA Shirley (M/47c). It's in pretty nice shape with all matching numbers that I can see and a good bore. Some of it, but not all, is covered with black paint that is chipping badly and is worn. There does appear to be some sort of finish to the metal underneath that is a light grey in color. The magazine is painted halfway, up to where it enters the magazine well.

Is this an original finish as manufactured or a preservative covering coated on it prior to storage? It looks like it was applied with a brush as it is uneven and has a few runs in it.

I would prefer removing it to see the original markings but if it is original to the manufacture may consider leaving it.

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.

[Maple_Leaf_Eh]

The paint is a really hard enamel called Suncorite. It is almost always chipped somewhere. Don't try to buy a little can of touchup, that cr@p will make your grandkids grow tails and six toes, so the British don't like to export it. High temperature automobile header or BBQ paint is a good substitute. There shouldn't be any paint on the magazine, so someone may have repainted it once already.

[Aragorn243]

I'm a little familiar with the Suncorite finish and this paint just doesn't quite seem right. It' very brittle and comes off with your fingernail. It's also fairly high gloss. The magazine serial number matches the rifle so it's original to it, the paint on it's bottom half appears to be the same as that on the receiver so they were probably applied at the same time.

I have not taken the wood off of it yet, will do that later today, but I have found no rebuild marks on the exterior. Only added marks I can find are the British Nitro Proof marks, a small one on the receiver and a longer one on the end of the barrel. This paint is so thick in places that it could be hidden under there. Prior owners scraped it off the side of the receiver to see the serial number. There is no paint on the portion of the barrel sticking out of the stock.

The upper half of the magazine looks to be the same finish most British magazines have, a dull grey/black color similar to bluing but not as shiny.

It does appear to be a repaint job to me but I haven't handled enough of these to know the difference. The finish on my Jungle Carbine is an even thin coating, this is pretty thick.

[Aragorn243]

Photos will probably make this a whole lot easier. There is a big glob of paint on the barrel end I hadn't noticed yesterday. With the magazine out, you can easily see the difference between the paint and the original metal.

So my questions are, should I remove the paint from all surfaces or just the magazine. Should I then repaint it or leave it alone. I've looked at photos on the web and see all sorts of levels of paint/non-paint.

The stock also shows sanding marks perpendicular to the grain. Is this how they were finished when made? Only seems to be at the barrel band and the neck of the butt stock. All markings on the stock look pretty clean and clear. Being wartime production, I can see where final finish would not be as high a priority as in peacetime. The stock itself is fairly free of defects, just small dings here and there. It is fairly dark but does not appear to be oil soaked and seems to have a very thin coating of some sort of finish on it but this could be dried linseed oil.

[Aragorn243]

To remove or not remove is now not in question. Flipped off a small piece with my fingernail and there is very fine rust starting to form under it. Took more off and it's pretty consistent. Not serious enough to damage it all, just a light powder at this stage but I don't want it getting any worse. Barrel looks brand new with the exception of one place where they shimmed the handguard with a piece of leather. Some heavy rust in that 2 inch section. Guess they didn't think about that drawing moisture and holding it. Internals look great. I have to work on the markings a bit to sort them all out but everything still appears to match.

[Patrick Chadwick]

The paint on the magazine looks like a DIY job to me, and I believe the No. 4s were parkerized before the Suncorite was applied. The parkerizing could hardly have worn off beneath the original paint, so if there is rust developing beneath the paint I deduce that the paint is not original.
And anyway, there is nothing original about rust. Get that muck off, and any rust that is developing beneath it!


Patrick

---------- Post added 02-27-2012 at 12:00 AM ---------- Previous post was 02-26-2012 at 11:57 PM ----------

The stock also shows sanding marks perpendicular to the grain. Is this how they were finished when made? Only seems to be at the barrel band and the neck of the butt stock.

No, that is not how they were finished! I suspect a wood refitting job!

[Aragorn243]

Thanks for the backup on taking the paint off. I'd rather it not be original than rusting away.

It took me most of the afternoon but the black paint and rust is off the bolt, receiver and magazine, the rust was so fine it didn't do anything other than thin the finish a bit from appearances. I mistakenly identified the type, it is an MKI not an MKI*. The site I was originally on didn't explain the differences in a manner that I understood them fully, didn't mention the bolt release but a better site clarified that for me this afternoon.

All numbers match but I believe it has gone through an arsenal rebuild even though it is not marked as such. The bolt looks to have been renumbered and the charging handle has a squared off "S" which I believe to stand for Savage but not sure. The bolt has a rounded "S" on it as well as a lot of other markings including the BNP with crown mark. Barrel is a five groove and bore looks great.

The stock appears to be walnut. Not sure if that indicates it is Savage manufacture or not. British proofs are on most of the pieces. It does not appear to have been renumbered. The serial number is on the main stock in full at the top and the last four halfway down.

The butt stock has a large rounded "S" on the top next to the butt plate. The butt plate is brass and the handguards have brass pins. Magazine does match, no crossed out previous numbers.

Metal cap on main stock has an "SM" stamp, the wood has what appears to be a large crown over a "51" in front of the trigger assembly. It also has a proof mark on the inside.

The front handguard has "MB 13" stamped on the metal and a "N 49" stamp on the wood just below the metal.

Butt stock has a "JN" stamped on the bottom of the neck. Also a large crown and a number or letter I can't read in front of the swivel. Something else on the bottom about 5 inches in front of the swivel. It's letters but I can't read them.

Rear handguard has a stamp I can't read and a British proof on the inside. All the wood matches color wise.

I still have to get the paint off the small fittings. I'll post some photos when I get it back together.

[Aragorn243]

Here's what it looks like with the paint removed:

[HOOKED ON HISTORY]

I have been researching this subject as well for touch up on my No 5. Krylon semi gloss matches perfectly but the durability is not there even though I am only touching up the horizonal surface of the charging bridge. Have heard aluma coat 2 and dura coat are options for a complete refurb. The youtube videos of the duracoat kits are intriguiging. Please post follow ups on you finish choice and thoughts on the results.

[Aragorn243]

I think for now I'm going to leave it alone. I'm not trying to make it look new and the surviving park finish isn't all that bad. The flash on the receiver wall makes it look like there's none there but it's pretty consistent with the safety leaver. The only part that is almost in the white is the bolt. That I may do something with but I'm just going to wait a bit.