1950 Longbranch Target Rifle... is this genuine?

[Echo Bravo]

Hi,

So... I may be purchasing a 1950 Longbranch No4Mk1*... that has apparently been modified to be a target rifle...

I'm a bit hesitant... and think this may have been done by some guy de-bubbafying it... here's why... and let me know if I'm wrong please...





1- The rear hand guard is the kind with the cuts along it... I thought that by 1950 they were using solid hand guards

2- The butt plate is brass... shouldn't it be black steel?

3- LB stamped... not CA... when did CA take over?

4- The safety is the kind with the hole in the middle... not the boot shaped one... is this a common mod for the target rifles?

5- The barrel hasn't been free floated... I thought they free floated the target models???

Thanks for your help... I look forward to hearing what you guys think.

EB

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.

[Badger]

Can you provide pics, even if they're the ones the seller has sent you?

If you don't know how to post them in the thread here, email them to me at badger@milsurps.com and I'll host and post them in the thread for you.

If the rifle is being publicly offered on another site, to maintain confidentiality, send me a link to the ad and I'll "scrape" the pics off the ad for you and bring them into this thread.

It's very hard to pass judgement on something that we can't really see.

As a starting point, check the Canada - Milsurp Knowledge Library (click here)

1950 C No.4 Mk1* Long Branch Rifle (click here)

This is an "all correct" example with a 94 pic photo montage of what a 1950 "unissued" Long Branch should look like.

Thanks

Regards,
Badger

[Echo Bravo]

I posted a couple pics and point 5

Also, what is that extra hole in the receiver on the second picture?

EB

[Lance]

I can help with some, but not all of your questions.

Grooved rear handguards are hit and miss, my unissued '49 has them, by unissued '50 does not. If it has an LB or CA inside the guard and it fits, leave it alone.

Brass butt plate is a definite no no on a '50 LB, very easy to change, you get can a whole box of them off ebay for $15.

There appears to be a CA by the receiver s/n, other metal bits and wood bits can be LB or CA as the change over did not occur over night. My '50 a 92L5XXX is all CA, but my '49 91L0XXX is all LB (with a few Savage bits). I do know the more specific LB to CA change over s/n range, maybe some else will speak up.

Your safety appears to be an early-mid war LB example, why yours was changed is due to the PH5C, the standard kickstand LB type will rub the sight or be an very tight fit.

I do not know much about free floating the barrel but it should be touching the very end of the forend with 1-2 mm of movement

The extra hole in the receiver is not military or target, it appears to be bubba.

Your triggerguard is also a milled type and not a stamped type a '50 rifle would have.

[Echo Bravo]

Thanks for the info... sounds more bubba than genuine...

EB

[tiriaq]

It was very common for rifles that were set up for target shooting to have alterations, or swapped parts. Shooters were prone to experiment. The milled trigger guard was likely used in the thought that it would improve the bedding. It is unlikely that the barrel would be free floated. It would be either muzzle bedded or centre bedded. If you were to take the forend off, the bedding would likely show hand work. The safety was cut for clearance. No idea what that hole is for.
I think it is very likely that it is a rifle used for DCRA/PRA target shooting.
It is not a good example of an as-issued 1950 LB service rifle. It is a representative example of a rifle used for SR(b) target shooting. Whether or not it is desirable depends on what sort of rifle you are looking for.
I have a 1950 LB that was used for DCRA target shooting. It was owned by two of the grand old men of the DCRA. It is a fine rifle, and is of interest to me because of its target shooting history.

[Ian Robertson]

I think tiriaq is correct. I have several rifles that were used for tr and no doubt cobbled together from available parts as tr shooters did and still do. In the early 80's when #4's were apparently getting a little scarce (or more expensive) in UK some of the Brit team members would head to K Mart to buy sporters to take home for the actions to build long range guns on. Although built from parts they can still be excellent shooters as they were meant to be.

[Max Power]

i to have several target rifles in my collection. 4 of them were built on 1950 CA guns. 3 of them have C< marked grooved handgaurds, one has a smooth one. they are all ether marked C< or CA. ether is correct as far as im concened on a target rifle. out of the bunch of them,all of them have had the buttplates traded for brass ones. true or not, i have been told that some liked to trade the plates for brass to put a lil more weight on the back end.
safe arm? thats allready been answered, they were swaped out, cause the standard arm style will rub on the site.
as to bbl free floating, none of mine are floated. they are all mid and frontend bedded. floating was only done on the sniper rifle.
all of 4 these rifles has also had the stamped steel trigger gaurds swaped out for machined ones. as has allready been said, the stamped ones were not liked , the milled was, and is, much better for strength.
showing my aga a bit, but a couple of these i have owned and shot for going on 30 years now. they only get sweeter with age