My BSA No1 Mk III !

[bekoki]

Hi,

I've just bought a 1940 BSA No1 mkIII and I would better understand what I've bought (and if it worth the money )...
I will order some books to better understand it (Ian Skennerton "The Lee Enfield" + Peter Laidler "The Identification of Buttstock Marking Discs in British Service"), but it will take 2-3 weeks and I also would ask you more information and some advices.
Hereunder I post some pictures that should report the main features of the rifle. To this end, In my opinion some details sound "strange":
- Buttplate top
- Butstock serial number font
- "0" mark over manufacturer markings (behind the trigger guard).

ah, the cut-off was added by the previous owner...

I would thank you for any information that you could provide to me.
Regards,



Alessandro

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.

[Peter Laidler]

The fancy butt plate overhang is just someones idea of prettying up the rifle, presumably after he had butt patched the heel of the butt. It should be a half round.

The butt disc markings are definately not military and it looks to me like it's been inserted as a bit of an afterthought simply because the person sanding the butt has 'run-into' the butt disc recess instead of using a block. Clearly 7.7 is the metric .303" and quite what the 50 relates to is anyones guess.

As for the barred-out butt number mark, it's very probably an armoury number. Asa for the O above the designation. Ain't got a clue!

The butt plate screw should seat into the butt plate with just the curvature showing but that's just a bit of cosmetics really

[Thunderbox]

On my laptop I can't read the date - is it 1940 or 1942?

The rifle is interesting, because it is one of the very last No1 MkIIIs (ie a rifle built to full military spec including a cut-off) made by BSA; after 1940 BSA switched to "Dispersal" rifles mostly made to MkIII* spec and without the full "BSA&Co" title.

Most of the last MkIIIs are "L" prefix numbers and dated 1940. "M" prefix rifles are supposed to be Dispersals. Clearly there was a bit f an overlap in production, and a few more MkIIIs were finished after the introduction of the Dispersals. "Never say never" with Enfields!

[bekoki]

The fancy butt plate overhang is just someones idea of prettying up the rifle, presumably after he had butt patched the heel of the butt. It should be a half round.

The butt disc markings are definately not military and it looks to me like it's been inserted as a bit of an afterthought simply because the person sanding the butt has 'run-into' the butt disc recess instead of using a block. Clearly 7.7 is the metric .303" and quite what the 50 relates to is anyones guess.

As for the barred-out butt number mark, it's very probably an armoury number. Asa for the O above the designation. Ain't got a clue!

The butt plate screw should seat into the butt plate with just the curvature showing but that's just a bit of cosmetics really

Hi Peter,

thank you for your reply. You confirm my fears: I didn't trust completely in the genuinity of the discussed butt features (butt plate, marking, butt plate screws...), but I was so happy to buy my first No 1 (mk III !) that I "forgot" them... The rifle is very interesting and beautiful, but now I am seriously thinking to change it with a less altered one... but an mkIII is quite diffucult to find...

Regards,
Alessandro

[Mk VII]

West German proof marks? Not from this lot of ex-Italian Navy guns, is it?

[bekoki]

On my laptop I can't read the date - is it 1940 or 1942?

The rifle is interesting, because it is one of the very last No1 MkIIIs (ie a rifle built to full military spec including a cut-off) made by BSA; after 1940 BSA switched to "Dispersal" rifles mostly made to MkIII* spec and without the full "BSA&Co" title.

Most of the last MkIIIs are "L" prefix numbers and dated 1940. "M" prefix rifles are supposed to be Dispersals. Clearly there was a bit f an overlap in production, and a few more MkIIIs were finished after the introduction of the Dispersals. "Never say never" with Enfields!

Hi Thunderbox,

my rifle is dated 1940. I also think that a 1940 BSA mk III is an interesting rifle: I couldn't resist the temptation and I bought it... But that butt now hurt me...

West German proof marks? Not from this lot of ex-Italian Navy guns, is it?

No, it should be from another lot... not Italian Navy. Could you tell me which marks are West German?
Thank you!



Regards,

Alessandro

[RobD]

Don't change the whole rifle - it's a very simple matter to buy a replacement butt, complete buttplate, screws and blank stock disc. These items are not scarce, and appear on ebay all the time. If you can't find a supplier locally, PM me and I'll send you the email address of a dealer in the UK.

[Peter Laidler]

On the other hand Beko......... Apart from the butt plate and screw you could just leave the woodwork as it is. It is all part of its rich history. If you change the butt and that fine example of a REAL Armourers butt patch, what about the broken handguard ears? What next.........?

It is rich in history. My No4T was used as the slave rifle to test fire for firmness, pretty-well, every telescope that passed through a large workshop. It has been slightly adjusted to suit in several different ways just to make life easier. So, as far as those that appreciate the notion of a No4T concourse competition, then it's not even in the running. But its history since the 50's is known and recorded. Anyway, that's my 2c's worth

[A square 10]

i think it looks right smart as it is , these are a product of their service and use , sometimes we go way overboard trying to put them back to what they once were but have not been for decades , dont get me wrong , if you want it different - its yours , but i kinda like the buttstock repair for what it is ,

[RobD]

I agree. And once you put on a replacement butt/buttplate/stock disc, that'll be part of it's history too.