1943 No4Mk1 BSA Shirley receiver - no serial number? Were they that much in a hurry?

[louthepou]

Hi guys, doesn't look like the serial number was scrubbed from this one - wondering if anyone else has come across a non-serial numbered receiver like that before? The receiver does look like folks were in a hurry to get it out the door...

Louis




The barrel is nice, should be a good shooter. Just dressed it up with spare parts I had.



Now here's, just for the fun of it, another one. These pictures are from a No4 Mk2 version (don't think it's a Mk1/2 or 1/3), with barely more info. Got it as a sporter, will desporterize it. Very minimalist Lee Enfields these days, in my shop, tehy don't seem to want to talk much...

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.

[Cdn303]

Lunch time/change of shift gun perhaps? Was set down in the anticipation of finishing it off, but worker forgot about it, or new worker assumed it was done and put it on the finished rack.

[jmoore]

Does the No.4 Mk.2 have the cutoff reinforce boss on the RH front of the receiver? If not, it may be a leftover receiver. Some seem to have been built up later on.

[Roger Payne]

JM, some do & some don't. The earlier Mk2 rifles had the cut off boss, but the last ones had it omitted, like on the No5 body. Afraid I don't know enough about No4 Mk2 production to tell you more precisely when the changeover was. No doubt somebody else will help out.

ATB.

[browningautorifle]

non-serial numbered receiver

I can tell you for a fact from working weapon stores, this receiver would be accounted for by the number 1943, or M47/1943, because I've seen it done. I have a hard time imagining that the weapon techs would allow a weapon the exist with no number, it would be hard to account for on inspections and such. I'd think if it was accounted for as NSN, they'd be stamping a set into it. Even though this can't be a correct serial, it HAS a number...can't wait to hear Tankie or Peter's perspective on my thoughts...or some of the other armorers...

[Peter Laidler]

BAR is right. I have seen no end of No8 rifles going through as CR-XXX and Stens as M-78. You know the sort of thing. While I have seen plenty of weapons with defaced, ill defined or just bead blasted out illegible numbers I don't ever recall seeing one with no serial number.

We had a well defined system for numbering or re-numbering weapons with lost, defaced of illegible numbers. These were prefixed ZZ or SA-year-A-xxxx