-
Contributing Member
Bizarre finish on a LE T
Is there any chance that the finish on this Enfield was done by the military?
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. |
|
-
-
08-09-2014 11:07 AM
# ADS
Friends and Sponsors
-
Legacy Member
Possibly Canadian FTR, some of the Canadian - Italian Navy Enfield's had the same type of finish.
-
-
-
Advisory Panel
I would be worried by the obvious serrated imprints of vice jaws on the wood. That does not look very professional.
Then there is the question: why would it have been refinished?
And if it was an arsenal-level job, wouldn't the rifles have been stripped right down to components parts - i.e. with the scope mounting brackets also removed? The screws on the rear mount look as if they were bead-blasted without being removed.
So take a very, very close look indeed (one cannot tell from the couple of photos) in all corners: are there traces of a previous finish that was not removed because the rifle was not completely stripped down?
One obvious reason for a refinish would have been degeneration of the original black "suncorite" coating. Look for traces of that.
Furthermore, I see no traces of the usual factory markings on the side of the receiver. If they have been obliterated, then it was probably a Bubba job.
Last edited by Patrick Chadwick; 08-09-2014 at 11:39 AM.
-
-
-
-
When ours went through the workshops the pads would only be removed if they were loose. By loose, I mean even a small oil squeeze would be loose in some in-inspectors opinion! But they'd be replaced PRIOR to going through the bead blast and phosphating plant.
Was that one done by the military.........? Probably yes, but a crap military looking at the standards!
This grey finish has always been a bit of a mystery. We did a huge load of old grey No2 and commercial type L9 9mm Brownings for a Crown Agents programme many years ago. Where they came from or where they were going to, nobody knew. It was said by |Robbie, the examiner that they'd come from the Netherlands (I think....., or one of those low Countries) and were being supplied via a MAP programme to....., well, somewhere!
-
-
Legacy Member
-
-
Legacy Member
If I were a betting man, I'd lay a small wager that the rifle in question has been subjected to a poorly done DIY attempt Parkerizing, or less likely, an aftermarket anti-corrosive finish such as hard chroming or Rogard NP3.
-
-
Advisory Panel
Hey Master Chief, May I ask how you removed the Suncorite? Having worked with it for many years, I've never seen properly baked Suncorite removed completely without bead blasting. Even the denatured alcohol, (meths) as our British friends know it, won't touch it if it's baked properly. Maybe some of the nasty chemical strippers but I've never tried. I'm usually busy putting it on instead of taking it off. Brian
---------- Post added at 02:22 PM ---------- Previous post was at 02:21 PM ----------
I was thinking maybe the No.4T was a teflon coated weapon from Belgian stores but the closer I look at it, it just looks like a very smooth zinc phosphate job. It's not dark enough to be manganese phosphate. I could be wrong.
-
-
You're right there Brian Once in the oven it cures the sunkorite paint (something that air drying will not do successfully) so I agree with you that whatever was on there weren't not sunkorite! It just looks like the whole rifle has been dunked in the phosphate tank and then given a quick blow job with an aerosol can of barbie paint! (- as opposed to a barbie doll)
-
-
Advisory Panel
You're much more straight to the point Peter! My point was that I don't think it was painted with Suncorite!!
-