L42 To good to be true.

[Roger Payne]

The cheekpiece is real but IMHO has been re-fitted to this rifle, & as you note, the wood to wood fit is not the best.

Concerning the front pad - it's not the pad itself, it's the milled flat area that the front pad sits on that is suspect. When Enfield, & Holland & Holland set up the UK produced rifles originally they were done such that the scope in it's bracket would lie perfectly parallel to the rifle bore. This meant that a tiny depth of metal would need to be machined away from the receiver side wall so that the front pad located into position precisely. If you look at the receiver of an original 4T/L42 with its front pad removed you can see a 'window' a few thou in depth that conforms pretty precisely to the mating surface of the front pad. With the pad on, it is so precisely done as to be difficult to see, though it can usually be determined if you look carefully. In this case it looks like the the guy doing the milling had had a few too many Buds before he started.

[Peter Laidler]

The cheek rest was never actually designed for the No4T. It went there by default! It was made and designed for the high telescope mounted P'14's and Sgt Cooper at the sniper school tried the idea on the first of the production No4T's. It suited them too so the idea was submitted, approved and the rest is history. But the fit onto a No4 butt, even at H&H was nowhere near perfect so it had to be fitted properly if the Armourers were so inclined - which most weren't! The only ones that were a perfect mechanical fit were those fitted by apprentices during their course

[Roger Payne]

Peter, I had wondered if that extra little notch at the front bottom of the early cheekpieces was a hang over from the from the original intent to fit them to the No3 (T).

[Peter Laidler]

You're probably right DRP. The underside configuration was for fitment to the P'14 stock butt

[XL39E1]

There are a few 72 dated L42's around, not many though! 34288 is recorded on the lists but as a "G" prefix, E and G always get mixed up.

[bigduke6]

Post # 1 the OP states serial number 2C0520 ...... So the butt, may be off an original rifle? as I,ve seen and handled a L42 with the rifle serial stamped on the butt were the scope number should be, IIRC in a PM to DRP he states he has seen it a few times.

I know of six L42 rifle serial numbers, (rifles recovered for spares.....) IIRC two of them I'm told are not on the list, the number 34288 is not one of the six I have.

[Roger Payne]

Hi Geoff. Yes, I've seen rifle as well as scope number stamped into the butts below the cocking piece on a number of occasions now. Maybe the work of a 'belt & braces' armourer during a repair! I've also seen a few rifles with the rifle serial on the underside of the butt behind the S51 stamp, though not many.

[Brian Dick]

I've seen rifle serial numbers stamped on a few L42 butts too. ROF Maltby also did it during the war on may service No.4's for reasons unknown to me.

[Surpmil]

Just to be Lucifer's lawyer for a minute, it certainly has the look of long service; that is not something easily faked. True, the stock and even the barrel might have seen that service on another, presumably genuine L42.

That oversize flat for the front pad is odd, but this would be a very early conversion (2C Savage) if genuine; perhaps the person on the milling machine did not understand the instructions/requirements or was a "learner"? Being purely cosmetic it would not be grounds for rejection presumably. Regardless, if someone were building a fake it's the last thing they would want to do, and photos of No4(T)s have been in books for 50+ years.

The front pad screws have been staked and restaked. We know why that happens: lots of shots fired; unless they came off another rifle...? But did the screws as well? Plenty of slot damage too.

The rear pad mating surfaces appear to have a bit of a cant inwards toward the body side as though someone has tweaked them with a file. Doesn't prove anything either way.

Could it be that someone wanted an L42 and was on the inside or had a contact who was and obtained a kit of parts except the body, which they then built up on a different body?

The butt has been on there a while and has plenty of meat left over the edges of the socket. Scope numbers overstruck or nothing there until the spurious 30---- added?

And what's that proof mark on the barrel ring? Would a rifle in continuous military use since production have that? It's well buried under the paint by the look of it.

[Roger Payne]

I'd agree that it's entirely possible that the rifle has been assembled with a kit of genuine parts on a suitable 'donor' body.