1942 Lithgow No1 paint marking question

[Sunray]

"...previous owner fired it..." That proves nothing about anything. Except he didn't know what he was about. Only headspace gauges prove good headspace.
"...& Commonwealth weapons..." Absolutely not CF Cadets. No paint of any kind on the No. 4's or No. 7's I had on my MIU, long ago. Mind you, none of 'em were DP'd. No such thing as no weapons techs available either.
"...many were converted back to firing status..." None of those are considered safe to shoot either.

[Bindi2]

Thanks again everyone for the replies, I was going to restock this one but I think I'll just leave it as is. Not wartime history but interesting none the less.

1942 rifle certainly would have seen action, WW2, Korea. The cadets came later. If the Butt hasent been changed or sanded there will be many stampings showing the rifles history. The paint is only one chapter of its history.

[kpj53]

1942 rifle certainly would have seen action, WW2, Korea. The cadets came later. If the Butt hasent been changed or sanded there will be many stampings showing the rifles history. The paint is only one chapter of its history.

I meant the paint markings didnt have any wartime history, but the cadet history is interesting too. Matter of fact every time people see the rifle the first thing they ask about is the paint markings, the red and green paint is really bright in daylight.

I'm sure the rifle has seen some action over its lifetime. Only markings the stock has is SLAZ 52 and the painted marks, many I have seen had all kinds of markings but this ones doesnt. I assume the wood was replaced when it was FTR'd or later down the road.

[Homer]

Replaced at FTR

[Peter Laidler]

FTR doesn't mean the wood will have been changed. If it was still serviceable, it would be refinmished, made off, dunked in hot linseed for 8 hours and re-used. The same as everything else. All gauged and re-used. Waste not, want not.

You find an Armourer with an old car and it'll always be repaired. When real armourers were about, we were masters of repair as opposed to replace.

[Homer]

Peter I understand that, however, of the rifles that were FTR’d at Lithgow between 1950 and 1960 and stamped FTR on the receiver, I’ve nrver come across one that didn’t have new forend and handguards at that time. Butts are a mix of new and used. I haven’t seen them all and I’m sure there are exceptions, but I’d suggest the vast majority had all front wood replaced.

[Richard Hare]

Homer,

My 1927 Lithgow was FTR'd in 1954.

New barrel made in 1953.
Foreend and upper handguard are Slazenger 1952 (Slaz '52)
Lower or rear handguard is Slaz '42.

Buttstock Slaz '52....so Nearly all new wood.

It too bears paint;
A white '52 on the buttstock, and a white "53 on the foreend just below the swivel mount.

One of a lot sold off in Canada, about 1988 -90.

[browningautorifle]

One of a lot sold off in Canada, about 1988 -90.

I remember those coming in...

[S-A-M3]

Peter.. will know, listen to what he says!!!!. S

[harry mac]

Just a guess, but I think the dots were for local indication that the rifle was awaiting repair, and wasn't to be issued for use. While it was waiting to be collected by the armourers and assessed/repaired, the rifle was withdrawn and it went to the disposal sales "as is".
I recon that if it had had the repairs done and come back to the unit, they would have removed the dots and put it back in use.