Fazakerley, Day 1

[Lance]

#68, day 1 (or 2) of initial Fazakerley production; an interesting piece of history that made it through partially unchanged.

Over paid or paid too much too soon but it caught my eye. Assembled mostly from left over Enfield parts it helps tell the tale of early war production.

The receiver appears to be originally Enfield that was not finished (no cut off slot) lacks a lot of proof’s usually seen in finished pieces, but does have an Enfield proof by the bolt groove. Sear is “F” marked, possible later replacement. Trigger guard is a much later BSA Shirely (M47) but trigger is Enfield (possibly kept because of the grooves??)

Barrel is ’41 dated, Enfield inspected and matching to receiver. Interesting inspector stamp in a square box. A similar stamp is seen on the middle band. Rear handguard ring is Enfield proofed.

Front band is hinged with inspector number stamp but no traditional Enfield inspector stamp. Front sight guard is unmarked, possible replacement?? Front sight blade is Fazakerley.

Forend, hand guards, butt are all Enfield, butt plate is mazak, appears Enfield proofed?? Trap door made by W&T.A so I have no clue on it. I assume the proof most likely is just an inspector mark and they plate was installed later in the rifles service.

Now the bad. Mis-matched bolt off a Savage 91C range rifle, magazine mis-matched and rear sight is a later stamped example with broken battle sight. I have a SM41 Singer milled sight to install unless someone else has a better suggestion? I am also in the hunt for a better mis-matched bolt, if anyone has a spare Enfield example they are willing to trade…..

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.

[Roger Payne]

A really interesting rifle Lance. It's quite a significant piece in the evolution of No4 rifle production. Did the previous owner fully understand what they had?

[mrclark303]

What a fascinating rifle, thanks for sharing, might I suggest it's added to the Knowledge Library.

[Lance]

A really interesting rifle Lance. It's quite a significant piece in the evolution of No4 rifle production. Did the previous owner fully understand what they had?

It was an internet auction, so no idea about the previous owner. I saw the s/n and the Enfield wood work and gambled, I knew the bolt was m/m but I was hoping for at least an early UK example.

[Roger Payne]

Well, the gamble paid off alright!

[CINDERS]

Nice grab on a hunch Lance.

[Giove]

A very interesting rifle.

S.N. 2068: So not "always five digits".

[SpikeDD]

Here is another one for you to compare marks to. 5 digit number on this one.

Attachment 92393Attachment 92403Attachment 92402Attachment 92401Attachment 92400Attachment 92399Attachment 92398Attachment 92397Attachment 92396Attachment 92395Attachment 92394Attachment 92392Attachment 92383Attachment 92384Attachment 92385Attachment 92386Attachment 92387Attachment 92388Attachment 92389Attachment 92390Attachment 92391

[Lance]

Many thanks for the pic's, what scope s/n was originally paired with her?

[SpikeDD]

You're welcome, Lance. Very nice score. This rifle belongs to another board member but I took the photos.

Attachment 92449Attachment 92450