+ Reply to Thread
Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 1 2 3 LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 23

Thread: Early 32 Scope?

Click here to increase the font size Click here to reduce the font size
  1. #11
    Legacy Member maxman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Last On
    07-30-2022 @ 03:02 PM
    Posts
    5
    Local Date
    03-28-2024
    Local Time
    02:38 PM
    Thread Starter

    Early 32? - Follow Up

    The negotiation took a lot longer that expected. I apologize for the delay. Attached are some pictures of the scope. It is 11" overall length and the turrets are made of brass. I'd appreciate hearing from anyone with any information. Thanks Maxman

    Attachment 103804Attachment 103803Attachment 103802Attachment 103801Attachment 103800Attachment 103799

  2. The Following 4 Members Say Thank You to maxman For This Useful Post:


  3. # ADS
    Friends and Sponsors
    Join Date
    October 2006
    Posts
    All Threads
    A Collector's View - The SMLE Short Magazine Lee Enfield 1903-1989. It is 300 8.5x11 inch pages with 1,000+ photo’s, most in color, and each book is serial-numbered.  Covering the SMLE from 1903 to the end of production in India in 1989 it looks at how each model differs and manufacturer differences from a collecting point of view along with the major accessories that could be attached to the rifle. For the record this is not a moneymaker, I hope just to break even, eventually, at $80/book plus shipping.  In the USA shipping is $5.00 for media mail.  I will accept PayPal, Zelle, MO and good old checks (and cash if you want to stop by for a tour!).  CLICK BANNER to send me a PM for International pricing and shipping. Manufacturer of various vintage rifle scopes for the 1903 such as our M73G4 (reproduction of the Weaver 330C) and Malcolm 8X Gen II (Unertl reproduction). Several of our scopes are used in the CMP Vintage Sniper competition on top of 1903 rifles. Brian Dick ... BDL Ltd. - Specializing in British and Commonwealth weapons Specializing in premium ammunition and reloading components. Your source for the finest in High Power Competition Gear. Here at T-bones Shipwrighting we specialise in vintage service rifle: re-barrelling, bedding, repairs, modifications and accurizing. We also provide importation services for firearms, parts and weapons, for both private or commercial businesses.
     

  4. #12
    Advisory Panel Lee Enfield's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Last On
    03-16-2024 @ 12:24 PM
    Location
    out there
    Posts
    1,820
    Local Date
    03-28-2024
    Local Time
    12:38 PM
    Quote Originally Posted by maxman View Post
    The negotiation took a lot longer that expected. I apologize for the delay. Attached are some pictures of the scope. It is 11" overall length and the turrets are made of brass. I'd appreciate hearing from anyone with any information. Thanks Maxman

    Attachment 103804Attachment 103803Attachment 103802Attachment 103801Attachment 103800Attachment 103799
    Looks very much like the C.No67 MkI without an adjustable eye piece.

    Certainly the turret design comes from a similar design basis point.

    Although windage appears to be on the left side (ala no 32).

    Too bad it isn't dated
    Last edited by Lee Enfield; 11-16-2019 at 12:43 PM.

  5. Avoid Ads - Become a Contributing Member - Click HERE
  6. #13
    Advisory Panel
    Roger Payne's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Last On
    03-20-2024 @ 06:05 AM
    Location
    Sutton Coldfield, UK.
    Posts
    3,429
    Real Name
    Roger Payne
    Local Date
    03-28-2024
    Local Time
    06:38 PM
    The tube looks to me as though it is based on the No32/42/53 series, certainly in the ocular housing & parallel sided part, although the front end assembly looks rather different, as do the drums. The style of engraving on them (drums) makes me wonder too, if the scope could be Canadian, in spite of the lack of a 'C' anywhere in the designation. And it would not be the only 3.5 power experimental scope coming out of Canadaicon. Is the parallel part of the tube 1" in diameter? My hunch is it will be. Will it fit into a conventional No32/No4 (T) scope bracket? It isn't dated, but the general look of it suggests WW2 era to me.

    Anybody got any thoughts?

  7. Thank You to Roger Payne For This Useful Post:


  8. #14
    Advisory Panel
    Peter Laidler's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Last On
    03-24-2024 @ 09:52 AM
    Location
    Abingdon, Oxfordshire. The home of MG Cars
    Posts
    16,507
    Real Name
    Peter Laidler
    Local Date
    03-28-2024
    Local Time
    08:38 PM
    Agree with DRP. The engraved markings are Canadaicon/REL without any shadow of doubt. Problem number 1 would be lack of any form of stop rings. Without stop rings it WILL slide within the mount during recoil. The flimsy turrets sticking out like a bulldogs balls would be as recipe for a speedy failure too

    Given that the range drum is graduated to 1000 yds presumably would be the reason why the azimuth or deflection is only 24 MoA as opposed to the usual 32 MoA . That's for mechanical/tech reasons that I won't go into. I wonder what the FoView is too.

  9. Thank You to Peter Laidler For This Useful Post:


  10. #15
    Legacy Member rgg_7's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Last On
    Yesterday @ 10:32 PM
    Location
    Niagara
    Posts
    524
    Real Name
    Ron
    Local Date
    03-28-2024
    Local Time
    02:38 PM
    maxman - what country was this purchased? Did the previous Owner have any info? REL marked everything they produced. What is overall length? tube diameter? What's in it for a recticle? Maybe with a little more info the guys on this board can determine it's origin. Ron (Canadaicon)

  11. #16
    Advisory Panel Lee Enfield's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Last On
    03-16-2024 @ 12:24 PM
    Location
    out there
    Posts
    1,820
    Local Date
    03-28-2024
    Local Time
    12:38 PM
    The turret housing and tube assembly method looks identical to the 3.5x "Gimbal" trials scopes. I was thinking that the dimensional differences may be related to attemps to improve waterproofing.

    Canadaicon made a big push of Tropical treating equipment in late '44 & '45, in the run up to the planned shift from the ETO to the Far East in preparation for the invasion of Japanicon.
    Last edited by Lee Enfield; 11-17-2019 at 04:47 PM.

  12. #17
    Advisory Panel Surpmil's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Last On
    @
    Location
    West side
    Posts
    4,651
    Local Date
    03-28-2024
    Local Time
    11:38 AM
    A very interesting addition to our knowledge base Maxman, thank you. Looks like it adorned someone's hunting rifle for many a year after the war ended and interest was lost in tropicalized scopes. No doubt you've received offers from certain members already!?

    So 24 minutes of windage adjustment and what to the range markings go up to please?

    From the dirt in the screw slots it seems to have held zero pretty well.

    Rather like the No.32 with the slipping scale mods that turned up a few years ago. Never say never.

    Of course what was really needed was a fulled sealed and zeroed scope with no external adjustments as was used on the Arisakaicon. Simple enough to put the range markings up to 1300m on the reticule itself. Much quicker and easier to use as well. I believe the latest ELCANs incorporate such a reticule.

    Another example of R.E.L. "getting on with it".

    I happened to see for sale a set of "rabbit ear binoculars" made by them recently; something I had never seen any mention of before as one of their products.
    Last edited by Surpmil; 11-25-2019 at 10:56 AM.
    “There are invisible rulers who control the destinies of millions. It is not generally realized to what extent the words and actions of our most influential public men are dictated by shrewd persons operating behind the scenes.”

    Edward Bernays, 1928

    Much changes, much remains the same.

  13. #18
    Advisory Panel Lee Enfield's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Last On
    03-16-2024 @ 12:24 PM
    Location
    out there
    Posts
    1,820
    Local Date
    03-28-2024
    Local Time
    12:38 PM
    Quote Originally Posted by maxman View Post
    The negotiation took a lot longer that expected. I apologize for the delay. Attached are some pictures of the scope. It is 11" overall length and the turrets are made of brass. I'd appreciate hearing from anyone with any information. Thanks Maxman

    Attachment 103804Attachment 103803Attachment 103802Attachment 103801Attachment 103800Attachment 103799
    Excerpt from the Canadianicon Military Historical Report Report No. 73:

    Sniper's Equipment
    38. Subsequent to a general survey of the situation on snipers equipment (109), a meeting
    was held in June 1943 to determine how best to meet both immediate and long term requirements
    (110). A number of comparative firing trials had been carried out on various commercial and
    service sights which appeared to indicate there was considerable room for improvement (111)
    (112) (113). For the longer term policy specifications were drawn up for a 5X telescope sight
    (114) (115) and 3-1/2X sight (116), and the production of prototypes was instituted (115) (117).
    The decision to design the lower power model came as a result of a suggestion originating in the
    United Kingdomicon (118). The War Office evinced considerable interest in the development of the
    two sights (119)
    , and by the end of November, 1943, were so actively concerned about the sniper
    situation that it seemed doubtful if the Canadian prototypes would be completed in time for full
    P.14
    consideration to be given to them by the War Office (120). In December an added requirement
    was introduced into the operational specification (121). This called for sights to be proofed
    against fungus growth under tropical conditions. Prototype samples of the telescope sights were
    sent to the United Kingdom in March 1944 (122), and at the same time steps were taken to
    modify the design in order to make it fungus-proof (123) (124).
    As a result of reports from the
    United Kingdom, which all indicated preference for the 5X over 3-1/2X model, an educational
    order for 100, 5X telescope sights was placed (125) (126) (127) (128) (129) (130). Speaking of
    the Canadian sights the Assistant Chief of the Imperial General Staff stated "that the Canadian
    5X and 3-1/2X telescopes were incomparably better in every way than anything that we or the
    Germans had so far produced, the 5X being better than the 3-1/2 X " (128). It caused no small
    surprise to learn in July 1944 that the provisional adoption of the 3-1/2X rather than the 5X sight
    had been recommended (131). This necessitated changing the educational order previously
    placed (132) (133). Concurrently, at War Office request, the Ministry of Supply initiated
    inquiries for production information based on a requirement for 4000 3-1/2X instruments (134),
    but were disappointed to learn that no deliveries could be made before April 1945 (135), whereas
    they had understood, on a basis of unofficial information (136) given without reference to the
    proper authorities (137), that deliveries could be completed by April 1945 (135). On account of
    the length of time required to start production the War Office order was not forthcoming (138).
    Nevertheless, interest in the sights remained (139), and found expression in a renewed inquiry for
    delivery estimates in March 1945 (140), although a 21 Army Group Report to the War Office
    (141) had stated: "there is no particular advantage to be obtained from the adoption of the
    Canadian Sniper's rifle". Four telescopes, two of each power, had been sent to the Western
    Theatre of Operations for user trial (142); two of these were "destroyed by enemy action" and a
    third captured complete with sniper (143).

    REFERENCES
    109. H.Q.S. 8928-11-54A, Vol 1. Crang, J.H. Possibility of Improvement of Present Sniping
    Rifle 11 Jun 43.
    110. Ibid, Minutes of Meeting held at A.T.D.B. 17 Jun 43.
    111. H.Q.S. 8928-11-54A, Vol 1, A.T.D.B. to D.S.D.(W) 15 Apr 43.
    112. Ibid, Macdonald, J.H.B. to Martin, T.B. 3 Jun 43.
    113. O.B. Procs 22211, 17 Mar 43.
    114. H.Q.S. 8928-11-54A, Vol 1, Minutes of Meeting held at R.E.L., 26 & 27 Jun 43.
    115. Ibid, Minutes of Meeting held at R.E.L. 17 Jul 43, 19 Jull 43.
    116. Ibid, R.E.L. to A.T.D.B. 10 Sep 43.
    117. Ibid, A.T.D.B. to D.O.S. (TS) 1 Sep 43.
    118. Ibid, Cable S.D.W. 156 to N.D.H.Q. 21 Aug 43.
    119. Ibid, Cable S.D.W. 576 to N.D.H.Q. 4 Nov 43.

    120. Ibid, Cable S.D.W. 728 to N.D.H.Q. 27 Nov 43.
    121. H.Q.S. 8928-11-54, Vol 2, S.D.W. 935 to N.D.H.Q., 24 Dec 43.
    122. Ibid, M.G.O. to C.M.H.Q., 2 Mar 44.
    123. H.Q.S. 8928-11-54A, Vol 3, R.E.L. to D.V.S.A. 18 Feb 44.
    124. H.Q.S. 8928-11-54, Vol 2, A.T.D.B. to D.M.G.O. (C), 9 Mar 44.

    125. Ibid, Vol 3, Report of Examination by N.P.L., Teddington, 3 Apr 44.
    126. Ibid, A.G.E. report 8 May 44.
    127. Ibid, Cable D.V.A. 739 to C.M.H.Q. 27 Jun 44.
    128. Ibid, Extracts from M. of S. Monthly Review of Research and Development Programmes,
    Field Weapons Programme, Item 12, undated.
    129. H.Q.S. 8928-11-54A, Vol 3, Experimental Establishment (Pendine) to Ordnance Board,
    5 Jun 44.
    130. Ibid, C.L.O. (T.L.G.) Pendine to S.D. 12, C.M.H.Q., undated.
    131. H.Q.S. 8928-11-54, Vol 3, Cable S.D.W. 2322 to N.D.H.Q. 3 Jul 44.
    132. Ibid, Cable D.V.A. 759 to C.M.H.Q. 6 Jul 44.
    133. H.Q.S. 8928-11-54A, Vol 3, D.V.S.A. to D. of M. & S., 6 Jul 44.
    134. Ibid, Cable S.D.W. 2379 to N.D.H.Q., 8 Jul 44.
    135. H.Q.S. 8928-11-54, Vol 3, Cable S.D.W. 2705 to N.D.H.Q., 17 Aug 44.
    136. H.Q.S. 8928-11-54A, Vol 3, copy of C.M.H.Q., 55/6252/P54.
    137. H.Q.S. 8928-11-54, Vol 3, D. of M&S to C.M.H.Q., 24 Aug 44.
    138. H.Q.S. 8928-11-54A, Vol 3, Cable S.D.W. 2858 to N.D.H.Q., 5 Sep 44.
    139. Ibid, Cable S.D.W. 3732 to N.D.H.Q., 19 Dec 44.
    140. Ibid, Vol 4, Cable D.V.S.A. 1281 to C.M.H.Q., 6 Mar 45.
    141. Ibid, Vol 3, 21 Army Group Report to W.O. (copy), 26 Dec 44.
    142. Ibid, C.M.H.Q. to N.D.H.Q. 11 Dec 44.
    143. Ibid, C.M.H.Q. to N.D.H.Q. 22 Dec 44.
    Last edited by Lee Enfield; 02-14-2020 at 01:08 PM.
    BSN from the Republic of Alberta

    http://www.cartridgecollectors.org/

  14. The Following 4 Members Say Thank You to Lee Enfield For This Useful Post:


  15. #19
    Advisory Panel Surpmil's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Last On
    @
    Location
    West side
    Posts
    4,651
    Local Date
    03-28-2024
    Local Time
    11:38 AM
    There is much there for further research. Do you know if any of the primary documents cited still exist?

    The War Office evinced considerable interest in the development of the two sights (119)[/B], and by the end of November, 1943, were so actively concerned about the sniper situation that it seemed doubtful if the Canadianicon prototypes would be completed in time for full consideration to be given to them by the War Office (120).[B
    This curious statement implies some deadline for such "consideration"; do we know when exactly that was?

    It is curious because while the WO was huffing and puffing about all these various technical requirements and deadlines, production of the same old Mk.I and Mk.II scopes was continuing merrily on at Watson's, Houghton Butcher etc. right into 1944 and in the Watson case, Mk.I's in the 14,000 SN range, with no pretense of sealing, waterproofing, fungus-proofing etc. etc.!

    The Mk.3 scope begins production at about SN 16,000 in late 1944, while H&H carries on fitting MkI and II scopes most if not all the way through 1944, this while they had the REL 3.5x and 5x scopes already in the UK for trials early in 1944. Not until October 1944 does the No32 Mk.3 design appear. One might wonder to what extent it was based on, if not prompted by, the REL scopes sent for trial earlier that year?

    We know from the inventory of sniping rifles taken in Nov. 1943 which Clive Law cited, that production of the No.4(T) at Holland & Holland was only about 180 rifles a month, rather than the purported 800.

    https://www.milsurps.com/showthread....l=1#post362178

    So, given that they had thousands of No.32 Mk.Is sitting somewhere in the UK unfitted and unused, one wonders why the Ministry of Supply didn't just send them over to Long Branch and solve the purported "problem"? It's not like there weren't some ships going back empty.

    Or would that have involved admitting that they hadn't got anything like the expected supply of conversions underway, and had no prospect of doing so?

    Then of course there's the problem of sending your sorry old MkI's over to Long Branch and letting them look them over and of course find out that they didn't remotely correspond to the standards that were being demanded of the REL production...that could be trifle awkward!


    In fact the low priority given to No.32 production at REL can only have been based on the priority given in the largely Britishicon contracts for dozens of other devices which REL was fulfilling. Compared to what else REL was building the No32 MkI was a piece of cake - albeit a very stale one which the experts at REL felt was not worth developing further, just like the three draw telescopes.

    So, suddenly the War Office gets a bee in their bonnet about sniper rifles at the end of 1943; presumably they had now noticed that the invasion of N. W. Europe was impending and H&H's production was nowhere near what it was supposed to be under the contracts.

    Was H&H just in violation thereof or had they been told "unofficially" to just carry on regardless? IIRC when Peter visited the H&H factory and spoke to the gent who had worked there at the time, he was shown the one milling machine which had been set up with jigs to machine the pads after fitting to the rifles. (40+ years after the end of the war and the contracts, there were still drawers full of finished and semi-finished pads, "thumbscrews" etc.!)

    Logically, if BSA had not been involved earlier, late '43 would be when their reputed 100 or so conversions were put in hand: the WO casting around for some way to get production of rifles closer to the production of scopes. Presumably BSA didn't have the spare capacity, or didn't want to be bothered beyond the hundred or so. (Unless those were .22 conversions as previously discussed elsewhere)

    Such of course is the nature of private contractors: if they don't want to cooperate or extract their digits, not much can be done about it unless contracts stipulate penalties. Crown corporations get the order and they carry it out, even if they need to hire more people and make capital investments to do it. In fairness though, they may well have just given No.4(T) conversions the priority which the WO set; we'll probably never know. It doesn't appear the contracts were amended however.

    The full story, or most of it, must lie in those primary documents; I hope you can turn some of them up.
    Last edited by Surpmil; 02-18-2020 at 12:22 AM.
    “There are invisible rulers who control the destinies of millions. It is not generally realized to what extent the words and actions of our most influential public men are dictated by shrewd persons operating behind the scenes.”

    Edward Bernays, 1928

    Much changes, much remains the same.

  16. Thank You to Surpmil For This Useful Post:


  17. #20
    Advisory Panel Surpmil's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Last On
    @
    Location
    West side
    Posts
    4,651
    Local Date
    03-28-2024
    Local Time
    11:38 AM
    There's another interesting facet to this story of the H&H contracts: why would they be seeking thousands of scopes and rifles from Canadaicon at all if 800 a month were coming out of H&H?

    This begs another question: how many No4(T)s had if fact been produced by H&H when the contracts ended in 1946?

    I am thinking it must be some thousands fewer than previously believed, when I recall that H.W. English had over 5000 MkI scopes they purchased loose from surplus sales after WWII.

    We have always assumed that the number of rifles converted was similar to the number of scopes produced, but most of those MkI scopes were in a used condition they must have been from rifles that were refitted with Mk.3 scopes post-WWII

    This can only(?) mean that many Mk.3 scopes were available "loose" to be used for such refitting, and that therefore the number of No.4(T)s produced must be commensurately less than the total number of scopes produced.
    Last edited by Surpmil; 02-21-2020 at 08:55 PM.
    “There are invisible rulers who control the destinies of millions. It is not generally realized to what extent the words and actions of our most influential public men are dictated by shrewd persons operating behind the scenes.”

    Edward Bernays, 1928

    Much changes, much remains the same.

+ Reply to Thread
Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 1 2 3 LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. Early No. 4 Mk.I Trials scope brackets
    By Promo in forum The Lee Enfield Knowledge Library Collectors Forum
    Replies: 33
    Last Post: 12-19-2017, 06:23 PM
  2. Heads up on "Tabby"? early WWII night vision scope
    By Gnr527 in forum The Lee Enfield Knowledge Library Collectors Forum
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 11-26-2014, 12:59 AM
  3. Early M1891 Scout Scope Mount Issue
    By RBruce in forum Soviet Bloc Rifles
    Replies: 5
    Last Post: 03-26-2012, 02:10 PM
  4. Unique Early PEM Scope on eBay.de Dated 1932!
    By Surpmil in forum Soviet Bloc Rifles
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: 04-10-2011, 06:26 PM
  5. someone seeking an early scope?
    By RJW NZ in forum The Lee Enfield Knowledge Library Collectors Forum
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 04-30-2009, 05:57 AM

Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
Raven Rocks