Correct Stock 1942 Long Branch

[00 Del]

Greetings All,

I have a 1942 Long Branch Enfield that was re-milled at Fazerkerly in 1952. All of the forward woodwork is reddish, and the fore end is serial numbered to the rifle. However, the stock is brown with a brass butt plate. I am tall and I would like to have the longer stock, as well as have the rifle be as it came from the Long Branch factory. So, what wood do I need to match the fore end? Also, what butt plate is correct?

I'm kicking myself for not finishing this when Springfield Sporters was still in business.

By the way, the fore end did have a loose fit when I bought the rifle. The rifle had "bad knees" I think they call it. From Milsurps.com I learned that I could soak the fore end in raw linseed oil (which I found I could order from Menards) and turpentine. I had quite a problem with buying leaky wallpaper pans, but ultimately did soak the fore end enough that it does again fit tightly. So, the fore end that is serial numbered to the rifle does again fit. Thanks for that.

Del

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.

[Daan Kemp]

Without altering anything, buy a boot that slips over the butt [easy on/off]. Adds at least an inch to the length of pull and changes nothing to the rifle. Been using one for shooting competitions for some years with great success.

These rifles were built for shorter men than we are today, and for men wearing several layers of clothing.

[Bindi2]

^^^^^ As DAAN said is the correct thing to do.

[00 Del]

Gentlemen, it is nice that you are trying to be helpful, but you are not answering the question that was asked. I would like to know what type of wood the Long Branch came with from the factory in 1942 and what butt plate (brass, steel, alloy). The current stock was obviously not original to the rifle, and I will be replacing it.

[Bindi2]

What ever is on the rifle when it left service is correct. There is no factory correct in the Enfield Line of rifles they are battle rifles not prima donnas. If you find a rifle in mint condition it has not been there or done that which is what a battle rifle is all about the scars tell a story as do the FTRs and replaced parts. Enfields that are beat up look tired or ratty have been there done that and are worth more because of that.

[Roger Payne]

Whilst agreeing with the adage that Enfields were made to be used in battle, with all of the ramifications that spring therefrom, the OP asked us a question. I'm not a Long Branch expert, far from it, but from what I've seen your rifle would have been stocked up either in walnut or birch. The birch tends to have a characteristic 'orangey-brown' colour, whereas the walnut is.........well, walnut colour. I do therefore wonder if you have a rifle with a mix of both woods on it. If the forend is a good fit & mated to the rifle then it would make much more sense, (as I think you already realise) if you really want to swap wood over, to swap the butt (& hand guards, if necessary). However, I'd keep the wood it came with so you can always reverse any changes you make.....

Sorry, not sure about the butt plate material. Long Branch used a lot made out of steel, but I'm not sure when exactly they started this.

[Buccaneer]

I have several Long Branch rifles in at the moment and there stock details are as follows, (1) 1941 dated No4 Mk1,(not a 1*) Walnut stock with a brass butt plate, rear hand guard not ribbed. (2) 1942 dated No4 Mk1* Beech stock with alloy butt plate rear handguard ribbed. (3) 1942 dated No4 Mk1* Walnut stocked with an alloy butt plate & a ribbed rear handguard. The last two rifles both have the rifle serial number stamped under the fore end so it would appear from this limited selection that rifles left the factory with both walnut and beech as standard.

[Roger Payne]

Could that beech possibly be birch Paul? LB's may well have left the factory dressed in beech, but I've never seen any, only walnut & birch. The birch is orangey-brown in colour, generally a little lighter than walnut. From what I can gather both at LB & Savage the birch was stained, as natural birch is very pale. Beech has the characteristic 'flecks' in it.

[desperatedan]

FWIW - I've just checked my LB (1943 not 42 though). It has birch woodwork throughout with a pretty dark orangey brown stain as Roger mentioned above, as dark if not darker than the walnut on my BSA. The top handguard is plain not grooved and it has a steel butt plate.

What I've always noticed when ever I use it, is that the fore-end seems noticeably "fatter/heavier" in the hand than either my BSA or Maltby examples which are walnut and beech respectively. Strange!

[Surpmil]

The other Long Branch wood was Canadian "rock maple", or so some of the older fellows called it. Very heavy and hard and machined very well so edges, handguard flutes etc. were well defined and tend to stay that way.

It does not take stain well, so stays pretty yellow. Not popular with troops or armourers reportedly.

One further thought: the rather orange walnut(?) stain applied to the birch stocks was sometimes put on the maple as well and does make them look quite orange as opposed to the natural pale yellow colour of the wood.

Obviously if the rifle had the Mk2/1 conversion when FTR'd your only choice is going to be UK made Mk2 forend with the crossbolt.