+ Reply to Thread
Page 4 of 4 FirstFirst ... 2 3 4
Results 31 to 39 of 39

Thread: No4 MK1 T

Click here to increase the font size Click here to reduce the font size
  1. #31
    Advisory Panel Surpmil's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Last On
    @
    Location
    West side
    Posts
    3,253
    Local Date
    07-08-2020
    Local Time
    01:08 AM
    Yes, I think you've probably nailed it there - I was forgetting that Rose Bros. were in Gainsborough.

    But it's also quite possible that this is a letter code for another foundry that gives no clue to its name or location, which was the purpose of such codes after all; "JG" and "N92" being the obvious examples.


    Quite likely the Indian divisions "overseas" took their weapons back with them at the end of the war, it would have been a simple way of getting rid of the stuff while giving them an update over the weaponry they had before WWII.

    No doubt their small arms, including No4(T)s were issued from the same sources as what the Canadians for example received, and therefore the same potpourri of manufacturers.

    IIRC there's photographic evidence of No4s on issue in India by 1944/45, though can't be sure about formations without checking.
    Last edited by Surpmil; 06-23-2020 at 11:53 AM.
    "Men occasionally stumble over the truth, but most pick themselves up and hurry off as if nothing had happened." W.L.S.C..

  2. Thank You to Surpmil For This Useful Post:


  3. # ADS
    Friends and Sponsors
    Join Date
    October 2006
    Location
    Milsurps.Com
    Posts
    All Threads
     

  4. #32
    Advisory Panel
    Roger Payne's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Last On
    Yesterday @ 08:27 PM
    Location
    Sutton Coldfield, UK.
    Posts
    2,719
    Local Date
    07-08-2020
    Local Time
    09:08 AM
    It could be a different foundry, but the castings marked with the GF do not look any different to me to those made by Rose Brothers that do not bear the GF. However, I have never made any proper study of them, but they appear to be 'run of the mill' RB products. I suppose it could be that RB provided the tools, including molds, for a subcontractor, or perhaps a subcontractor did some of the machining of the castings. And sometimes, manufacturer's add certain markings to only a specific percentage of what they make. I've sometimes mused (what a sad life I lead!) why Rose didn't mark their castings with their officially allocated factory code, in the same way that Dalgleish were allocated N92; presumably RB would have been allocated a code starting with M followed by a number as Gainsborough lies in the north east corner of the Midlands. Yet they didn't, they seem to have marked a few brackets with the roundel containing R B G single digit number, or more commonly JG or KD. Again, it's only speculation, but I wouldn't be surprised if the latter two aren't the initials of two of the inspectors working at the factory.

    Someone will probably turn up some documents next week confirming beyond any doubt that GF means Gujarat Forces......

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


  6. Avoid Ads - Become a Contributing Member - Click HERE
  7. #33
    Really Senior Member Alan de Enfield's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Last On
    Today @ 04:01 AM
    Location
    Y Felinheli, Gogledd Cymru
    Posts
    1,745
    Local Date
    07-08-2020
    Local Time
    09:08 AM
    Quote Originally Posted by Roger Payneicon View Post
    .........… presumably RB would have been allocated a code starting with M followed by a number as Gainsborough lies in the north east corner of the Midlands.
    M632 = Rose Brothers
    Attached Thumbnails Click image for larger version

Name:	Screenshot (241).png‎
Views:	164
Size:	129.6 KB
ID:	109360  
    Mine are not the best, but they are not too bad. I can think of lots of Enfields I'd rather have but instead of constantly striving for more, sometimes it's good to be satisfied with what one has...

  8. The Following 3 Members Say Thank You to Alan de Enfield For This Useful Post:


  9. #34
    Advisory Panel Surpmil's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Last On
    @
    Location
    West side
    Posts
    3,253
    Local Date
    07-08-2020
    Local Time
    01:08 AM
    Without digging out my copy of the Little Green Book, someone remind us of what "JG" stood for and why "M632" doesn't appear on their brackets?
    "Men occasionally stumble over the truth, but most pick themselves up and hurry off as if nothing had happened." W.L.S.C..

  10. #35
    Advisory Panel
    Roger Payne's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Last On
    Yesterday @ 08:27 PM
    Location
    Sutton Coldfield, UK.
    Posts
    2,719
    Local Date
    07-08-2020
    Local Time
    09:08 AM
    That's what I was getting at.......why Rose Brothers never did use their allocated factory code, unlike Dalgleish (N92), rather just using the JG or KD marks. AFAIK nobody knows for sure what they stand for, but I rather wonder if they may be the initials of inspectors there.....though I have not a shred of evidence to back that up. If anyone knows for sure please chime in!

  11. The Following 2 Members Say Thank You to Roger Payne For This Useful Post:


  12. #36
    Advisory Panel Surpmil's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Last On
    @
    Location
    West side
    Posts
    3,253
    Local Date
    07-08-2020
    Local Time
    01:08 AM
    Next question: how common a practice was it for contractors to leave off their code markings?

    Or was it done in this case as someone thought soldiers might be confused by the "M632"? Seems improbable, but not impossible.

    Or was it actually Rose Bros. at all who made them? Things have been known to change after contracts are issued...
    "Men occasionally stumble over the truth, but most pick themselves up and hurry off as if nothing had happened." W.L.S.C..

  13. Thank You to Surpmil For This Useful Post:


  14. #37
    Senior Member giove's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Last On
    06-29-2020 @ 11:08 AM
    Location
    Italy
    Posts
    169
    Local Date
    07-08-2020
    Local Time
    08:08 AM
    Is this the Belgian mark?
    Attached Thumbnails Click image for larger version

Name:	Belgio.jpg‎
Views:	119
Size:	202.6 KB
ID:	109377  

  15. The Following 2 Members Say Thank You to giove For This Useful Post:


  16. #38
    Really Senior Member Seaforth72's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Last On
    Today @ 02:38 AM
    Location
    Richmond, British Columbia, CANADA
    Posts
    330
    Local Date
    07-08-2020
    Local Time
    01:08 AM
    Add Seaforth72 on Facebook
    Real Name
    Colin MacGregor Stevens
    Yes, the circular mark appears to be a Belgian mark. I had the same mark on a Long branch No. 4 Mk. I* (T) in the same position. That rifle had the metal refinished in the grey such as the Belgians are known to have used. A similar monogram mark was used for Liege years ago on firearms.

    The "K B" marking s found on some Long Branch made rifles and appears to be a 1945 marking, probably by an inspector.

    The "16" is likely a rack number for use by the storesman. I have not seem such a marking in this location before.

    Your example appears to be on a Canadianicon made Long Branch. Can you tell us the rifle's serial number?
    Colin MacGregor Stevens https://www.captainstevens.com WANTED: REL 5X scope; LB Scout Sniper Rifle windmill sight & furniture; C/|\ butt with built-in cheek rest; No. 4 71L0451, 28L0844, ASE-xxxx ; No.32 Mk. I SN 1042; Trials No. 4 rifle parts.

  17. The Following 2 Members Say Thank You to Seaforth72 For This Useful Post:


  18. #39
    Senior Member giove's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Last On
    06-29-2020 @ 11:08 AM
    Location
    Italy
    Posts
    169
    Local Date
    07-08-2020
    Local Time
    08:08 AM
    Thank you Seaforth.

    The fore-end is the only Canadianicon part of the rifle.

    The rifle is a 1944 BSA.


+ Reply to Thread
Page 4 of 4 FirstFirst ... 2 3 4

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