-
Advisory Panel
Originally Posted by
capt14k
Why would someone grind the sight like that?
I can't even imagine, thing is, it's been finished over top. Can't tell what the finish is though, from here... Yes, easy enough to replace that also...which starts the questions.
-
-
07-11-2020 09:43 PM
# ADS
Friends and Sponsors
-
Legacy Member
Gday all,
Thanks for the input, I guess unissued is the correct terminology then,
Agreed RE the sight, I’m not to sus’ on the whole thing being it’s otherwise pretty immaculate, I will likely find a replacement for the sight of it effects function/usage at all.
And yes, I overpaid for it !
-
Thank You to S12A For This Useful Post:
-
-
Legacy Member
I have a couple of these I unwrapped and cleaned myself (best christmas ever) and one still in the wrapper which is staying that way.
-
-
Advisory Panel
Originally Posted by
capt14k
Yes PF were foreign contracts and UF was for UK military. At least that is what I have read
This is incorrect.
Actually PF is the earlier method of coding manufacture by Fazakerly. T
The new system appears to have debuted later in 1954.
UF is pretty much the current coding:
U = manufactured in the "United Kingdom"
F = manufactured by ROF "Fazakerly"
54 = manufactured in 1954
A = first 99,999 serial number block
01,234 = rifle number 1234 of 99,999
Last edited by Lee Enfield; 07-13-2020 at 07:07 PM.
-
-
Legacy Member
Originally Posted by
Lee Enfield
This is incorrect. Actually PF is the earlier method of coding manufacture by Fazakerly.
UF is pretty much the current coding:
U = manufactured in the "
United Kingdom"
F = manufactured by ROF "Fazakerly"
54 = manufactured in 1954
A = first 99,999 serial number block
01,234 = rifle number 1234 of 99,999
Was there still foreign contracts after the UF started to be used?
---------- Post added at 07:10 PM ---------- Previous post was at 07:07 PM ----------
Also isn't there PF rifles dated after 1954?
-
-
Contributing Member
MY PF is dated 1/55, for what that's worth.
-