experimental long branch. "EX 11"

[superbee]

This one looks interesting. Comments?

By Sword and Musket ..(f 845)

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.

[browningautorifle]

I'll hold onto it for them until the sort themselves out...

[Alan de Enfield]

I'll hold onto it for them until the sort themselves out...

Its a beauty for sure.

I'm sure that in the last 3 1/2 years they will have found out more (or not) and sold it.

[Roy W]

It's been discussed on here many times, it was assumed that EX stood for Exhibition rather than Experimental. What is 'Experimental' about it?

The woodwork has been butchered on the left side of the receiver.

It's a basic Number 4 with an unusual serial number, that's all, IMHO and certainly not worth what is being asked for it, hence it hasn't sold in years of being advertised.

https://www.milsurps.com/showthread.php?t=31316

[limpetmine]

I've never seen LB wood look like that, but I have seen Savage wood look close to this. I think this one has had some "effort" put into mottling the wood.

[CINDERS]

They have certainly sanded down the left side to within an inch of its life, just because it has no primer ring on the bolt means squat a brand new correctly fitted bolt head will sort that out.
Is that a gouge on the left side of the forestock or a crack near the cross pin, they all want stuff to be special I should try and see if Skennerton says anything about this EX11 in any of his books.

[Lee Enfield]

They have certainly sanded down the left side to within an inch of its life, just because it has no primer ring on the bolt means squat a brand new correctly fitted bolt head will sort that out.
Is that a gouge on the left side of the forestock or a crack near the cross pin, they all want stuff to be special I should try and see if Skennerton says anything about this EX11 in any of his books.

There is a very bad crack on the left side. [edited to add](In reviewing the photos from the 2012 thread, it was originally relieved for a central sight base (which has been sanded out) the crack has grown since the original photos)

The fact is that Skennerton saying anything about this rifle (or many others) really doesn't matter as much of his "north american production" chapter is based on collector observations and theories rather than documentation.

In reference to this specific rifle, in my (not so) humble opinion, it looks like legit 1941/42 production (except for the bolt body which is 1942 or later). I would price it as a 1941 LB rather than anything special.

If I was purchasing it, I would pull the fore-end off and examine the markings on barrel and internal parts.

Having said that, I know where there is an never serial numbered 1941 LB action and bolt - it would not be difficult for me to source all the (correct) parts to build this rifle - I could serial number it as EX-0 perhaps?

[Roger Payne]

Aside from everything else, if it was a factory assembled 'experimental' rifle, why did Long Branch need to recycle a used bolt body? The serial 'EX 11' looks to have been applied to a flat that has been linished/filed, presumably to remove an earlier serial number. A little puzzling........

& whilst there will always be exceptions, most experimental markings were engraved, not hand stamped.

[muffett.2008]

Fancy tiger striping, some one had fun with a propane torch.....matches the rest of the rifle,...... rubbish.

[tiriaq]

Mention is made of the short spacing between the rear swivel and buttplate. I wonder if the wood surface under the buttplate is machined finished as one would expect or hand cut?