Irish Contract Enfield question.

[Thunderstreak]

I have been trying recently to educate myself about the Irish Contract Enfield Rifles. I have a Fazakerly built 1956 No4 Mk 2 that is marked “F 56 FTR” as opposed to “UF 56”. I can’t see any markings on it to give evidence of a previous life before the FTR. I have read that these were possibly put together from new parts but marked “FTR” for some reason.
Can anyone enlighten me on the history and story behind these rifles?

[Sapper740]

I have been trying recently to educate myself about the Irish Contract Enfield Rifles. I have a Fazakerly built 1956 No4 Mk 2 that is marked “F 56 FTR” as opposed to “UF 56”. I can’t see any markings on it to give evidence of a previous life before the FTR. I have read that these were possibly put together from new parts but marked “FTR” for some reason.
Can anyone enlighten me on the history and story behind these rifles?

I've read the Irish Contract rifles are supposed to be in the PF309308 to PF359347 range and manufactured in 1951-52. There’s a lot of debate regarding exactly what an Irish Contract rifle is with some people arguing that only those rifles with serial numbers in that range are Irish Contract rifles. Apparently no one knows for sure which rifles were actually delivered to Ireland and other people consider any Lee-Enfield No. 4 Mk. 2 rifles delivered to Ireland to be Irish Contract rifles. Your rifle should have a UF prefix which they started using in 1954? if memory serves me correct. Are the parts all matching or are they 'force matched'?

[Thunderstreak]

It appears to be all matching. Bolt, receiver and magazine all have the serial number engraved on them. All components appear original though I haven’t taken the time yet to cross check every stamp. I see no evidence of any markings being removed or re-stamped. It appears to be a “new” first run rifle, not a “FTR”. I am by no means an expert but every FTR rifle I’ve seen has some evidence of its previous life.

[Alan de Enfield]

It appears to be all matching. Bolt, receiver and magazine all have the serial number engraved on them. All components appear original though I haven’t taken the time yet to cross check every stamp. I see no evidence of any markings being removed or re-stamped. It appears to be a “new” first run rifle, not a “FTR”. I am by no means an expert but every FTR rifle I’ve seen has some evidence of its previous life.
https://www.milsurps.com/images/impo...007994_z-1.jpg

The fact the rifle is marked as having an FTR at the Fazakerley factory in 1956 tends to suggest that it has been FTR'd.

An FTR would replace worn parts such that rifle was at least 80% as good as new (80% life remaining)

The serial number is A8783, a range which predates the UF series by some years

[GeeRam]

It appears to be all matching. Bolt, receiver and magazine all have the serial number engraved on them. All components appear original though I haven’t taken the time yet to cross check every stamp. I see no evidence of any markings being removed or re-stamped. It appears to be a “new” first run rifle, not a “FTR”. I am by no means an expert but every FTR rifle I’ve seen has some evidence of its previous life.
https://www.milsurps.com/images/impo...007994_z-1.jpg

Its an oddity.
'56 was when they changed over to the new numbering, and the UF A**** numbering, so the A**** number could be right and because its a low number and a new system, the lazy scouser forgot the UF prefix......
But, that wouldn't account for the FTR stamping.....apart from its Faz

[Alan de Enfield]

Its an oddity.
'56 was when they changed over to the new numbering, and the UF A**** numbering, so the A**** number could be right and because its a low number and a new system, the lazy scouser forgot the UF prefix......
But, that wouldn't account for the FTR stamping.....apart from its Faz

You'd have thought that, even Fazakerley, after almost 9,000 rifles, would be able to get the serial number prefix correct !

[Lee Enfield]

It appears to be all matching. Bolt, receiver and magazine all have the serial number engraved on them. All components appear original though I haven’t taken the time yet to cross check every stamp. I see no evidence of any markings being removed or re-stamped. It appears to be a “new” first run rifle, not a “FTR”. I am by no means an expert but every FTR rifle I’ve seen has some evidence of its previous life.
https://www.milsurps.com/images/impo...007994_z-1.jpg

Does it have the cut-off block on the right side of the receiver?
If it does not, my theory is that Faz did not have contracts for new production, but did have contract for FTR.

Is the left side the straight 45* angle shelf?

[Low & Slow]

the Irish Contract rifles are supposed to be in the PF309308 to PF359347 range and manufactured in 1951-52.

Curious, is this a typo? I've got PF340620, and it's dated 1/55.

[Thunderstreak]

A few more detailed pictures to help with the mystery!

[Sapper740]

I dug up Charles Stratton Volume 2 Lee Enfield No. 4 and No.5 rifles. According to his book Fazakerley stopped making new No.4 Mk 2 rifles in 1955. They also placed the month of manufacture ahead of the year. Serial number prefix PF from 1948 to 1954:
1948 - PF 22xxx to PF 68xxx
1949 - PF 68xxx to PF 139xxx
1950 - PF 184xxx to PF 223xxx
1951 - PF 228xxx
1952 - PF 231xxx to PF 263xxx
1953 - PF 264xxx to PF 309xxx
1954 - PF 314xxx to PF 376xxx
1955 - UF 55Axxx to UF 55A 21xxx

You have to go all the way back to 1942 to see an 'A' prefix. I'm not sure how a No.4 Mk 2 got an 'A' prefix, at least it's not covered in the book.