-
Legacy Member
Replacement parts not done by the military.
-
-
07-27-2023 08:05 AM
# ADS
Friends and Sponsors
-
Legacy Member
Originally Posted by
Bindi2
Replacement parts not done by the military.
Yet, here they appear on a pre-1968 import-marked gun? Perhaps Sam Cummings did the alteration (Interarmco)?
Of course, anyone could have done this while it was residing stateside in the past 50 years.
But this gun gives no 'bubba' vibes. It all looks like arsenal finish and fitting.
-
-
-
Yes, or maybe a rather pale parkerising on the rearsight. If you look at the receiver where the UK 303 Brit is stamped & the paint has flaked off, the underlying surface looks slightly grey to me (mind you that might be my eyes!), which would also fit with parkerising, & which was the approved finish to go under suncorite. Rifles were bead blasted, parked & then suncorited. I just wonder if the sight got a quick dip in phosphoric acid but never got painted??
I've refinished quite a lot of No4's similarly over the years. If I can do it so can anybody else.
Forgot to mention earlier, but it's also got a Long Branch safety fitted. Plus, the refinish was obviously done before the UK 303 Brit was stamped into it, so perhaps not necessarily even done in the US??
Last edited by Roger Payne; 07-27-2023 at 11:05 AM.
Reason: addendum
-
Thank You to Roger Payne For This Useful Post:
-
Legacy Member
Good eye. The rear sight frame and elevation riser are exactly as they appears in the photos, a very light and almost 'battleship gray' color. So, there must be a finish, and light parkerization is a possibility.
The top surface is perfectly polished, with no finish.
-
-
Contributing Member
Just a general observation really, nice usable No4, I would suggest its been refurbished by an owner in the years since it landed on US shores.
Certainly repainted and a Singer back sight fitted, probably had the two position austerity sight fitted originally, possibly replacement wood, numbered by an old owner.
The bolt head certainly shows signs of military primer erosion, assuming its original to the rifle, it must have had good prior use.
The point being, as has been said before, 'vast' numbers of Enfield's were sold off in the late 50's and early 1960's, they have drifted around the world, from trade to owner and back for 60 plus years now, so its impossible to tell now what's original and what isn't...
Only the recent French sell off's (all seem to be original WW2 spec) and perhaps the ex Italian Navy examples are close to original 'ish' specs.
Treat it for what it is, a nice honest looking No4mk1, as long as the bore, throat and crown are good, happy days and enjoy....
.303, helping Englishmen express their feelings since 1889
-
-
Legacy Member
Originally Posted by
mrclark303
Just a general observation really, nice usable No4, I would suggest its been refurbished by an owner in the years since it landed on US shores.
Certainly repainted and a Singer back sight fitted, probably had the two position austerity sight fitted originally, possibly replacement wood, numbered by an old owner.
The bolt head certainly shows signs of military primer erosion, assuming its original to the rifle, it must have had good prior use.
The point being, as has been said before, 'vast' numbers of Enfield's were sold off in the late 50's and early 1960's, they have drifted around the world, from trade to owner and back for 60 plus years now, so its impossible to tell now what's original and what isn't...
Only the recent
French sell off's (all seem to be original WW2 spec) and perhaps the ex
Italian Navy examples are close to original 'ish' specs.
Treat it for what it is, a nice honest looking No4mk1, as long as the bore, throat and crown are good, happy days and enjoy....
The pre-'68 import mark breaks through the paint. So, it was not refinished after it arrived.
Yes, it's been fired. The previous owner talked about range sessions, and the primer ring is evident. The bore is an 11-1/2 out of 10. An exaggeration, but it's really that nice.
I'll take some internal pics. No stateside refinisher has been inside, either.
Anyone have an ideas about the rear wood number in the position of sniper numbering, besides stateside? I had not seen this before.
Last edited by martin08; 07-27-2023 at 11:37 AM.
-
-
Legacy Member
OP’s rifle looks to me like one of the early 1990s imports ( most certainly not a pre-1968 import) released by the British MoD. Many of these were mummy wrapped and had the serial number stamped at the wrist like this example. As mentioned, the black paint isn’t the original 1942 finish. A legit military No.4.
-
Thank You to husk For This Useful Post:
-
Legacy Member
Originally Posted by
husk
OP’s rifle looks to me like one of the early 1990s imports ( most certainly not a pre-1968 import) released by the
British MoD. Many of these were mummy wrapped and had the serial number stamped at the wrist like this example. As mentioned, the black paint isn’t the original 1942 finish. A legit military No.4.
I'll take a closer look for the proper post-'68 import mark with the importer's name and address. Perhaps under the handguard? Can't take more pics until tomorrow.
-
-
Legacy Member
Would there be other evidence of FTR?
Do the numbers on the bolt handle look original? It does show the A-suffix.
And just wondering if this has the original barrel. Would it be 2, 4 or 6 groove if original?
Thanks.
-
-
-
The Following 4 Members Say Thank You to Brian Dick For This Useful Post: