Fuzzy, on 16 February 2012 - 01:14 AM, said:
Thanks for the pics, and yes, they will help. First, the sight issue. It is the first photo that was replaced and has a serial number on it that is different than anything else found on this rifle. I spoke with my expert and he still says that when they scoped a rifle a new front site was usually added with the same serial number as the scope.
Now, having said that, there is no indications a scope was ever put on this rifle.
OK so that is clarified so where on the part is the serial number?
I have to admit to a degree of skepticism here as I have never heard of this practice - however I am quite willing to keep an open mind. Logically speaking however, as the front sight would have no impact upon the operation of a telescopic site I am not at all sure why this would have been done.
One possibility: sometimes sight blades were replaced and these are sometimes numbered to indicate their varying thicknesses - but this has to do with zeroing the rifle and bears no relationship of which I am aware to the scoping of the rifle.
Just so I am clear (sorry for being dense) the nosecap has the same number as the rest of the rifle (bolt, receiver, barrel knox form, underside of rear sight, foreend) but there is another serial number on the sight. Is that correct?
The only number I am aware of commonly stamped on these parts is the height of the blade/base used for zeroing the rifle Apologies for the poor photos but I think you can see the difference here and may be able to make out the letters on the top of the base (in this case these are OA and then three digits - the OA signifies the manufacturer (Orange Arsenal in Australia in this case) and the digits the height) Unlike mauser who often numbered every screw using the last couple of digits of the serial this was not ever practice on Enfields to my knowledge. The rifle serial was on the bolt, receiver, barrel, rear-sight, fore-end and bayonet boss (and in Indian service - although not often British on No1 rifles- often on the magazine). Sniper No 4 rifles were indeed numbered to the scope on the furniture but to be honest I do not know if this was practice on the MkIII.
You can probably just make out the OA and numbers here
Fuzzy, on 16 February 2012 - 01:14 AM, said:
On to the mag, mine looks like the MarkIII with the exception of the spine. It does appear to be different, but I can't say for sure until I get the gun back. As I stated, I have it in being checked over for a reason for something jamming the trigger and then falling out. I wish I could have found it, but if you've never been in the Southern Arizona desert, things can be very hard to spot, even when picking up your spent brass. Anyway, we both agree it was probably an old piece of primer that broke of and landed in the mechanism where it stayed until it came loose and fell in to the thing and jammed it. My playing around with it obviously jarred it loose. after looking it over he found no damage to the trigger mechanism. He still has it because the butt stock is a little loose and the screw used to secure it is in as far as it will go. He's going to remove the stock and put a thin leather washer on it to tighten it up so it doesn't continue to loosen.
Now, as soon as I get it back, I'll try and get some good shots of the front site to see if we can figure out what is going on. Oh,the marks, the are what you would expect to see when a gunsmith seated the new site. Had to use a good magnifier to find them. Again, it's a great shooter and I look forward to getting back to the range with it.
Also, decided to leave the current wood on it and not attempt to put a mag cutoff back on, since it really would serve no purpose other than to put it back to WWI look, which makes no sense to me. It still has a great history and it gets better the longer I research it.
Look forward to the pics!
Actually as the cutoffs were deleted around the time your rifle was produced it is entirely possible it was never actually fitted with one - and for most of 16/17/18 rifles with the cutoff would have been in the minority. I reckon its a good call to leave it as is.
I assume your gunsmith will have had the rifle out of the furniture and checked the drawers of the stock - these can sometimes get damaged. It is really really important to have the forend off the rifle when tightening the butt/installing the washer (I am sure your chap knows this but it is a quirk of enfields) because the stock bolt (if original) has a squared end that fits into a recess in the back of the forend and if you tighten the butt with the forend in situ then you run a real risk of splitting the forend. DOn't mean to teach my granny to suck eggs but better safe than sorry. The wood behind the trigger is relatively fragile - if all is tightened down then it is fine but as things work loose any movement here can lead to damage (and innaccuracy)