Hey guys can anyone give me some info on my rifle?
Its a 1915 lsa shtle no. 3
My concerns are that its a parts rifle because it was imported by jjcc
Can you guys tell if it is
And maybe what some of the markings mean?
ctrl+f then type "milsurp" and youll see this:
>>29538173
now go ask there.
Just gonna keep doing this if thats ok with you sweetheart
Other side of barrel
'strayan marking on the stock. Lithgow disk. Stock looks refinished, fore-stock particularly might be sanded or a replacement. Early cocking piece correct for rifle's date.
Post the serial number on the bolt and the reciever.
That metalwork looks suspiciously black too for a rifle with a dingged up buttstock, either that stock might be a replacement or the metal might have been refinished.
I know more about No4 rifles, and therefore British, American and Canadian manufacturers and repairs than about Australian No1s.
>>29544256
Milsurp General=\=specific markings on specific model of a specific rifle. Don't be a dick
OP: sorry idk, I'm just learning about SMLE myself, so good luck
I think the forestock is coachwood
It has copper/brass recoil plates on the inside
>>29544275
Metal is in great shape but its original that much i can tell.
The forestock is different than the buttstock and is serialed to the receiver
But the buttstock is also serialed to the receiver as the receiver has two serial numbers
My hopes arethe brits sent it to australlia during WW1
And that its original and not a parts rifle
>>29544272
>>29544266
These are just standard acceptance and inspector's markings. There's a broad arrow, a George Rex final proof mark.
The D is possibly significant but I don't know what it is.
>>29544304
Yeah, looks like the serial on top has been struck out. My guess is that it's an honest factory refit, the stock would have been matched and bedding adjusted before it was numbered to the rifle and my guess is that the metal work was refinished too.
>>29544313
I think that's a Slazenger stock, 43 being the date. That would fit with it being a wartime FTR rifle.
>My hopes arethe brits sent it to australlia during WW1
It was made in Australia, used by their troops and looks like it was FTR'd there during WW2 as well. Nice rifle.
>>29544328
If it was made in australlia then whats up with the london small arm marking?
Surely it was made in britain
Sent to the aussies who repaired it at some point?
Not sure if important but it has
The old style cocking nob and windage adjustable rear sight
>>29544348
My bad. I thought you said it was Lithgow in the OP. I never really looked at the wrist.
I saw the buttstock and the little Lithgow star and never bothered to look further at the wrist and date.
Could have been in Aussie use, although I've never heard of it. No1s were used by the British in the Far East until mid or even late WW2 in some cases. I could have entered Aus service Ii guess, or maybe those parts actually were added by a civilian owner or company. But then they would also of had to re-stamp the stock, which unfortunately does happen when people try to pass things off as original. Difficult to say how prevalent it is though.
>>29544456
Idk man. The original buttstock has D
Marked on it along with some other stuff
And its worn enough that it couldnt have been done by someone recently.
All the parts are connected by a serial or a marking so i dont think any of them were just added to the rifle.
I would like to know what the D means
Or if the brits actually shipped aussies
Any enfields back then.
Pic is 100 yard accuracy
Bumples
>>29544231
JJCO imported lots of legit rifles. They made some rifles out of parts they also bought, but most of the guns are legit ones. Yours is legit. Your rifle was made in Britain and given to Australia after WWI to replace losses and Lithgow made rifles in British inventory.
>>29544304
The forestock is a coachwood replacement. Probably switched out during it's 1944 rebuild. That's not the serial number, btw. That's the number the military district it was assigned to assigned it as. It should have like a 3MD or a 2MD mark on top of the receiver (pic related). The number is the military district it was assigned to. Your rifle's military district number was crossed out when they got rid of the military districts.
>>29544328
>Yeah, looks like the serial on top has been struck out.
NOOOO! That's not the serial number! That's the number the military district assigned it.
I do agree that the rifle's stock may have been sanded.
Will Donald make Milsurp great again?
Or will I be cursed to finding only cheap Turkish/middle eastern mausers in my local area?
This is probably the best thread to ask. How unique is it to acquire a type 56 Chinese sks made pre Vietnam era with Albanian trench art? I ordered one of those sks' from jgsales and was expecting a beat up red stock on mine. I ended up with a beech wood stocked type 56 with names carved in on the left, and some names picked into the wood with the tip of a blade on the right.
>>29544280
Yes it does. Thats where the enfied experts are
>>29544365
It was a transitionary period. Certain features still show up, others dont
>>29544487
I have a book that mentions it, but im out at the mall. Ill see if I can scrounge it up at some point
>>29546190
>>29545029
>>29544456
>>29544328
Thanks guys for all your help i appreciate all of it.
Keep it coming if anyone has anything else to add
>>29545783
>How unique is it to acquire a type 56 Chinese sks made pre Vietnam era with Albanian trench art?
Not very. PRC dumped their older weapons on Albania to woo Hoxha away from Russia.
>>29545029
Have any idea on the value of the rifle?
>>29546434
Probably around $250-$350. It's not super rare. If the bolt is matching it would be on the higher end of that scale, but even $350 is pushing it.
>>29546597
Wow really? In arkansas ive never seen any enfield that wasnt sporterized go less than 350$
With most being 400-450
>>29546667
You just aren't looking too hard. A lot of dealers don't know milsurp and will price themselves out of the market. They have the same shit on their gunshow tables for 5 years or more.
>>29546688
Maybe but these arw guns that sell the 500+ ones are the ones that sit.
Still thanks for the help
>>29546424
Sweet. Thanks for answering my question. I'll have a thread up on the 18th or 19th with photographs and hopefully translations.
>>29545029
Rifle was in use by Australia, the Lithgow stars, 3 MD (3rd military district of Australia), and the D (defence department, australia) all indicate this.
>>29548676
That's my rifle, not OP's rifle. I was just using it as an example. His was also used by Australia, but his is not a Lithgow.
Op here Does anyone know what the D marking means?
Defense department of australlia right? Thats the only thing ive found that might be true in my looking around the internet
>>29549238
Just that. There is a small arrow inside the D for war department acceptance.
>>29549248
Awesome thanks man
Have a spongebob quote from a different thread
