Savage Lee Enfield question for the experts.

And I believe even fewer that were produced without the "US Property" mark
I have a very early receiver that is a MK1 without the property mark
I would call them rare
 
points said:
And I believe even fewer that were produced without the "US Property" mark
I have a very early receiver that is a MK1 without the property mark
I would call them rare
Click to expand...

0C1 the very first Savage no4 is US Property marked, arguing that all of them were originally.

Post Ww2 government users commonly ground the marking off the siderail.

I have a Savage no4 and this is what they did and then they reblued it. If you look closely at it you can see the file marks.
 
Last edited:
Page 289 of Ian Skennerton's "The Lee-Enfield Story"

"British approval was required for such changes and manufacturing concessions to components because a sizeable percentage of the Long branch rifles and virtually all the Stevens-Savage rifles were to fill British orders, and were therefore subject to acceptance by the British Inspectorate. In the initial Savage production, many rifles were rejected by the British inspectors; this was not properly resolved until a Lend-Lease agreement was formulated between the British and U.S. governments.

Under the new agreement the British had less control in the initial inspection and refusal of rifles; conditions for payment were changed also which further reduced some of the controls Britain previously had. The Lend-Lease rifles are marked "U.S. Property" while those produced earlier under the direct purchase system were not so marked as they were for a direct British contract."

As for the rarity of the Mk1s, Savage and Long Branch changed over very early in production to the Mk1*.So a Mk1 from either manufacturer is a neat find.
 
points said:
Page 289 of Ian Skennerton's "The Lee-Enfield Story"

"British approval was required for such changes and manufacturing concessions to components because a sizeable percentage of the Long branch rifles and virtually all the Stevens-Savage rifles were to fill British orders, and were therefore subject to acceptance by the British Inspectorate. In the initial Savage production, many rifles were rejected by the British inspectors; this was not properly resolved until a Lend-Lease agreement was formulated between the British and U.S. governments.

Under the new agreement the British had less control in the initial inspection and refusal of rifles; conditions for payment were changed also which further reduced some of the controls Britain previously had. The Lend-Lease rifles are marked "U.S. Property" while those produced earlier under the direct purchase system were not so marked as they were for a direct British contract."

As for the rarity of the Mk1s, Savage and Long Branch changed over very early in production to the Mk1*.So a Mk1 from either manufacturer is a neat find.
Click to expand...

Regarding US Property markings, Skennerton is now known to have been incorrect.
 
It is a bit of a puzzle. I wonder if perhaps some of the early Mk1s simply missed being stamped in the rush to get them out the door. I would bet my lunch money that mine has not been scrubbed.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom