'Star' on a No.4 Mk.1 Maltby Enfield?

bogusiii

bogusiii

CGN Ultra frequent flyer
Rating - 100%
94   0   0
Looking at my new No.4 Mk.1 (Maltby, 1944) there appears to be a " * " after the stamped No.4 Mk.1 on the left side of the receiver, making it appear to be a No.4 Mk.1*. The rifle is all British, no FTR marks and clearly has the bolt head release plunger at the rear and not the 'notch' at the front you'd expect on a Mk.1*. I thought the star I'm seeing might have been just a very unlucky place for damage from a drop or something but it looks in exactly the right position and is blued as per the rest of the receiver. Also, I found a picture of a similar 1944 Maltby for auction:
http://www.auctionarms.com/search/displayitem.cfm?itemnum=8922010

and it too has the No.4 Mk.1* stamping (you can't see where the bolt release is).

What gives? Is it really a 'star' and if so, why?
 
Interesting, but...

I think I'm on safe ground saying the " * " was to indicate the slot method of bolt removal rather than the rear plunger, right?

If so, would Maltby have made Mk1* rifles? In my case, there appears to be a star, but the rifle has the plunger (no slot) so should be a standard Mk.1.
 
bogusiii said:
I think I'm on safe ground saying the " * " was to indicate the slot method of bolt removal rather than the rear plunger, right?

If so, would Maltby have made Mk1* rifles? In my case, there appears to be a star, but the rifle has the plunger (no slot) so should be a standard Mk.1.
Click to expand...

If it has a bolt release plunger and is clearly stamped Mk1* that is an oddity to me. I'd like to see some pictures of it. :popCorn:
 
Last edited:
If you send me a PM I can send pictures by e-mail (not sure how to post here).....but the marking on the left side of the receiver is exactly like the one in the auction link above and the release is exactly what you'd expect on a Mk.1 (no star). I'm confused too, hence my question.
 
I've seen photo's of this before on Brit No4's which were also Maltby's. It was a while ago , I believe on ParallaxBill's LeeEnfield site.
They were stamped Mk1* but the rifle was clearly a Mk1.
No reason/answer as to why but the possibility of a mistake by whoever stamped the rifle.
 
Therre are number of these rifles, all 1944, all within a particular serial range.
The Mk. I* was authorized for production in the UK, although nothing much came of it. I suspect the die was made in anticipation, but then placed in storage. For whatever reason, the die was put into use. Obviously it was used for some time before someone noticed that the die was incorrect.
 
Pics


c48c3c3d5ccb36add9ce07a2e8471124.jpg

P1020012.jpg

P1020011.jpg
 
Star mark

1944 they were right in the middle of the big push.Expediency was the norm.My guess is they used what they had,nobody would care if the stamp wasnt perfect.Dave
 
tiriaq said:
Therre are number of these rifles, all 1944, all within a particular serial range.
The Mk. I* was authorized for production in the UK, although nothing much came of it. I suspect the die was made in anticipation, but then placed in storage. For whatever reason, the die was put into use. Obviously it was used for some time before someone noticed that the die was incorrect.
Click to expand...

Or alternatively that Maltby made some change to the gun which was eventually not authorized or deserving of a change to the designation.

Skennerton points out that LOC (official change lists) were often not officially approved until years later. IIRC the LB/Sav No4MkI* was not "officially" introduced until 1946.

Someone at Maltby/BSA/Faz may not have even been aware that the No4MkI* designation was already in use.
 
Lee Enfield said:
Or alternatively that Maltby made some change to the gun which was eventually not authorized or deserving of a change to the designation.

Skennerton points out that LOC (official change lists) were often not officially approved until years later. IIRC the LB/Sav No4MkI* was not "officially" introduced until 1946.

Someone at Maltby/BSA/Faz may not have even been aware that the No4MkI* designation was already in use.
Click to expand...

Hmmm...so what change would have been made that they would have considered the rifles a different mark?

Interesting about it taking that long to make the official changes...hadn't heard that.
 
cantom said:
Hmmm...so what change would have been made that they would have considered the rifles a different mark?

Interesting about it taking that long to make the official changes...hadn't heard that.
Click to expand...

On that note, I've seen several Brit No4MkI receivers over the years which are marked No4MkI" .

Never seen a reference to that either.
 
Have any of you guys read "The Lee-Enfield Story"? My copy is on long term loan, but I clearly remember seeing a reference to a batch of rifles incorrectly marked with a "*" . There was even a picture. The Brit manufacturers were supposed to change over, but never did. Wise choice, the * bolt release slot sucks.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom