Nabs, the "steel" buttplate of the wartime Number 4 is not steel at all. For one thing, it doesn't rust. Rather, it is Zamak, a zinc-based alloy incorporating aluminum, magnesium and copper. We were able to use it because we had the required base metals in quantity AS WELL AS the ability to refine them to the amazing purity demanded by the Zamak process; the zinc, for example, is held to 99.99%.
A Number 2 bolthead does not necessarily indicate that a rifle has been shot a lot. There are lots of new rifles around sporting Number 2 boltheas. Wartime production standards were relaxed in any cases, and definitey moreso in England than in Canada. We think of a "new" Number 4 as coming out of the plant wearing a "0" bolthead, but that just is not possible when you are making a million of something as quickly as possible. During the war, every effort was made to hold new rifles to a "3" bolthead or lower, with great preference for the "lower". In England a few rifles did come off the line with "4" boltheads, even though this is nowhere to be found in the official records; I once owned a "4" bolthead. STANDARD boltheads were numbers "0", "1", "2" and "3" and, at the factory, bolts would be changed around until one of these, preferably a "0" or a "1" would fit, but rifles also left the factory, absolutely unfired, with "2"s and, when times were really tight and the need for rifles absolutely pressing, with "3"s. Immediately after the war, any rifle in the Service with a "3" was rebuilt carefully (with a new bolt factory-numbered to that rifle) and put in store with a lower-numbered head, generally a "0" or a "1". But a "2" does not necessarily mean a worn or heavily-shot rifle; it could well have been built that way. In any case, you know what spare part you will want to have on hand should you run into a batch of ammo with thin rims: a "3".
As to finding Canadian ownership stamps on a rifle, just remember that the Long Branch rifles were built here! The Canadian militay would hve got "first dibs"on new rifles being made, but a lot also were made on contact for Great Britain. Long Branch rifles purchased by Canada generally had the peculiar Long Branch safety with the thumb-piece looking much like an ankle with a boot on the end of it. The British did not like this safety and specified a more conventional safety: the one to which you referred with the regular thumb-piece with the hole in the end. If you are ever down this way, drop by and I'll let you see a nice Long Branch I have. It is a 1944 with a very rich blue finish, British model safety, nicest wood I have ever seen on a Number 4, beautifully fitted and finished, absolutely unfired..... and not a number on it anywhere. Obviously it was made for display purposes: just far too many peculiarities for it to be a lunch-bucket gun, especially considering the actual mechanical process of making a rifle.
Anyway, hope some of this helps. When you get your Number 4s, let's see some photos! Sounds as if you have a bit of fun work coming up.
.
A Number 2 bolthead does not necessarily indicate that a rifle has been shot a lot. There are lots of new rifles around sporting Number 2 boltheas. Wartime production standards were relaxed in any cases, and definitey moreso in England than in Canada. We think of a "new" Number 4 as coming out of the plant wearing a "0" bolthead, but that just is not possible when you are making a million of something as quickly as possible. During the war, every effort was made to hold new rifles to a "3" bolthead or lower, with great preference for the "lower". In England a few rifles did come off the line with "4" boltheads, even though this is nowhere to be found in the official records; I once owned a "4" bolthead. STANDARD boltheads were numbers "0", "1", "2" and "3" and, at the factory, bolts would be changed around until one of these, preferably a "0" or a "1" would fit, but rifles also left the factory, absolutely unfired, with "2"s and, when times were really tight and the need for rifles absolutely pressing, with "3"s. Immediately after the war, any rifle in the Service with a "3" was rebuilt carefully (with a new bolt factory-numbered to that rifle) and put in store with a lower-numbered head, generally a "0" or a "1". But a "2" does not necessarily mean a worn or heavily-shot rifle; it could well have been built that way. In any case, you know what spare part you will want to have on hand should you run into a batch of ammo with thin rims: a "3".
As to finding Canadian ownership stamps on a rifle, just remember that the Long Branch rifles were built here! The Canadian militay would hve got "first dibs"on new rifles being made, but a lot also were made on contact for Great Britain. Long Branch rifles purchased by Canada generally had the peculiar Long Branch safety with the thumb-piece looking much like an ankle with a boot on the end of it. The British did not like this safety and specified a more conventional safety: the one to which you referred with the regular thumb-piece with the hole in the end. If you are ever down this way, drop by and I'll let you see a nice Long Branch I have. It is a 1944 with a very rich blue finish, British model safety, nicest wood I have ever seen on a Number 4, beautifully fitted and finished, absolutely unfired..... and not a number on it anywhere. Obviously it was made for display purposes: just far too many peculiarities for it to be a lunch-bucket gun, especially considering the actual mechanical process of making a rifle.
Anyway, hope some of this helps. When you get your Number 4s, let's see some photos! Sounds as if you have a bit of fun work coming up.
.
. That is just amazing information about the refining process, I had no idea that Long Branch did this for their butt plates. All this time I thought they were simple steel butt plates. 
