1953 ftr smle

kjohn said:
View attachment 12981
Click to expand...

Maybe homemade scope mount, pity who ever did it ruined a nice No.1 MkIII that was originally like this one -

April2014074_zpsbc777241.jpg


See this post for more pictures -
http://www.canadiangunnutz.com/foru...of-a-1917-BSA-No-1-Mk-III*-SMLE?highlight=bsa
 
I'd be saying it's absolutely aftermarket scope base holes. Makes you wonder why the bothered with an FTR on a Mk III* in 1953 though. Might have been sending it to Afghanistan, Iraq or Kenya though. Lot of stuff going on in those places in '53.
 
HarryD said:
Australia FTR'd SMLE's right up to 1959/60.
Click to expand...

Yes, but that was because they still had them in the system as a issue arm, they didn't get around to a full recall of them and full issue of the SLR until the 1960's, especially so to the RAAF and RAN.

The SLR (L1A1) only started coming out of the Lithgow factory in 1959.
 
mkrnel said:
Yes, but that was because they still had them in the system as a issue arm, they didn't get around to a full recall of them and full issue of the SLR until the 1960's, especially so to the RAAF and RAN.

The SLR (L1A1) only started coming out of the Lithgow factory in 1959.
Click to expand...

Yes that's right.

The reason why they were refurbished is because a worn out rifle is not psrticularly useful to anyone. There were still a lot of tensions between nations around the globe and governments/military leaders couldn't rule out another global war and full scale mobilisation of troops. Would there be enough weapons for a prolonged war with major setbacks like Dunkirk? They also had to keep enough skilled workers employed in case this eventuated. It's an interesting discussion that comes up from time to time and this is only my speculation. A search on a couple of the Enfield forums might shed more light why, but there must have been a very legitimate reason, because they did. It would be interesting to know how many SMLEs were refurbished in 1953.
 
I have (had) the same holes on the 1917 BSA Mk III* that I just finished. Assumed to be scope mounts. I plugged the holes with an oversize allan cap screw , turned in tight. Cut off with a Dremel tool, filed down and reblued. The front one turned out good, the rear was hard to get at till file smooth, so had to grind with a Dremel bit. It's hard to get a file in the back one due to the charger bridge, so it's still noticeable, at least isn't a hole.
DSC06004_zps14a0162c.jpg
 
mr.e moose said:
https://www.dandbmilitaria.com/images/D/DSC00689-02.jpg
Could you have a former Purdy side mount sniping rifle by chance?
Click to expand...

I am 150% sure that the old fellow that purchased the rifle back whenever (maybe 1960's or 70's) would never have drilled any holes anywhere on any of his rifles, so I wondered about a military application. I was hesitant to offer this as a suggestion, as I am not interested in any "sniping" from some of the more outspoken. There doesn't appear to have ever been any mount put on and the holes were either drilled and tapped after refurb or at least the threads were tapped or chased after, as the threads have no bluing.

Can you elaborate on the Purdy sniping rifle? Edit: Did some googling, but hard to sift through all the stuff. I will try again when I am more alive!
 
Last edited:
The mount holes look very similar to the ones that was on my 1940 SMLE sporter as they are in the same spots.

Does the nose cap and/or wood match the rifle by chance ?
 
I had come across this supposed example of a WW 1 sniper rifle and I thought that perhaps the mount would be similar. As there are 11 different variations of WW 1 SMLE scope mounts (so I have been told) it is hard to determine if the hole pattern would correspond with one of them. Most pictures I have found always show the bolt side of the receiver with little detail on the mount itself. In his description he says it is marked AJP which to me is a Alfred Parker mark and not Purdey.
 
I did a little more searching and the rifle that I referred to is definitely not right.I suspect that it has a Parker Hale mount on it and that fits with the various references to sporters that have the same holes
 
kjohn said:
I am 150% sure that the old fellow that purchased the rifle back whenever (maybe 1960's or 70's) would never have drilled any holes anywhere on any of his rifles, so I wondered about a military application. I was hesitant to offer this as a suggestion, as I am not interested in any "sniping" from some of the more outspoken. There doesn't appear to have ever been any mount put on and the holes were either drilled and tapped after refurb or at least the threads were tapped or chased after, as the threads have no bluing.

Can you elaborate on the Purdy sniping rifle? Edit: Did some googling, but hard to sift through all the stuff. I will try again when I am more alive!
Click to expand...

If you look closer in the sniper? mount in this Indian/sporter made up rifle you will see at least 2 mounting screw holes in the same horizontal line on this scope mount -

DSC00689-02.jpg


DSC00688-01.jpg


No military issue sniper scope mount would rely on just 2 small screws to hold a scope to a rifle, these holes are very similar to others I have seen also on sporter Lee Enfield SMLE's, something like this one -


images


Or was common in the 1960's before scope mounts were easy to get, a gunsmith made up one.
 
Well, whatever the deal, thankfully the rest of the rifle didn't get butchered. As with most of these old "mystery rifles", there will be an answer buried in the mist.
 
kjohn said:
Well, whatever the deal, thankfully the rest of the rifle didn't get butchered. As with most of these old "mystery rifles", there will be an answer buried in the mist.
Click to expand...

Yes, you still have a very nice SMLE that should shoot very well, it is just a pity that they D&T it but it is not a big deal. A good gunsmith could easy fill those holes and then black paint over like the current Suncote finish and most would never know any different.
 
Mate I would not be the slightest bit worried about the holes. It's a lovely old rifle and sadly, these things happened, but we can't change the history.
 
I am not worried in the least about the holes. :) I was just curious as to the origin, and posted the pic so others could have a gander. It is, indeed, a nice old rifle. It seems that the holes are likely for a PH mount then?

I am currently 950 km away from it so I can't get a look at the nose cap to see if it is numbered to match the rifle. As soon as I get home, I will check and post if it is or not.

Thanks for all the positive and constructive comments! I am not a picky collector and am a bit hesitant to post any pics of my stuff. I know that the majority of people enjoy looking at old milsurp stuff, and I appreciate when other post pics of their goodies. I just don't care for the snarpy comments aimed at some of our offerings.

I plan to post more pics of my stuff so others can see what is out there. Whenever someone posts pics of a milsurp, there is usually a wealth of information added to the post by others. Not all of us know everything about everything, and can always learn. :p
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom