4mk1 lower forestock differences

KotKotofeich

KotKotofeich

CGN Ultra frequent flyer
Rating - 100%
76   0   0
Location
Ottawa Valley
Clearly I don't know enough about these... so teach me :)

Working on a little project replacing one sportered forestock with... another sportered forestock ;)

The original forestock is inletted for the receiver more than the new one (pointed out with the pencil). Is this significant? The receiver is run of the mill m 47 1943 marked.

I have no history on the replacement forestock. The differences just peaked my curiousity.

fo3bwp.jpg


2rw7xfs.jpg
 
You may want to reconsider using that No5 stock for your project. There are a lot of people looking for those to restore their project rifles.

Run an ad in the EE to trade it for a nice sporter fore end. You may even be able to trade it for one of the synthetic stock sets which include both a matching black butt and fore end.
 
The top stock is from a No4 Mk1 Brit whereas the bottom is from a No5. Can you post a picture of the No5 to see if it's been cut back. Ron
 
What should the length be if it's not cut? I don't think it is... I picked it up as a sportered 4mk1 forestock in an attempt not to screw up parts that would be useful for a restoration for someone. Ugh...

Looks identical to the ones on pictures of 5mk1s and the amount of wood in front of the band inlet looks right.

14msviw.jpg


Bad news is, Bubba itch took over and I started carving into it last night - I did not get too far though...

3539klw.jpg


If someone wants to trade me a sportered 4mn1 forestock that's at least 18 and 1/4 " long or even a 5mk1 stock that was cut to that length let me know. I'll leave it alone for a week or two but after that it I'm cutting it to 18 and 1/4 and carving the inlet for the 4mk1 receiver. This is for a .45acp short enfield so, yes, it's a Bubba project...
 
Last edited:
Un-bubba'd No 5 fore stocks are scarcer than hen's teeth. You should be able to sell it for a pretty good price, more than enough to buy a No4 fore stock and have plenty of change left over:p
 
Judging by the number of messages I'm getting, yeah :) so let's take a breath here and not try to take advantage of a noob that stumbled into something good ;) I'll pull the ad for a little bit and do some research... I'm happy to offer a good deal, but within reason :)
 
Last edited:
After a somewhat ridiculous turn of events, I have to ask - are 5mk1 bolts also hens teeth rare? What determines a 5mk1 bolt except the drilled handle? This is the very same project rifle (with the original forestock) - I just realized that the bolt handle is drilled... Is the universe telling me I need to restore a 5mk1? :)

2ho9vmo.jpg
 
Looks like a No4 BSA bolt. No5's had the hole as well however larger size and handle shaped differently. Is there a serial number stamped on the back face of the bolt handle. if so em or pm it to me and I'll look it up. Ron
 
The little red colour covered book on my shelf has the serial number ranges for the main arsenals. Serial numbers for No.4s and 5s were in distinct blocks and prefixes.
 
My copy of the Skip Stratton book on the No.4 and 5 rifles has been opened so often, tonight it fell open on the page with the No.5 production and serial numbers.

Production estimates and assigned serial prefixes for No.5s:
ROF Fazakerley, 1944 to 47, 170,000, single letters, AA through AC
BSA Shirley, 1945 to 47. 81,300, BB through BM.

To paraphrase several sentences on bolt handles, no-hole typically a No.4 and with-hole typically a No.5. Solid spherical and flat ended knobs typical through the No.4 range. A lightening hole of two observed different diameters in the knob appropriate for the No.5 for weight reductions, but sometimes also installed on No.4 rifles.

Let's not forget the British No.4 rifle production system relied on dispersed subcontractors, making parts according to the capacity of the particular plant. The final assembly was done by skilled labour, with parts arriving just-in-time, and rifles shipped out to reduce exposure to damage by air raids.

Slazenger's tennis racquet machinery was repurposed to make rifle stocks. Small machine shops made screws, nuts and back sights. The CCM bicycle company in Canada made fore end bands. So, it is not surprising for one plant making bolt bodies to have a set of drawings that instructed them to drill out a hole, while the next company down the list might not have had a spare vertical milling machine and their drawings were relaxed to excuse that step. Nothing nefarious, just the reality of bull-headed command economies. Once the process was in place and things were running smoothly, there was no appetite for change if it would have delayed critical deliveries.
 
Last edited:
KotKotofeich said:
... so teach me

...

The original forestock is inletted for the receiver more than the new one (pointed out with the pencil).

...

2rw7xfs.jpg
Click to expand...

The relief you've pointed to is a hangover from when the No.4 rifle was initially specified. The earliest drawings had planned on a cut-off plate like the No.1, and there is a corresponding bulge on the receiver. The right sidewall was also supposed to have a long slot cut into it. After a half-second of rethinking, the cut-off was eliminated. The bulge which would have been machined for the pivot was never removed from the drawings. Wartime demand meant there was no time to put the rifle back through another cycle of drawings, new jigs, preproduction models and acceptances. Screw it! Get those rifles out to the troops. After a few years of relentless production to meet that urgent demand, there was a chance to take a deep breath and remove the bulge as superfluous and unnecessary, as well as a few other less obvious changes. Your two stocks are before and after that decision.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom