a couple of questions on new SMLE Lith

JTF#

JTF#

CGN Ultra frequent flyer
Rating - 99.5%
217   1   0
Location
Ontario
I picked up this SMLE today for $100! and have some questions about it.

the barrel and receiver match but one is dated 1915 the other 1914. does this mean it was maybe made at the turn of the years? the barrel is also a HV. the other question is what do these markings on the trigger mean?

thanks!









 
Last edited:
Interesting. It's like a replacement receiver to a 1914 barrel. Does the action look to have been scrubbed and re numbered?
 
smellie said:
Looks like a January rifle.

WORTH rebuilding correctly.
Click to expand...

Dont think it can be a January rifle (well not Jan 1915) Lithgows production as of June 1914 was 4800 rifles completed, #2099 should have been well made by 1915.
Re-allocated serial number??
 
Last edited:
The marks in the second picture(the .303, 2.222, 18.5 tons) means the rifle was in England at some time. They're proof marks required by Brit law on any milsurp rifle sold through there. Not a military thing at all.
It's not a replacement receiver for a barrel. Barrel wear out far quicker than receivers ever will. Might be a replacement barrel though. It wouldn't be unusual for a 1915 made receiver to have a 1914 made barrel either. Parts were made in different factories and whole rifles assembled later. It's entirely possible that that barrel was put on long after W.W. I ended too. Check the headspace before you shoot it.
 
sunray said:
The marks in the second picture(the .303, 2.222, 18.5 tons) means the rifle was in England at some time. They're proof marks required by Brit law on any milsurp rifle sold through there. Not a military thing at all.
It's not a replacement receiver for a barrel. Barrel wear out far quicker than receivers ever will. Might be a replacement barrel though. It wouldn't be unusual for a 1915 made receiver to have a 1914 made barrel either. Parts were made in different factories and whole rifles assembled later. It's entirely possible that that barrel was put on long after W.W. I ended too. Check the headspace before you shoot it.
Click to expand...

The serial number does not fit for 1915 production, rifle #2099 is not even half way though production as of June 1914 so would have been assembled maybe early 1914 which fits with the barrel date.
Why do you believe it cant be a replacement receiver?
 
these are all the questions I have. I am going to get pics of all the markings for a group I am in on facebook but I will post them here too.

yes smellie it will be restored! but I want to use original WW1 aussi parts on it. the stock might be the acception because I don't think there would be many replacement aussi mk111 stocks out there.
 
sunray said:
The marks in the second picture(the .303, 2.222, 18.5 tons) means the rifle was in England at some time. They're proof marks required by Brit law on any milsurp rifle sold through there. Not a military thing at all.
It's not a replacement receiver for a barrel. Barrel wear out far quicker than receivers ever will. Might be a replacement barrel though. It wouldn't be unusual for a 1915 made receiver to have a 1914 made barrel either. Parts were made in different factories and whole rifles assembled later. It's entirely possible that that barrel was put on long after W.W. I ended too. Check the headspace before you shoot it.
Click to expand...

I think a few points made here need a little more discussion.
I'd suggest its a reallocated serial number to the action, because as has been pointed out, this serial number is too low for a 1915 dated action. I'd also suggest that armorers didn't wait for barrels to wear out if the action was hit by shrapnel or was damaged in some way. Were parts made in different factories during WW1? Can you clarify this point more?
It certainly is an interesting rifle.
 
It's interesting there's no view marks on the action. Is it definitely a 1915 action and not a mis struck 14? What's on the butt?
 
HarryD said:
It's interesting there's no view marks on the action. Is it definitely a 1915 action and not a mis struck 14? What's on the butt?
Click to expand...

Harry, it's pointless to argue with any post by sunray. Just assume it is wrong, ignore it and move on. He seems to make stuff up as he goes along.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom