C No7 .22 markings

P

paulz

CGN frequent flyer
Rating - 100%
21   0   0
Location
bc
I have very fond memories of this rifle from my cadet days and I am thinking of buying one. The last one I saw at a gun show was marked No4, but it had the correct rear sight and no bayonet slot on the barrel.

So my question is, are all genuine C No7s marked C No7, or were some made from leftover No4 receivers? I was always under the impression that unlike most other training rifles C No7s were purpose built rather than conversions. Could a "genuine" rifle be marked No4 or is it a frankenrifle/bubba?

I imagine that other than barrel and rear sight, just about everything else would interchange with a No4 anyway, so a frankenrifle would not be hard to make from a mix of No4 and No7 parts.

Humbly awaiting enlightenment by the resident fundis.
 
I would suspect a parts gun. A No. 4 receiver could be adapted by reaming the rh sight pivot hole, and drilling and tapping a hole for the windage detent spring screw.
 
The 22 training rifle was never marked No4. I have seen No4's converted into 22 by modifying the rear sight pivot as "tiriag" stated in his post.

There are three different markings on the sidewall of the receiver. Tpye 1 - .22IN. Long Branch 1944; Type 2 - No7 .22IN. MK1 Long Branch 1945 and Type 3 - CNo7 .22IN. MK1 Long Branch 1946. There are variations of the stampings for 1944 and 45 production years. There is also a 1953 receiver (rare) that was found on replacement receivers and experimental models.

There are variations in the rear sight and mag body depending on the year. Most all had walnut stocks however I've seen a few very nice maple stocks.

On investment. you need to fit your budget. You can start by buying components and assembling; purchase a clone like the one you describe for $600 - 750 range; a replacement receiver $900 to 1100 or a correctly marked one for $1200 - 1500.

These are a fun gun to own and shoot. Good luck in your quest.
 
I have a copy of Cdn Army EMEI dated 15 May 1952 which details modifications to the body(receiver) of a No4 Mk1* when necessary to assemble a new body to a C No7 rifle.

When modifications were completed the EMEI stipulates that the marking "No4Mk1*" was to be removed by grinding or other suitable means and the designation "C No7. .22-in Mk1" was to be stamped in the same position using 5/64" stamps.The body was then to be re-finished by parkerizing or browning.

I purchased a new 1953 dated C No7 receiver back in the mid-70s and built a C No7 rifle on it which incorporates my old regimental number in the "s/n" which I stamped on it.
 
Many years ago I was at the Ancaster gun show and a old fellow had a Long Branch .22 cal. rifle on the table marked No.4Mk1 with a 1943 mfg. date. The rifle was mint. The wooden box for it was in good shape and had .22 IN Long Branch written in big letters on the front of the box. He said the first .22rf Long Branch rifles were made on No.4 actions and they did not call it a No.7 until September 1944. A year or two later I read an article in a gun magazine stating the same thing. FACT or FICTION unknown to me.
I was familiar with the .22rf. C7 as I shot one the rifle team whe I was in high school and the above rifle peaked my interest.
 
Thanks for the replies, as usual, very informative.

The ones I used to shoot were the type 3 (as described by rgg 7), marked C No7, but did not have the dedicated .22 magazine with the channel and the hole, just empty No 4 mag bodies, which I think works better anyway (easier to empty).

I am looking for a shooter, for nostalgia and cheap practice of the fundamentals, so while I would like an all matching, correct receiver with the transit box etc etc, it is not essential. I don't want to buy a No4 frankenrifle for a No7 price though, which was the main reason for my question. (Thanks rgg 7 for a good summary of the going market rate).

Thanks again guys for the good info.
 
No7 22 Markings

I have one of the No4s in 22 1943 it looks factory so I never touched it. Sight is the C7 type with the hole for the pivot enlarged on the left side of the frame. The new in the grease barreled action I have is marked 22 Long Branch 1944. I also have one of the Belgian 22s manufactured on the British frame and the markings are crude compared to a Long Branch.
 
"...thinking of buying one..." Big dollars these days. If you can find one. They were mostly destroyed along with the No. 4's. Forget trying to build one. Barrels are scarce.
Friggin' things shoot though.
 
sunray said:
Friggin' things shoot though.
Click to expand...

Absolutely! Which is why I am thinking of hunting one down. Once, many, many moons ago, I (we) placed third in a Toronto District team match using them.

I have recently found that too much bench shooting and plinking has led to a serious deterioration of my basic marksmanship skills, and there are few things better for working on the fundamentals than a single shot .22. Better yet, one roughly the same size and weight as a fullbore rifle, and not one with all the fancy stocks, handstops etc.

Since I am looking for a shooter and for nostalgia, I will likely settle for the first one I find (and afford), correct of Frankenrifle. True bliss would be a all correct matching C No7 and a 7.62 DCRA conversion, but one thing at a time.
 
BadgerDog said:
Here's a great article by stencollector on the 1944 C No.7 .22 Caliber Lee-Enfield Training Rifle (click here)http://www.milsurps.com/showthread.php?t=2134 in the Knowledge Library.

It's an "all correct" (not an armourer put-together) piece and shows all the markings on receivers from various years.

Hope this helps ... :)

Regards,
Badger
Click to expand...

It certainly does, thanks, although I suspect I will be settling for a frankenrifle. The last two I have found for sale were marked No4, (hence this thread) and I have not seen a genuine No7 in the flesh since my Cadet days.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom