Enfield no.4 wartime scope used?

BBq_Woa!

BBq_Woa!

CGN Ultra frequent flyer
Rating - 95.3%
61   3   0
Location
Hamilton, ON, Canada
Hi all,
I was wondering if someone can tell me, during world war two, which scope and scope mount were used on No.4 Mk1s?
If there were multiple models used, can you tell me a few and which models are the most readily available and least expensive these days?

thanks very much folks!
 
The scope should have been a No.32 and the mounts were made by various contractors. when set up the mounts would be stamped with a matching serial no.! various trials were carried out throughout the war using captured and civilian equipments. This included allied nation equipment. Various stocking trials were carried out including at Long Branch a bfurniture that closely resembles a true sporter.
I can recommend "The British Sniper" by Ian Skennerton. It covers the period from 1915 to 1983 and is for "British and Commonwealth Sniping and Equipment"
 
TimC said:
The scope should have been a No.32 and the mounts were made by various contractors. when set up the mounts would be stamped with a matching serial no.! various trials were carried out throughout the war using captured and civilian equipments. This included allied nation equipment. Various stocking trials were carried out including at Long Branch a bfurniture that closely resembles a true sporter.
I can recommend "The British Sniper" by Ian Skennerton. It covers the period from 1915 to 1983 and is for "British and Commonwealth Sniping and Equipment"
Click to expand...

wonderful, thanks so much
 
Another excellent reference is "Without Warning" by Clive Law. It is THE source for imformation about Canadian sniping equipment. In addition to the No. 32 scopes, the Lyman Alaskan was used as the No. 32TP, in Griffin & Howe style mounts. TP = "Trade Pattern", ie, commercial. These saw service. Some Weaver 330s were tried as well, although I do not know if there were actually used. The C67 was a later pattern of scope, which looked not unlike a modern hunting scope.
ALL these scopes and mounts are expensive, if original. The least expensive generic scope is the Lyman or Weaver; civilian ones turn up from time to time.
 
Another interesting variant was the laminate stocked CNo.4T - I've not seen one in person. I did see a shortened wood No.4T sniper prototype with the correct XP prefixed serial number at Gunco in Ottawa a few years ago. Someone brought it in for DEWAT! Jason outright refused to do it and returned it to the owner still live. I sure hope he never found anyone willing to neutre the thing. Aparently it was a presentation to hid Dad who was a retiring inspector at CAL at the time and was a legit short sniper prototype. VERY interesting rig.
 
Claven2 said:
Another interesting variant was the laminate stocked CNo.4T - I've not seen one in person. I did see a shortened wood No.4T sniper prototype with the correct XP prefixed serial number at Gunco in Ottawa a few years ago. Someone brought it in for DEWAT! Jason outright refused to do it and returned it to the owner still live. I sure hope he never found anyone willing to neutre the thing. Aparently it was a presentation to hid Dad who was a retiring inspector at CAL at the time and was a legit short sniper prototype. VERY interesting rig.
Click to expand...

James Hahn's (Inglis & Army Technical Developement Board) presentation sniper came to light when his family wanted information on how to donate it to the CDN War Museum.

It is illustrated in "Without Warning" (can be seen on the sample page at www servicepub.com)

They really didn't know very much about his wartime services.

Most people do not realize that once something become PROPERTY of a museum they can do anything they want with it, from selling it to destroying it. Most guns in Canadian museums have been destroyed to simplify the storage & staffing requirements.

I have been informed (by a very irate individual) that this includes the Canadian "War Museum" collection.
 
When Jason told me about the request that that rifle be deactivated, the thought occured to me - when you deactivate a sniper rifle, do you smash the lenses in the scope as well? I sincerely hope that the idiot who owned this extremely rare rifle didn't find some garage mechanic to ruin it.
I have heard the story about the Canadian War Museum, as well. The "rationale" was that it was cheaper to deactivate the guns than to register them. I assume that following the same logic the aircraft in the national collection have all had their engines welded and main spars cut.
I'm just waiting for some #### to say that collectors should follow the example of the War Museum and deactivate their collections. After all, if the institution primarily responsible for the preservation of this part of the Canadian heritage can ruin the artifacts entrusted to it, why should an individual not follow suit? It is my understanding that all the high art firearms in the Hermitage museum in St. Petersburg were deactivated during the Soviet era.
 
Last edited:
There are 7 different official production Marks (variations) of wartime scope.
No32 MkI, MkIA, MkII, Mk2/1, Mk3, TP (Lyman Alaskan), Mk4(C.No67MkI)

The MkIA (a MkI upgraded to MkII status), TP & Mk4 are only found on Canadian guns.
The Mk2/1 is uniquely British (It was both produced as such (by Vickers) and converted from MkII to Mk3 status)

Produced In Britain by about 4 mfgs: Vickers, Taylor-Cook-Hobson?, ect.
Canada by REL
US by Lyman (to a unique Canadian specification & order)

Post war the No32 was produced in at least Belgium, Holland and Isreal.

There are 3 types of production mounts: the standard No32 mount (2 piece base) used by all British production guns & most Canadian, The REL mount & the C.67 "griffin & howe" mount (both with 1 piece bases) used exclusively on Canadian guns.

Both the "REL" and the "c.67" mounts appear based upon the Griffin & Howe type levered clamp design.
 
Last edited:
I find it not only disturbing but callous that to avoid registering something of historical value to the nation that should already be catalogued (if not, why not?) should really be a simple exercise. Soon they will want to know what weapons are deactivated as they will need remocording as non firing. What would the purpose of a register be if it only records weapons that can be fired. If you own a weapon that becomes deactivated do you haveit removed from the register? No they will want to record that it is deativated so it can be discounted from further illegal use!
Believe me that is the whole point of a register! The first way is through sales tax, dealers having to record sales and keep registers followed by licensing. Without licensing there can be no register, up until the mid 60's in the UK you could buy a shot gun certificate, allowing you limitless amounts of smoothbore guns and ammo, for the princley sum of 10 shillings from the local post office. The Police werent involved in the system beyond Firearms as opposed to shotguns.
Oh for a return to those days.
 
TimC said:
I find it not only disturbing but callous that to avoid registering something of historical value to the nation that should already be catalogued (if not, why not?) should really be a simple exercise. Soon they will want to know what weapons are deactivated as they will need remocording as non firing. What would the purpose of a register be if it only records weapons that can be fired. If you own a weapon that becomes deactivated do you haveit removed from the register? No they will want to record that it is deativated so it can be discounted from further illegal use!
Believe me that is the whole point of a register! The first way is through sales tax, dealers having to record sales and keep registers followed by licensing. Without licensing there can be no register, up until the mid 60's in the UK you could buy a shot gun certificate, allowing you limitless amounts of smoothbore guns and ammo, for the princley sum of 10 shillings from the local post office. The Police werent involved in the system beyond Firearms as opposed to shotguns.
Oh for a return to those days.
Click to expand...

Registered guns that are dewated in Canada are still kept in the system.

Officially they have been removed, but the system is so screwed up that they are probably still registered to the last 3 owners.
 
Most people do not realize that once something become PROPERTY of a museum they can do anything they want with it, from selling it to destroying it. Most guns in Canadian museums have been destroyed to simplify the storage & staffing requirements.
Click to expand...

According to the Cdn Forces museum manual: A-SJ-100-001/AS-000 para 28.55-
Small arms held by a DND Museum are considered still in service with DND and are not normally irreevrsibly modified. Such weapons form part of the CF inventory and are controlled through normal supply and accounting procedures. Donated weapons are to be brought on CF inventory and, as such, need not be registered with civilian police agencies
Click to expand...
.

So if a gun is held by a CF accredited museum, it SHOULD be safe. Unfortunately, it only takes one do-gooder to harm that portion of Canada's history.
 
Further to the comment about types of No.4(T) bases, there have been some photos circulating of Gulf War Royal Marine rifles with larger diameter scopes. The tube was the same so the rings didn't change, but the body and turrets required a semicircular clearance cut in the centre leg. I have a picture I emailed myself but for some Windows reason, I cannot Right Click > Save as.
 
The L42 should have been replaced by GW1 and in theory the Royal Marines didnt take part, they did however do the Kurdish ops in northern Iraq! It could have been Op Telic, then it would have been an L96 in 7.62 or .338 LM. Telic by the way seemd to be accepted as Tell Everyone Leave Is Cancelled! The optics would have been S&B.
 
It is incredible how an uninformed comment becomes rumour and then is accepted as God-given fact! The CWM does NOT deactivate firearms. I have had a close relationship with four of the past five arms curators over the past 35 years and they were/are all very cognizant of the historical significance of the collections they manage.
If you don't wish to believe that then consider the cost in people, equipment and supplies to deactivate these firearms to the point where they are no longer registerable yet are still cosmetically acceptable for public display. Then compare this to the cost of registering the damn things over a 2-year period (the time period allotted to businesses - including museums - at the coming into force of the FA) - all of this for a National museum that would never have a firearm registration application denied unless it could be proven to be a stolen firearm. It is obviously cheaper and easier to register/transfer than to deactivate - especially when the firearm is a transfer of an already registered firearm.
Its time to stop making wild statements based on unfounded statements.
 
Having talked to the individual who did some deactivations for the CWM, I am satisfied that at least part of the collection has been welded.
 
If you think that's bad. A Holland and Holland WW1 scoped rifle used by at least two officers, was removed from the Guards Museum to be de-acted.

NOw I don't know what was done, but T.E. Lawrence's rifle was removed from the I.W.M for a period of time to be "worked on" I shudder to think the exact meaning of that!:mad:
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom