Fake Jungle Carbine???

G

Gomer

Regular
EE Expired
Rating - 98.3%
117   2   0
Location
Northern Alberta
Looked at a .303 'Jungle Carbine" a guy was selling last night.It had no markings anywhere,not even under the hand guard even though it was in like new condition.Wood/metal fit poor too_Otherwise all correct>any ideas?
had a 4 digit ser.#
Bob
 
Last edited:
You'll have to provide more info or better yet, pics, to say for sure. Did it have the lightened knox form? Was the sight the correct 800yd peep? Proper butt stock?

SIR recently sold a bunch of No4 based look-a-likes and fakes have been floating around for decades.
 
Whats a Knox form?Is it the chamber end of the barrel where it threads?then yes,was lightened.had 800 yard peep too.Will have to buy it to get pics.If these are new fakes,who made them?
thanks,Bob
 
navy arms and a few others in the states used to sell a kit to turn a no4 into a 5- for what they were selling the kit for you could get a whole rifle this side of the border
 
Jungle carbines aren't just lightened (metal removed) on the Knox Form. Some metal is also removed along the reciever side wall. The bolt handle should be hollow, the rifle designation should be electro-pencilled onto the left had side of the reciever. The markings can be extremely light and you may have to angle the rifle under a strong light to make them out (assuming that no other work has been done to it or the finish isn't Suncorite). Look for proof marks and other ownership markings. I think Stratton's sight has some info on "faked" Carbines. JC's aren't that rare so don't get suckered into paying a premium.

Cheers
Brian
 
"...who made them?..." Everybody and his brother is or was making No. 5 fakes. Gunparts sells a whole kit for doing it. Never understood the reason for the demand for a rifle the Brit Army didn't want.
 
Crazy thing is that the REAL Number 5 is a relatively scarce historical piece, while the FAKES are generally better shootin' arns!

When the Brits lightened the Number 4, they also lightened the frame of what was to be the Number 5, leading to a nasty case of "wandering zero" that they never did surmount. Unless somebody has a spare milling maching hiding in his basement, chances are that a fake will not have the lightening cuts, meaning that the original well-designed Number 4 receiver is still okay..... and they shot really nice.

But JCs are just SO neat!
 
"wandering zero" has never been proven in actual tests, soldiers at the time were seeing foreign troops with semi's and when working with US troops would borrow M1's

more likely the wandering zero was made up as a way to help politicians make the right decision to go to the SLR


but back to the main point, if it has the cuts in the barrel knox, and the boss on the right side of the reciever for the mag cutoff removed good chance its a real, or parts of a real NO5
 
Last edited:
"Real" Jungle Carbine Groups at 100 yards,various ammunition:

f329a7da.jpg



f329a7c9.jpg


f329a7e4.jpg



f329a7ef.jpg


f329a807.jpg


I think they are accurate enough for a "battle rifle";)

Note that the zero was not changed, and most of the various loads seem to be in the upper right of point of aim. They are not all in exaclty the same place, which is to be expected form different ammo/bullet/powder combinations, but I htink the zero stayed put- no wandering. :)
 
Last edited:
hey guys I have been fiddling with my no 5 myself ......it actually came with a no4 sight, but everything else checked out I put a no 5 sight on and its back to orgional

about the wandering zero .......I have notice that between a no3 and 4 the shorter barrel of the no 5 increases the "kick" considerably and it takes some getting used to for a good group
 
I would like a nice cheap repro as a shooter that way you don't mess up an increasingly rare historical piece. As far as the "wandering zero" I think it was a combination of all the above stated reasons ,lightened recievers, strong kick
and soldiers who wanted semiautos. My bet is some real no 5's would shoot fine and others would wander every time. It was the time of the assault rifle and the intermediate round anyway.
 
clarification: SIR rifles are not #5 fakes. #4 vs #5

Apart from the flash hider the rifle is completely different: SIR rifle #4 butt stock #4 barrel (no metal removed from base) has been cut back. #4 receiver (no metal removed from in front of rear sight or from below bolthead on r/h side. sporterized #4 fore stock. The #5 fore stock barrel band groove is at a clearly different location than the #4. I have come a cross a mention that there was a few (very few?) #5 rifles that through depot level repair wound up with #4 recievers. I have a #5 "fake" that is all BSA #5 parts but has a #5 receiver I highly dought that this was a depot repair. Most likely a basement job. Still nothing like SIR sporterized #4.
 
Those pictures remind me of a No 5 I used to own that had all the original markings scrubbed. A new serial number had been added similar to yours, a ".303 Brit" marking added, and German commerical proof marks. Can you show some photos of the chamber area of the barrel?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom