Need help - Info on a No4 Mk1* target rifle!

louthepou

louthepou

Snow-White Le Mod<br>Moderator
Moderator
Rating - 100%
792   0   0
Location
Aylmer, QC
Hi folks,

Visited an acquaintance today, he showed me one of his recent finds. He is quite the Winchester fanatic, but knows enough about other rifles to see that acquiring a (what I believe should be referred to as a) target No4 was a no brainer (for a good price...).

I know next to nothing about Parker-Hale 5C-equipped Enfields, so any info I could pass along to this rifle's new owner would be appreciated. Here are a few pictures he sent me.

The trigger guard and sling swivel:
215349ac822ef027a.jpg


Top view showing a mark on the front of the receiver (looks like the Canadian Government ownership mark I know of, the "C" with an arrow in it, but with two arrows tip to tip?)
215349ac822f27781.jpg


Finally, side view. Serial number starting with 78L4...
215349ac822f628d8.jpg


Thanks for any stories,

Lou
 
A typical No. 4 rifle used for target shooting under the auspices of either the DCRA or a PRA. The sale mark indicates the rifle was privately purchased. Members could purchase these rifles directly from the Gov't. Just last week I examined one; it was accompanied by the original invoice dated 1948, for $35. First private sale rifle I saw was one that had just been purchased in 1962, it was $45. These private sale rifles tended to be brand new when obtained, and are consequently usually in fine condition - unless the bore is worn from a great deal of shooting. Sometimes shooters purchased surplus rifles, and set them up for target shooting.
The DCRA was, and is, the governing body for full bore (Bisley style) shooting in Canada.
 
Thanks guys, much appreciated. Sorry WoodC, these are the only pictures my buddy sent me...

The bore is mint, so as you hint tiriaq, this rifle saw little use.

Is that type of trigger guard exclusively found on these?
 
Last edited:
That trigger guard is likely the original one from when the rifle was made. Sometimes target shooters would substitute a milled guard. These were considered to be a bit sturdier.
That is a very fine rifle.
 
louthepou said:
Thanks guys, much appreciated. Sorry WoodC, these are the only pictures my buddy sent me...

The bore is mint, so as you hint tiriaq, this rifle saw little use.

Is that type of trigger guard exclusively found on these?
Click to expand...

That's a 1944 Long Branch. By then they had gone from the milled guards to the stamped ones. I've heard that one good rap on the stamped guard could throw your trigger job off...lot of people scavenged up a milled guard to replace them.

Presumably this rifle is still in .303 right?
 
It's indeed still in .303 Cantom. It is a beautiful rifle (no arguing with tiriag on this! :) ), and I have to say I am just sightly jealous of my buddy - more happy for him, really.

I have one last question. This rifle in theory would have been equiped with this rear sight at the factory? Or as a second thought at some point by a private owner? Or, is there no way to figure that one out.

Thanks again for the info guys.

Lou
 
it would be by the owner there were/ are so many types of sight around they could pic and choose what suited they're needs ..i've had 5 DCRA rifles (7.62)3 of which had different sights and 2 with the one like your friends .thats a really nice rifle he has tell him to enjoy it!!
 
A new MkI* actioned rifle was probably a good and bad deal. As the fellas have correctly stated, the original stamped trigger guard would flex and bend throwing off the trigger pull (or so I've been told by a very knowledgible No.4 shooter). Never remove the magazine on a No.4 because that too will change the trigger presure.

The dillema is while a Long Branch No.4 is a perfectly serviceable rifle with as fine barrel as possible, the Mk1/3 conversion with the hung trigger got rid of all the annoying trigger issues. I would suspect that a 7.62 conversion with a hung trigger and a new LB barrel would have been a nearly unbeatable target rifle (for a while).
 
Unbeatable at long range, unless it was raining.

At Bisley the #4 was still used at long range as the preferred action well into the 80's. Of course, they were all 7.62 by then, but were still best with the mediocre military ball ammo used.

Eventually the solid action rifles (Swing, Sportco and Musgrave) with 30" barrels took over.
 
maple_leaf_eh said:
A new MkI* actioned rifle was probably a good and bad deal. As the fellas have correctly stated, the original stamped trigger guard would flex and bend throwing off the trigger pull (or so I've been told by a very knowledgible No.4 shooter). Never remove the magazine on a No.4 because that too will change the trigger presure.

The dillema is while a Long Branch No.4 is a perfectly serviceable rifle with as fine barrel as possible, the Mk1/3 conversion with the hung trigger got rid of all the annoying trigger issues. I would suspect that a 7.62 conversion with a hung trigger and a new LB barrel would have been a nearly unbeatable target rifle (for a while).
Click to expand...

If only the 1/3 FTR's didn't come with Suncorite, beech wood and electropencil scritchy scratchery...yeah, a superior setup.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom