Questions regarding 1943 Long Branch No.4 Lee Enfields

LawrenceN

LawrenceN

CGN Ultra frequent flyer
Rating - 100%
244   0   0
Location
Toronto (West end)
I've handled, shot, and owned a great number of Lee Enfields over my lifetime, but a few questions have arisen that I'd never given any thought to. If any of you Lee Enfield gurus out there know DEFINITIVELY the answers, I'd love to hear from you. There is a gentleman in search of a '43 Long Branch No.4 and he's specifically requesting that the forestock be serial number matched to the action. I was under the impression that any unnecessary steps in manufacture were eliminated in the need for rapid production, and therefore numbering the stocks was considered an unneeded step. Comments? For instance, my 1950 Long Branch, which was new in the grease when I got it, does not have a serial numbered stock, just the "C" broad arrow.
Also, does anyone know for sure what rear sight sat on the '43 production rifle, or were there a several variants depending on what was at hand? I've seen them with the 2 position flip sight, the stamped Mk.II sight, and even the "Singer" milled sight. Any knowledgeable input would be most appreciated.
 
I had a 43 and it was numbered on the fore end. Most of the wood for LBs I have worked with are numbered. Definitively? NO but probably. I received a batch of 6 LB fore endsa few weeks ago an they all were stamped. They had a variety of numbers, so various years.
The sight issue always comes up. It seems to be that whatever they had was what went on. That's as definitive as I can get.
 
I have a '43 Long Branch that has a matching forestock serial number to the action, so as points says... "Definitively? NO but probably".
 
Hi Lawrence,

I have posted this question regarding the stock once before and you can find the old thread here:

http://www.canadiangunnutz.com/foru...start-stop-numbering-the-stocks-and-magazines

In my opinion, aftering doing a bit of research and discussing the issue with a lot of other advanced collectors Longbranch most likely did not serial number the forestocks at the factory.

From the old thread:

"This is kind of an old chestnut, but the consensus seems to be that stocks and mags were serialized after leaving the arsenal." -Purple

"The conventional wisdom is that LB never serialized the stocks" -maple_leaf_eh

"AFAIK Longbranch never serial numbered the stocks or mags, this was done by other users." -green

I have a mint/unissued/unfired 1944 Longbranch that is textbook and correct in every way and the front of the stock is not numbered.

I think your friend should reconsider his decision to buy only forestock matched enfields, since most likely it's not even an original factory feature.

Cheers,
-Steve
 
To answer your questions:

Long Branch did number fore-ends into 1943. The practice seems to have stopped BEFORE 1944 as I've never observed an originally numbered 1944 dated Long Branch forend.

All 1943 dated Long Branch rifles (other than snipers) were fitted with the MkII two position flip site.

Starting in June of 1944 all LB rifles being manufactured were fitted with the MkIII ladder site, and orders were issued to retrofit as available all rifles previously fitted with the MkII flip site.

The sight information is taken from canadian army records, not my fantasies and experience.
 
Lee Enfield said:
Long Branch did number fore-ends into 1943. The practice seems to have stopped BEFORE 1944 as I've never observed an originally numbered 1944 dated Long Branch forend.
Click to expand...

Hi Lee Enfield,

This question is still debated and your claim of them being numbered up to 1943 is possible but is there a way you can prove these early stocks were numbered at the factory and we can finally put the issue to rest?

Is there factory rack photos or other early Long Branch photos that show the stock numbering?

Is all early Longbranch stock numbering done using the same style of stamp?

Cheers,
-Steve
 
I hope they numbered them in 43 cause I put new unused furniture on my 43 and numbered the fore end. Oh well. I like it.
I don't like shooting with the mk2 sight so I change them out anyway.
 
What we need to find is an original/unissued 41 or 42 Longbranch without numbers that has unquestionably original wood furniture.

OR factory photos showing the numbered forestock.

Otherwise this mystery will continue.

At the least, we can determine that on 1943 forward production example missing the forestock numbering does play into originality.

-Steve
 
Thank you all gentlemen! As ever, you've been great at sharing your opinions and knowledge. Specifically to Lee Enfield, I appreciate the input on the rear sight. So, to re-cap, the DEFINITIVE answer to the question, "Were stocks numbered to match the rifles at the Long Branch factory?" seems to be (wait for it!), "Yes, they didn't"!
 
I have a LB 1943 in exc condition with the two position flip sight and it's not numbered. I also have three 1941's that are around the same color
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom