I have a pretty nice 1943 Longbranch No.4 that i got about a year ago. It was my second rifle, but my first real collectible rifle. Its pretty much all original except the but plate is a British marked brass one. And the rear sight is a "F" Mk1 "micrometer" sight. Should I get a Long Branch Alloy but Plate and a Canadian CMK3 sight for it? Or would the but plate still be considered Correct?
Should I Replace?
- Thread starter LeeEnfieldNo.4_mk1
- Start date
Tough call. It could have ended up with those bits attached while in service, as the sights were "desirable", and every RSM likes shiny brass bits.
That said, I have your rifle's sister, and I swapped her bits for Canadian ones.
Neal
That said, I have your rifle's sister, and I swapped her bits for Canadian ones.
Neal
My '43 Long Branch has a couple Savage marked parts on it and a brass butt plate vice the usual LB style one. I took it to an Enfield expert and he said that it was not uncommon to have Savage parts on a LB rifle as Savage would sometimes top up the Long Branch supplies with some of their inventory. The brass butt plate may have been added later but that doesn't mean that it is incorrect for the time period. Stranger things have happened.
I would swap out the non "LB" parts....if you ship me the parts that you want to swap and provided they're in good condition, I'll give you the correct ones....you pay for the shipping both ways. You can reach me via PM. Ron
- Location
- Tucson, Arizona
The Mk1 sight is also correct. When production finaly caught up with demand, the better sight was retrofitted.
The ZAMAK buttplates, (pot metal) often degraded and were replaced.
Your rifle probably had the attention of the armourers as most service rifles did at one time or another.
The ZAMAK buttplates, (pot metal) often degraded and were replaced.
Your rifle probably had the attention of the armourers as most service rifles did at one time or another.
The parts were installed sometime during the rifle's period of service, likely not in Canada. A such, that is part of the rifle's history. It would do no harm to swap the parts for Canadian ones - after all, these are direct replacements, no alterations are required. In '43, the original sight was most likely a Mk. II (300/600). Rifles that stayed in Cdn. service wound up with the CMk.3 slide adjustable sight.
A British NO.4 Should have the Mk1 "Micrometer" style sight. Most No.4 Mk1* would have had the 300/600 flip, which would have later been replaced with the MkIII and then the CMK3 ladder type sights.
so the mkII sight is the 300/600 flip? then why does the mark III say Mk II right on it?
[/IMG]
Yours is a Mark 3 sight, why it is stamped MkII is beyond me. Maybe due to it being the second style of adjustible sight.
According to my sources, the sights are:
Mark 1-"micrometer" style sights, mostly used on British Made No.4's.
Mark 2- 300/600 fixed "Flip" style, mostly fitted on Long Branch and Savage rifles. Not sure if the Brits used them or not.
Mark 3 (what yours is apparently)- "ladder" type adjustable sight.
Mark 4- Ladder type adjustible sight, I think the difference beetween the Mk3 and Mk4 is the Mk3 is milled, and the mk4 is stamped, not too sure on that.
Here are all the sight in order:
My photos sure do get around!
Only three types of sights
- MKI micrometer
- MKII flip 300/600
-MKIII stamped version
Two basic variations:
a) British with a MKII style ramp with a stamped aperture (uses a small washer to keep it centered), also one with a MKIII ramp with a machined aperture
b) Canadian CMKIII machined aperture version
Only three types of sights
- MKI micrometer
- MKII flip 300/600
-MKIII stamped version
Two basic variations:
a) British with a MKII style ramp with a stamped aperture (uses a small washer to keep it centered), also one with a MKIII ramp with a machined aperture
b) Canadian CMKIII machined aperture version
Buck Turgidson
Regular
My Lee was FTR 1948. I wonder if this is when it got the mkIII "ladder" which I guess was stamped incorrectly. strange.....would you switch to a mkI?. I prefer the micrometer because I can measure the # of clicks from a certain elevation vs. the results I get on paper. (more accurately anyways)
- Location
- Tucson, Arizona
If you really want a canadian sight, I'll be happy to send you a mint CMk 3.
It was on my RCMP No4 and I replaced it with a Parker-Hale target sight.
I believe the MkII marking on the illustrated sight is correct as it requires a tiny washer to keep it from sliding sideways. The MkIII sight looks the same , but the base is wider like the two position flip sight and does not require that washer. (it's the one on the right in No4Mk1's pic.)
It was on my RCMP No4 and I replaced it with a Parker-Hale target sight.
I believe the MkII marking on the illustrated sight is correct as it requires a tiny washer to keep it from sliding sideways. The MkIII sight looks the same , but the base is wider like the two position flip sight and does not require that washer. (it's the one on the right in No4Mk1's pic.)
