[crazy]

hey guys ,,haven't been around for awhile but figured i'd show off the new lithgow no1mkIII*,,it's a 1941 receiver with a 1942 dated stock,,really a nice Lithgow came with a 45 dated bayonet and a sling with a `1943 aussie penny on the sling,,lol..still kinda cool with the rifle,appeares all matching numbers,,and a nice bore,,one of the nicer ones i've owned! i always kinda liked the aussie enfields!!figured i'd throw up a few pics and see what ya think...

 

[Wagga Screw]

A very nice, honest example. Well done Sir

 

[JB White]

Same time period as one of mine. A late '41 dated rifle with early '42 timber.
When you take it down for cleaning and inspection, take a look for the copper blocks in the draws. Mine was missed during the retro fit.

 

[Doogal]

Just remember fore-end off first before the butt....

 

[crazy]

thanks guys ,,yea.. my first no1 i kinda learned the hard way about the forend,,lol,,lol,,something i'm wandreing about ,,i remember my other aussie's haveing unit markings on the receiver ring,,this one didn't ,,and also remember the sheild on the grip strap ,,were these ommited during wartime production?
thanks again guys.
crazy

 

[crazy]

another question

hey guys ,,got a question for ya ,,checking the lithgow the other day i noticed 2 different numbers on the bolt,the main serial number is spamped on the handle as typical of enfields and it matches theseria number on the receiver ring,,theres also a number on the underside of the handle that matches the rear of the receiver top of the strap,,what was the purpose of the 2 sets of numbers?
thanks again
crazy

 

[jrhead75]

The one underneath the bolt handle is an assembly or batching number that was used at the factory to keep the barreled action and bolt together after fitting and before the rifle's serial number was applied.

 

[Martling]

crazy,

Very nice rifle. Is it import marked? I am looking at a Lithgow that looks very similar in fit and finish and was imported by JJCO. It also has an 1941 receiver and 1942 stock. Is that something that was typical "factory correct"?

Chris

 

[JB White]

Yes. It certainly shows up often enough. 1941 was a transitional time. Lithgow changed over from the MkIII to the MkIII*. They began the move from Lithgow proper to assembling rifles at the Orange feeder factory. Woodwork was subcontracted out to Slazenger.
If a '41 receiver was in the pipeline then it was coupled with whatever wood was next available, then marked when accepted. Also keep in mind the government dates are fiscal year, not calendar year. Therefore it's possible to have a 41 dated receiver actually made in the early 42 calendar year.

 

[sakorick]

Very nice one. Be nice to her and rub in some raw linseed oil....she looks dry as a bone(don't forget the barrel and action channel). Regards, Rick.

 

[DEMO]

Also keep in mind the government dates are fiscal year, not calendar year. Therefore it's possible to have a 41 dated receiver actually made in the early 42 calendar year.

Something I've often thought about. When did they actually change the year stamp on the action? I've always thought technically, January 1st.

 

[muffett.2008]

My bets on the fiscal year, otherwise we would not need to record the year overlaps.

 

[JB White]

Something I've often thought about. When did they actually change the year stamp on the action? I've always thought technically, January 1st.

I don't know exactly when Lithgow (or Australia for that matter) rolled over their fiscal year back then. Had I known, or felt I knew, I would have made a statement to that effect.
If memory serves, the UK rolled their fiscal year in April/May. I have worked for companies who's fiscal years rolled in June/July, and others who rolled beyond the first quarter in the new calendar year. If I had to guess about Lithgow...you can see it wouldn't be a very good guess! LOL

 

[muffett.2008]

Production began in May 1913, the first report was issued to Government 30/6/13, then 30/12/13 and on in 30/6/14 and so on.
Production returns were sent from 1918 on as end of financial year returns to government.
A perusal of Gazettes for returning year figures shows that this system was retained until end of production.

 

[DEMO]

Yes muffer you'd get no argument from me with that and of course it's well known that the factory production figures quoted in skennertons books are to fiscal years. I run my piss poor business the same, but this is only production figures for numbers of completed rifles and makes perfect sense for the factory in order to balance the books. The question is, are action dates in line with the fiscal year or calendar year? I saw that you already commented action dates were in line with fiscal years. I'm not disagreeing but that's the first time I've heard that and surprises me some what.

 

[muffett.2008]

Just eyeballing the production figures for 1917 by month, jan.1420, feb.1740, mar.2300, apr.2680,may.2810, jun.6290, jul.1330,aug.1640,sep.3060,oct.3029,nov.3046,dec.2900 = 32245
The accumulative total to 1917/18 is 96257, 3742 rifles short of the 1918 A prefix.
Looking at two rifles that are relatively close , 1916 and 1917 I calculate the 1916 to be around Mar.'16 and the 1917 around Nov.'17.
If the rifles were dated per calender year, they'd both be 16's. My '14 would be a '15.

 

[DEMO]

Mate you lost me a bit there. You wrote, 1916 to be around Mar 16 and the 1917 around Nov 17. Sounds right to me. Whats the serial number of the rifles?

Ive done similar calculations before but the numbers don't add up to me. I could be completely wrong but the figures don't seem to be in line with the butt dates on my rifles. The grey area for me is number of rifles assembled up until June 1914. The calculations would put it at around 12000 but I think its about 1/3 this figure. Its been a long time since Ive done this muffer so not remembering exactly how I came to that but Id be very interested to know the actual figures if you have them. I had also determined that action dates changed from 1916 to 1917 at about serial number 58000 at the beginning of 1917.

 

[5th Batt WWCT]

Lithgows fiscal year ran from July to June (according to Ians books) so any rifle with a date on the butt (early rifles) that is marked 6/16 or 6/17 should (if the actions were dated fiscaly) have the date 1915 & 1916 respectively on the action.

 

[DEMO]

That's right mate.

 

[muffett.2008]

My bad Demo, that '17 was Nov.16, I'll blame the dog for that, she gets a bit touchy when I don't take her out when she asks. (No Bindii, not my wife)
12000 is definately incorrect. Up until 30 june there were only 4800 according to Skennerton, the actual figures look more like 13800, but there are two batches of test rifles not recorded in these figures, and this includes the 6 months to Dec. '15. the accumulative total being 18,586.
There would seem to be a variation in calculations between the Official Reports, Skennerton and Griffiths, Reynolds and Stratton have different figures again. You will also notice the Jun.17 figures I quoted virtually doubled, possibly because of a pause in the barrel setters strike, but definately an anomally in respect of other months.
The percentage of rifles actually issued is another matter, 12/13-40, 13/14-3,900, 14/15-14,646, 15/16-30,420, 16/17-22,670, 17/18-23,570. = 35,246, against a total production of 96,257. the remainder to store.