Gunboards Forums banner

Status
Not open for further replies.
1 - 20 of 48 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
146 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
Hello All,

I’m working a trade deal on this beautiful SMLE to go w my Irish Contract ‘54 I unfired Enfield as a “safe mate “ and aside from several of these Irish Contract ones , I have no experience in these but love this rifle ....

Can anyone shed any lite on what the collective group feels it is valued at ?

I realize that’s a very subjective topic and something is worth what someone’s willing to pay for it , got it, if it was a FAL or some other Mil Surp in my Wheelhouse / area Of knowledge id have a much better idea and possibly be the guy helping a newer FAL/ L1a1 prospective owner.

Any thoughts ?

https://www.gunbroker.com/item/875387865


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 

·
Gold Bullet member
Joined
·
2,769 Posts
Not supposed to post links to live auctions.

The pictured rifle is a 1945 Lithgow, which was almost certainly a JJCo importer built rifle from NOS parts. Nice, but not an unissued rifle like the No4.

Sent from my SM-G973U1 using Tapatalk
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
584 Posts
A large number of Lithgow #1 Mk3 rifles were imported by John Jovino - some were actually unissued, but some were assembled by Jovino from NOS parts. The Jovino rifles are marked as such, usually on the receiver flat just ahead of the bolt handle: "J.J. CO." I had such a rifle, which did appear just as perfect as the specimen in the ad, and it was a nice rifle, BUT - while most of the parts were Australian, the barrel was an Ishapore (India), also in new condition. It was one of the Jovino-assembled rifles. I did not pay very much for the rifle, and it shot well, but I'd be VERY cautious about paying such a sum for what may be one like the one I had. A close-up photo of the area of the receiver should show the Jovino marks, if present. I'd at least ask whether the rifle is a Jovino import.

PRD1 - mhb - MIke
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
16,906 Posts
The pictures on GB show the receiver is stamped JJCO NY NY
Well, JJCO import stamp ...that don't mean its a bitzer made up of parts but................BUT...does it have MA 53 ..or any year date under the safety lever on the left side wrist ? If not , and there is no FTR marks on receiver , then its most certainly a JJ Jovino made up rifle using new old stock parts. Not a repro, not a clone but a rifle of new parts that is not "original" for a 1945 Lithgow.

That the seller included a RFI bayonet along with it only adds suspicion on the legitimacy of the rifle .

Regardless of what it is...its not what the OP thinks it is, not worth much more than $500 but could sell to some novice for quite a bit more.

Over at CMP boards, a M1 Rifle made of original legitimate parts is "Correct". Well, I don't think this No.1 is "correct" but one might be ethically right in saying its "made of original parts" and is a reconstructed example.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
6,781 Posts
Not an expert, but:

- Muffett's survey only has one other recorded "C-prefix" on a 1945.

- No buttstock markings.

- No photos of barrel information.... is it an FTR? Is it a JJCO build? Is it even an Aussie barrel?
(But here's 2! pictures of a buttplate LOL)

- "Matching" bayonet is Indian.

I can't say if it is legit or not, but it has a lot against it. And at a price that is double what I've seen 1945s go for.....

I will defer to the Oz Mob.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
9,150 Posts
This one is Jovino assembled from new spare parts, not original. I was about when Jovino first brought in the Lithgows. Most of the "unissued" ones were built from parts. A small number were not. I got a 1943 that was original and all matching, unissued shape. I think the OP Gunbonker awkshun "1945 Lithgow" has been for sale for a long time. While the price is high, some say that one cannot pay too much, only buy too soon. Given a steady rate of inflation, say 3%, that rifle will be worth that in 2075.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
9,454 Posts
Read & heed.
Check the serial number against date.
No. 1 Mk III* (Lithgow - "New")
Often advertised as “collector grade” or “mint - unfired” or “unissued” and selling for $200 and up.

Watch out for these! Quite a few “new Lithgow” rifles have been built just within the last few years from spare parts bought from the Australian government. The parts are new, and the rifles were never issued--but they aren’t Lithgow factory rifles by any stretch of the imagination! They’re recently-built parts guns.

It is possible (though not likely) that some Lithgow-manufactured rifles with late-1945 (or later) dates were kept in storage and subsequently surplussed out in unfired or unissued condition. Such rifles would have 5-digit serial numbers with either an “E” or an “F” serial number prefix, and the serial number would be stamped on the rear of the bolt handle and on the bottom of the fore-end, as well as on the receiver ring. Neither the nose cap nor the bottom of the backsight leaf will carry a different serial number on these rifles. Also, legitimate factory rifles will have 1/4-inch square brass or copper recoil plates installed on the fore-ends where the sear boss bears against the wood. These plates will be attached with small brass wood screws.

If you find a “new” Lithgow with a 1943 or 1944 date, be highly suspicious. This was the height of the war, and virtually all rifles manufactured were issued. If you find the receiver marked with a “JJ CO NY NY” import stamp, assume it’s a parts gun unless you have clear evidence to the contrary. (Many “new Lithgow” parts guns appear to have been assembled on receivers imported by John Jovino & Co.) If you find a 4-digit serial number with no prefix letter and an “A” suffix, this is clear evidence that it is not a Lithgow factory rifle. If you find different serial numbers on different parts, this is clear evidence that it is a parts gun. And if the recoil plates are missing, it is not only a parts gun--it could be dangerous to shoot. There’s a possibility that the fore-end will be damaged with as few as 20 or 30 round fired.
Where JJ Co used unissued receivers, they did not have serial numbers on them from Lithgow.
JJ Co numbered these receivers themselves, using a letter suffix (usually A) in the serial instead of a letter prefix as was customary markings for Lithgow.
If any doubt, a quick look at the serial number and date on the rifle will soon sort it.
For knowledgeable collectors of Lithgow Enfields, these assembled new rifles are pretty easy to spot by their light colored stocks and parkerized finish. Another dead give away for the assembled rifles is that they are not in the normal Lithgow serial number ranges. Most of the assembled rifles have serial numbers that either start with a "G" prefix or have a "A" suffix.
import marks on your Lithgow on the right hand side of receiver just above the woodline in front of the bolt handle? If so, I think it you look hard at your import marks, you will see that they are actually IA CO SAC CA but the first "I" looks like a "T" due to the mark being stamped at an angle. I have had a couple of the IA imported Lithgow rifles with the IA CO SAC CA import marks on the location I mentioned and others with the import marks on the bottom of the charger bridge on the right side. IA was the "Inter American" company and they imported a lot if military surplus arms as well as new AKs and Sks. If I remember right, they went out of business around 2005 or so. Anyhow, they had some pretty nice Lithgows as well as some not so nice like any importer. They did not assemble rifles from NOS parts either like Jovino did.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
16,906 Posts
JJCO had some legit MA52 refurbished barreled actions upon which they stuffed new SLaz furniture and un numbered nose caps......the weapons appear brand new. The only thing JJCO did was put on parts to a FTR'd barreled receiver with matching bolt. Same thing Lithgow was going to do but did not get around to doing. Not a fantasy rifle , not "built" by JJCO and not a completed rifle by Lithgow.

What to call that: how about "Assembled NOS Parts" Lithgow. ?
 

·
Platinum Bullet Member
Joined
·
47,656 Posts
$5K for that?



email the seller,

ask for pics of the barrel on each side under the rear handguard,
clear pic of the bottom or back of the rear sight,
better pic of the nose cap
number on the bolt handle,
left side of the socket,

then,,

offer $600



FWIW a Johnson Collector (1941 Johnsons) told me once he looked at a rifle on a table,
rifle seemed legit, usual marks and usual wear,

everything looked good, and the guy was proud of it price wise,
he said the thing that killed the deal for him was it came with a bayonet,, and it was a very obvious reproduction,


he figured, since the owner did not fess up to the repro bayonet, how much of the rifle had been altered, or played with,


he was telling me this when looking over one of the rifles I had on my tables, and he asked if i had a Bayonet,

at that time I had 2 rifles, and one repro bayonet, (I sell all bayonets seperate, usually on ebay)

his advise stuck with me, (and he as not talking about either of my rifles)
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
87 Posts
A large number of Lithgow #1 Mk3 rifles were imported by John Jovino - some were actually unissued, but some were assembled by Jovino from NOS parts. The Jovino rifles are marked as such, usually on the receiver flat just ahead of the bolt handle: "J.J. CO." I had such a rifle, which did appear just as perfect as the specimen in the ad, and it was a nice rifle, BUT - while most of the parts were Australian, the barrel was an Ishapore (India), also in new condition. It was one of the Jovino-assembled rifles. I did not pay very much for the rifle, and it shot well, but I'd be VERY cautious about paying such a sum for what may be one like the one I had. A close-up photo of the area of the receiver should show the Jovino marks, if present. I'd at least ask whether the rifle is a Jovino import.

PRD1 - mhb - MIke


Some time ago I heard about something like this, without any detail and could not remember, so thank you very much for this details!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
87 Posts
Not an expert, but:

- Muffett's survey only has one other recorded "C-prefix" on a 1945.

- No buttstock markings.

- No photos of barrel information.... is it an FTR? Is it a JJCO build? Is it even an Aussie barrel?
(But here's 2! pictures of a buttplate LOL)

- "Matching" bayonet is Indian.

I can't say if it is legit or not, but it has a lot against it. And at a price that is double what I've seen 1945s go for.....

I will defer to the Oz Mob.


I´ve only one Enfield with "matching number" bayo, it´s an No.4 Mk1 for Burma (ROF Fazakerley), the other bayo I know did not have any numbers especially the Bayo for No.1 rifle.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
5,104 Posts
This is one of those rifles that doesn't quite conform to other JJCO builds in some ways, but it does in others. If it were a 52 rebuilt barreled action then how did the nosecap get the matching number?
C prefix is raising some eyebrows. Lack of other key markings overall raises them higher.
No pics beneath the rear handguard or under the rear sight leaf. Hmmmmm.... Asking $5K for that rifle there should be about 100 detailed photos available.

Making reference to other rifles such as PF or UF No4's in the description is meaningless aside from being a smoke screen. Calling a refurbed/refinished RFI bayonet 'matching' is another.
I wonder just who or where are his two experts that called it legit. Did they basically call it a rifle with real Lithgow parts????

The rifle is what it is. A nice looking shooter with a nostalgic look. Just like some offerings from Mitchell's Mausers or one of the Gibbs/Navy Arms fantasy carbines.
If someone does buy it for that "too soon" price, they had better go over it very well before firing. Especially the fitting up.
Did anyone notice the split in the fore end in the area of the cutoff screw boss?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
761 Posts
The main problem with the Jovinos were that they did not install the recoil plates correctly if at all... Many split forends and accuracy problems. This seller on Gunbroker should seek mental help if he thinks he is getting 5K for that rifle.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
16,906 Posts
JJCO marked Litgows bear close scrutiny. SOme are legit rifles, others are bitzers , some could be FTR and in new condition and some could be cobbled together with NOS parts. There are clues in deciphering what a JJCO truly is. For instance in this auction example, if the rifle does not have recoil blocks and is a 1945 Lithgow...looking brand new in every way, then I'd step back and consider the lack of recoil blocks which should be there if the rifle were assembled in 1945 or was a MA marked FTR'd rifle. Some other clues ..missing marks on butt stock .

JJCO...not all garbage, not all original, some original and some are mysteries that look new and can snooker an unsuspecting novice buyer.

Go slow with a JJCO rifle .

In 1990 Roses Dept. Store outside Fort Bragg (multiple locations) had a Sunday sale and advertised brand new Lithgow No.1 Mk III. I hit every store location as the sale price was $299. Every rifle at every store I pawed over and every one had a black park finish, X prefix serial number and wood was mint condition SLAZ. Not a one had a MA mark under safety nor a FTR marking. All were JJCO marked and all were fantasy rifles. Nose caps...all w/o serial number on them.
 
1 - 20 of 48 Posts
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top