Warning

 

Close

Confirm Action

Are you sure you wish to do this?

Confirm Cancel
Member Login

Site Notices
9/16/2019 10:09:13 PM
Posted: 6/17/2014 12:37:14 PM EDT
My LGS called me and said they got in a Enfield. I drove over and found this Lithgow waiting for me so I took it home. Hopefully some of you can tell me if I got beat or not.

It looks like it was put together in 1943 I guess they were not too concerned about a nice finish. The stock is roughly finished and the metal is painted black.

No import mark. Excellent bore.

Hand guards are MA 41 marked. Butt stock 1942. I did not check the forestock.

Receiver 1941.

Bolt shoulder serial (70562) matches receiver but does not have the B prefix. Number on top of the bolt is 60780. L on the front bolt shoulder.

Nose cap bayonet lug is unmarked, there's no provision for a stacking swivel, and it's BA marked.

The bottom of the rear sight is marked OA 43.

I guess that's the high points. Hopefully the pics will help.



















Link Posted: 6/17/2014 12:44:53 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 6/17/2014 12:47:06 PM EDT by MVolkJ]
Rifle was accepted for service in '42, so the barrel (and the bolt, because it lacks the serial prefix) are a replacement from a later refurbishment. Not unusual, nor is the lack of serialization on the barrel or nosecap (and I bet the rear sight leaf isn't serialed either). Lithgow stopped renumbering these parts at refurbishment at some point.
Link Posted: 6/17/2014 12:49:49 PM EDT
Nice find.. You always luck out.. good job..
Link Posted: 6/17/2014 1:28:42 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 6/17/2014 1:30:11 PM EDT by GunnyUSMC]
Originally Posted By 1srelluc:
Nose cap bayonet lug is unmarked, there's no provision for a stacking swivel, and it's BA marked.

The bottom of the rear sight is marked OA 43.
View Quote

The BA and OA are marks for Lithgow sub contractors/ or town where they were made . If you look close you will fins most small parts have a mark.
Link Posted: 6/17/2014 2:11:09 PM EDT
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By MVolkJ:
Rifle was accepted for service in '42, so the barrel (and the bolt, because it lacks the serial prefix) are a replacement from a later refurbishment. Not unusual, nor is the lack of serialization on the barrel or nosecap (and I bet the rear sight leaf isn't serialed either). Lithgow stopped renumbering these parts at refurbishment at some point.
View Quote


You are right OA 43 marked.

Given it has no import marks and the forestock has the recoil plates (I ended-up checking) I don't think it's like a JJco "Bitzer" in the sense that a importer cobbled it together out of a bunch of parts.

I suspect it's was just refurbed and stored. Odd there is no refurb date on the knox form unless the 9/43 date on the barrel just under it is the refurb date.
Link Posted: 6/17/2014 2:20:40 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 6/17/2014 2:23:17 PM EDT by MVolkJ]
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By 1srelluc:
You are right OA 43 marked.

Given it has no import marks and the forestock has the recoil plates (I ended-up checking) I don't think it's like a JJco "Bitzer" in the sense that a importer cobbled it together out of a bunch of parts.

I suspect it's was just refurbed and stored. Odd there is no refurb date on the knox form unless the 9/43 date on the barrel just under it is the refurb date.
View Quote


Yeah, it's a legit refurb. Lithgow got lazy post-war; stopped marking a lot of stuff. Probably a late 40's refurb. The 9/43's the barrel date.

The refurb date, if marked, would be on the buttstock and would just be a month/year mark.
Link Posted: 6/17/2014 2:38:34 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 6/17/2014 2:39:20 PM EDT by 1srelluc]
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By MVolkJ:


Yeah, it's a legit refurb. Lithgow got lazy post-war; stopped marking a lot of stuff. Probably a late 40's refurb. The 9/43's the barrel date.

The refurb date, if marked, would be on the buttstock and would just be a month/year mark.
View Quote View All Quotes
View All Quotes
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By MVolkJ:
Originally Posted By 1srelluc:
You are right OA 43 marked.

Given it has no import marks and the forestock has the recoil plates (I ended-up checking) I don't think it's like a JJco "Bitzer" in the sense that a importer cobbled it together out of a bunch of parts.

I suspect it's was just refurbed and stored. Odd there is no refurb date on the knox form unless the 9/43 date on the barrel just under it is the refurb date.


Yeah, it's a legit refurb. Lithgow got lazy post-war; stopped marking a lot of stuff. Probably a late 40's refurb. The 9/43's the barrel date.

The refurb date, if marked, would be on the buttstock and would just be a month/year mark.


The only other markings are at the wrist but I can't make them out. Certainly not a month/year because of what I've seen pics of they a pretty prominent and near the other butt markings.

Is the black paint also normal on a refurbed Lithgow? Another weird thing is it looks like if they were going to do away with the stacking swivel on the nose cap why did they leave the solid "hump" for it there. Seems a waste of metal. I guess they were cast so I suspect it was cheaper to just not mill and drill.

So I guess the real question now is did I get beat for $200.00?
Link Posted: 6/17/2014 3:02:22 PM EDT
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By 1srelluc:

The only other markings are at the wrist but I can't make them out. Certainly not a month/year because of what I've seen pics of they a pretty prominent and near the other butt markings.

Is the black paint also normal on a refurbed Lithgow? Another weird thing is it looks like if they were going to do away with the stacking swivel on the nose cap why did they leave the solid "hump" for it there. Seems a waste of metal. I guess they were cast so I suspect it was cheaper to just not mill and drill.

So I guess the real question now is did I get beat for $200.00?
View Quote


Yeah, the black stoving is fine. You'll see it on post-war refurbs every now and then. The nosecap with undrilled stacking swivel is a WWII Aussie design. As you said, it was easier to just not drill it out than completely redesign the part to remove it entirely (as the Indians eventually did).

$200 is a very good price for a nice Lithgow.
Link Posted: 6/20/2014 7:42:50 AM EDT
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By MVolkJ:


Yeah, the black stoving is fine. You'll see it on post-war refurbs every now and then. The nosecap with undrilled stacking swivel is a WWII Aussie design. As you said, it was easier to just not drill it out than completely redesign the part to remove it entirely (as the Indians eventually did).

$200 is a very good price for a nice Lithgow.
View Quote View All Quotes
View All Quotes
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By MVolkJ:
Originally Posted By 1srelluc:

The only other markings are at the wrist but I can't make them out. Certainly not a month/year because of what I've seen pics of they a pretty prominent and near the other butt markings.

Is the black paint also normal on a refurbed Lithgow? Another weird thing is it looks like if they were going to do away with the stacking swivel on the nose cap why did they leave the solid "hump" for it there. Seems a waste of metal. I guess they were cast so I suspect it was cheaper to just not mill and drill.

So I guess the real question now is did I get beat for $200.00?


Yeah, the black stoving is fine. You'll see it on post-war refurbs every now and then. The nosecap with undrilled stacking swivel is a WWII Aussie design. As you said, it was easier to just not drill it out than completely redesign the part to remove it entirely (as the Indians eventually did).

$200 is a very good price for a nice Lithgow.


Yep, I would have tossed down $200 for that without a question. Nice rifle, I'm jealous...
Link Posted: 6/20/2014 8:15:08 AM EDT
Bores dark but rifling strong. Stock looks refinished.
1919 Lithgow w/bayo and sling
" />
" />

along with my new k98
Link Posted: 6/20/2014 8:34:38 AM EDT
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By JohnKimble:
Bores dark but rifling strong. Stock looks refinished.
1919 Lithgow w/bayo and sling
http://<a href=http://i1144.photobucket.com/albums/o481/trentcam/WP_20140618_023_zps81095bd1.jpg</a>" />
http://<a href=http://i1144.photobucket.com/albums/o481/trentcam/WP_20140618_020_zpsbc8c0395.jpg</a>" />

along with my new k98
View Quote


I wouldn't assume that. Bear in mind that early Lithgows, like yours, are mostly stocked in a different wood type than the WWII Lithgows. The early rifles used a timber called Queensland Maple; the WWII rifles are mostly stocked in Coachwood.

Are there any stampings on your buttstock? CMF markings, possibly a marking like 2MD or 3MD, maybe a shield with a kangaroo inside?
Link Posted: 6/20/2014 11:32:43 AM EDT
There are some very faint stampings I will look into next time I go home.
Top Top