Ordered a Lithgow 1 Mk 3 from AIM

[Niner]

Just had the urge... impulse buy. It comes with a bayonet and I had this sudden urge, since the price seemed really right, and I had this small mad money windfall. I'll have something to look forward to in the next week. I'll post some pictures. Probably has a big Ishy screw through it, but the 3's are so interesting because of all the refurbs done to them anyway, over time, that it doesn't really matter.





One day the Ishy's are going to be collectable in the same way the Finn Nagants are.....well ...maybe. ;) We could hope that's the case.

<p>





http://pic11.picturetrail.com/VOL384/10 ... 430766.jpg" style="border:0;"/><!--EZCODE IMAGE END--></p><i>Edited by: <A HREF=http://p089.ezboard.com/bmilsurpafterho ... s>Niner</A>  http://x9eralpha.home.comcast.net/85.gif[/pic] at: 5/26/05 11:26 pm

</i>

[dromia]

Good on you Robert. ;





Is it a Mk111 or a Mk111*?





If its a Mk111 then it will be very collectable.





If its been through an Indian refurb don't knock it my No5 is a real beauty, there is a lot of snobbery about Enfield arsenals and yes quality does vary, but they are all part of the Enfield story and as such are equally legit in collecting terms.





Peddaled rifles for instance were derided a few years ago as bitsers and not true Enfields, but now people have clocked onto their relative rarity, especialy early SSAs, and the are the gnats knackers now.





Looking forward to the pictures Robert. ;

<p>http://www.photobucket.com/albums/1003/ ... _Badge.gif" style="border:0;"/><!--EZCODE IMAGE END-->





Adam.





Why don't you visit .

[joseyclosey]

Adam, are the "gnats knackers" similar to the "dogs bollocks" by any chance?:D;


Robert, congrats on the purchase, look forward to the pix.


joe

<p>

[Flaith]

Down here they're simlar but much smaller, except for Queensland mosquitos which have much bigger ones. The Germans thought that the British Mosquitos had very big ones also.





Eoin.

<p>

[Niner]

It's a 1MKIII* and it has the Ishy screw in the side of the stock..... but the wood is matching and in pretty good shape, only one splice at the toe. Also... the bolt and the receiver numbers match and the cleaned bore looks like a mirror. The Bayonet has a rack number on it that doesn't match the rifle nor the scabbard but for $119. for the rifle and bayonet I don't think it's a big deal.





The slot for the magazine cutoff is still there in this rifle dated 1918.





http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v51/N ... litgow.jpg" style="border:0;"/><!--EZCODE IMAGE END-->





http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v51/N ... p3/139.jpg" style="border:0;"/><!--EZCODE IMAGE END-->





http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v51/N ... p3/101.jpg" style="border:0;"/><!--EZCODE IMAGE END-->

<p>





http://pic11.picturetrail.com/VOL384/10 ... 430766.jpg" style="border:0;"/><!--EZCODE IMAGE END--></p><i>Edited by: <A HREF=http://p089.ezboard.com/bmilsurpafterho ... s>Niner</A>  http://x9eralpha.home.comcast.net/85.gif[/pic] at: 5/26/05 9:44 pm

</i>

[Flaith]

That's a really nice one, congratulations. Have a look at the barrel date, this might be one of the rifles which the Aust Govt sold to India in the post WW2 years.





Eoin.

<p>

[Niner]

Haven't had a chance to clean it up yet. Don't know what is under the wood, but look at these marks. Any chance the 45 is the year you are talking about Eoin?





http://pic11.picturetrail.com/VOL384/10 ... 247368.jpg" style="border:0;"/><!--EZCODE IMAGE END-->

<p>





http://pic11.picturetrail.com/VOL384/10 ... 430766.jpg" style="border:0;"/><!--EZCODE IMAGE END-->

[Flaith]

Robert,





Sorry to take so long to answer, but what with the disaster and a few other things I missed seeing your post.





Have a look on the lhs of the barrel at the Nock's Form. There should be a date just below the flat,





Eoin.

<p>

[Niner]

Eoin, I posted this before the big ezboard thing. Any of these marks make any sense to you? Why would the ring show a 45 and the barrel a 43? I would assume these were years. Or am I wrong in this assumption? This would seem backward to any normal refurb. Any chance this could be some kind of bitser?





http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v51/N ... CN0659.jpg" style="border:0;"/><!--EZCODE IMAGE END-->

<p>





http://pic11.picturetrail.com/VOL384/10 ... 430766.jpg" style="border:0;"/><!--EZCODE IMAGE END--></p><i>Edited by: <A HREF=http://p089.ezboard.com/bmilsurpafterho ... s>Niner</A>  http://x9eralpha.home.comcast.net/85.gif[/pic] at: 6/10/05 7:32 am

</i>

[Flaith]

Robert,


One of the other things was that we went onto Broadband and some sorting out was needed. A consequence of this is that I don't have my computer back on line yet and have to use my wife's which has a #@#@#$%$%^&*&* 'qwerty' keyboard whereas I use the logical Davorak board.





Anyway back to the subject. Nothing strange about the date. The barrel date is the date of manufacture and on a 1918 rifle indicates that the barrel was replaced sometime after that date. Wartime made bbls were being used up until the end of repairs in the late 1960s.


Of added interest is that yours was a Mk III and has been converted to Mk III*. This was merely the removal of the cutoff and the long range sights. It's certainly not a bitser as that crud on it could only have come from Indian service. Are there any numbers on the forend?





Eoin.

<p></p><i>Edited by: <A HREF=http://p089.ezboard.com/bmilsurpafterho ... >Flaith</A> at: 6/11/05 12:11 am

</i>