Milsurp After Hours

Having to look up Skennerton in relation to a posting on another forum I noted something I found curious in relation to the SMLE trials rifles of 1902.
They were made without any manufacturers, designation or date stampings. They would appear to be the only MLE/SMLE's so made.
Anyone have any idea why ?

Maybe, as a trials rifle it was important that they were tested without fear of favoritism and so only carried a a serial number or some such ID that was cross referable to a producer by a limited number of people. That is just a wild guess on my part

Duncan, these were a batch of 1,055 (A and B models) made only by RSAF Enfield so I don't think the "without fear or favour" aspect comes into it. Other trials rifles (before and after the SMLE) made only at RSAF Enfield had the usual stampings with those manufactured outside the UK having manufacturers details stamped on the left receiver wall.
Skennerton is clear stating "There are no designation markings, nor marker stamped on the action body." "No maker's name, year or designation markings were stamped on the action body". " There are no Markings on the RH side of the ButtSocket."
Back to Square one.

Well you need a better man than me to answer it mate

You probably need a psychic as Ian would have had access to the existing records.

Best of British luck, mate.

Skennerton also had access to all the surviving examples, both of them. I wonder if what is in the book is a fact or an extrapolation based on existing examples ? He states the No 4 trials rifles of 1931 included a few made to set up the machinery which had no markings and the rest were marked so it seems a reasonable theory to conclude the SMLE trials were done the same.

Possibly the rifles had no designation as they were pre production trials. When production trials aare commenced the rifles generally get issued for troop trials and would require a full set of markings such as found on the No1 MkV.

Actually I've come up with a new theory. There were no designation markings because they hadn't decided on a name yet

i guess thats as good as any , but im thinking its getting over thought , a pre-trials rifle might not even get past the stage of buildup , if issues were evident a slightly different tact would be taken before moving ahead to the stage of feeling its worthy of submittal ,

i suspect the 'short magazine rifle' was a given , it was a question if they could be made acceptable with existing tooling or simple modifications , gotta fiddle with it a bit to get things right