Experience shapes our perceptions as well as our advice. How we interpret what we see / hear / read is directly related to our previous experience in the area.
My perception of the original post is that the poster believes he has come into possession of a an original 1941 SMLE manufactured by Lithgow, wearing original 1942 dated furniture in excellent condition and of great beauty that he believes is unfired and is as it came off the production line. He states there is grease in the chamber and bore, there are no import marks, all serial numbers match and there is no wear on any of the metal surfaces of the rifle.
My own perception is that the rifle is indeed a 1941 Lithgow SMLE in exceptional condition with period correct wood. The serial number matches the period, all the markings (BA, OA, Slaz etc) are consistent with the period. Both Bathurst and Orange were in production in 1942. The wood carries the correct manufacturing and inspection marks for the period. Wood dated a year after the metal is common with Lithgow production - I have owned examples and still own a '42 with '43 dated wood.
But I see some anomalies with the wood being the set the rifle originally wore.
1) If we assume the grease in the chamber and bore is from storage then why is the wood in such good condtion as it would have been coated in the grease as well.
2) The wood is not serialled to the rifle. At that time Lithgow serialled the bolt handle, receiver, barrel, rear sight, nosecap and forearm. Later the numbering of the rear sight, nosecap and forearm were dropped but not in this period. This was part of there production method and would have been adhered to as a matter of course.
3) The rear sight protector ears are on backward. Could have happened any time in the last 60 years ? Agreed. However the story is the rifle is straight from the production line. During production there were multiple inspections (remember those "line of insp stamps with 1 thru 10 under the crown") and such a mistake would have been noted. BTW its not a crown but a seven pointed star around an A.
So, I say - original rifle, original wood but original complete unit ? Open to question.
BTW Ed, Slazenger made forearms in early 1943 without recoil blocks. My 1942 Lithgow has such a forearm. You may have sold in error.
One last anomaly I see in this thread.
My perception of the original post is that the poster believes he has come into possession of a an original 1941 SMLE manufactured by Lithgow, wearing original 1942 dated furniture in excellent condition and of great beauty that he believes is unfired and is as it came off the production line. He states there is grease in the chamber and bore, there are no import marks, all serial numbers match and there is no wear on any of the metal surfaces of the rifle.
My own perception is that the rifle is indeed a 1941 Lithgow SMLE in exceptional condition with period correct wood. The serial number matches the period, all the markings (BA, OA, Slaz etc) are consistent with the period. Both Bathurst and Orange were in production in 1942. The wood carries the correct manufacturing and inspection marks for the period. Wood dated a year after the metal is common with Lithgow production - I have owned examples and still own a '42 with '43 dated wood.
But I see some anomalies with the wood being the set the rifle originally wore.
1) If we assume the grease in the chamber and bore is from storage then why is the wood in such good condtion as it would have been coated in the grease as well.
2) The wood is not serialled to the rifle. At that time Lithgow serialled the bolt handle, receiver, barrel, rear sight, nosecap and forearm. Later the numbering of the rear sight, nosecap and forearm were dropped but not in this period. This was part of there production method and would have been adhered to as a matter of course.
3) The rear sight protector ears are on backward. Could have happened any time in the last 60 years ? Agreed. However the story is the rifle is straight from the production line. During production there were multiple inspections (remember those "line of insp stamps with 1 thru 10 under the crown") and such a mistake would have been noted. BTW its not a crown but a seven pointed star around an A.
So, I say - original rifle, original wood but original complete unit ? Open to question.
BTW Ed, Slazenger made forearms in early 1943 without recoil blocks. My 1942 Lithgow has such a forearm. You may have sold in error.
One last anomaly I see in this thread.
This is one of the things that I enjoy and revel in at this website. Individuals sharing knowledge and experience in order to help others in their quest of more knowledge. We just need to remember that circumstances and details may not always be the same for everyone and that our advice, while well intentioned, (and usually gladly accepted) is not always the entire solution.versus
I should have kept my nose out of this.
)
