Wanted: No2 MkIV Lithgow .22

oldlithgow · #1 08-03-13, 19:11

I know we are viewed by our friends down in Australia so as the title states I am looking for a proper marked stock for my No2 MkIV Lithgow .22
I would like to get one marked date around 1950's but at lest with well defined markings.

Craig Harris
1968 M38A1
oldlithgow

Tony Smith · #2 09-03-13, 03:03

You'd be looking for something like this. Unfortunately, mine is a No2, MIV* and not for sale. You can still see the original 1943 stamping from prior to the conversion.

oldlithgow · #3 09-03-13, 20:46

Those are the markings I am looking for, thanks for posting the picture.
Mine was rebuilt in 3 month 1953 on a 1917 receiver but any stock with those markings is OK.
The * asterisk is the Lithgow factory mark 7 pointed star.

Mike Cecil · #4 09-03-13, 20:49

Tony,

I think that is what he means, as there was only a No.2 Mk.IV*, not a No.2 Mk.IV. They are also referred to in later official documents as No.2 Mk.4/1.

Oldlithgow,

With the vast variation in markings on the .22 training rifles, from no markings to that shown in Tony's image, I'd not be too worried about trying to find a stamped butt, but good luck if you can prise one loose from someone!

They were a nice rifle to shoot -I've owned several over the years - the only draw back being the single shot nature of the conversion -each round had to be loaded by hand, rather than work the bolt and load from a magazine.

Mike C

oldlithgow · #5 09-03-13, 23:19

Mike,
Thanks for the information, In Canada you can find numerous Lithgows but it is rare to find a .22. Mine currently has no markings on the stock and is sitting in later era Coachwood. I am happy with it right now but it would be nice to have one of the nicely marked ones.

Tony Smith · #6 10-03-13, 04:45

Quote:

Originally Posted by oldlithgow

Mine currently has no markings on the stock and is sitting in later era Coachwood.

It is hardly likely to be later wood. SMLE production finished in 1954, and the factory then concentrated on FTR repair work before retooling for the L1A1 SLR.

Unlike the .22 Hornet rifles of that period which were completely made from new components for commercial sale, virtually all of the woodwork (and the actions) for the No2 MkIV* .22 rifles were recycled from earlier built No1 MkIII (or MkIII*) rifles.

Mike Cecil · #7 10-03-13, 05:55

Have to agree with Tony on that one: Coachwood was the latter standard for SMLE stocks, but any rifle going though FTR conversion to .22 could well have been re-equipped with a new set, or partial set, of woodwork to replace any 'dinged' parts. I remember examining many rifles during the last sales of .303 SMLE rifles and noting the mixture of timber parts, especially on rifles that were marked FTR. Walnut, coachwood, or Queensland Maple - made no difference to the assembler who wasn't looking for pretty matched timber, just a complete and functional rifle. There were literally thousands of sets of spare coachwood timber held in Defence stores for years, so they were certainly available if required for the FTR rifles in the 1950s.

Fortunately I ended up with an early 1920s Lithgow .303 SMLE with matching numbers, woodwork AND a WW1 issue hessian rifle bag, still new in its paper wrapping, from the armoury at Bandiana. (in the days when the Federal Govt still sold off firearms to the public!)

Mike C

charlie fitton · #8 11-03-13, 18:26

Odd "Oldlithgow", I think I have one of these in the basement too. Looks like a no 1, but .22.

i know there's a No2 short .22. Ironicaly with the 2400 yard sights on the side.

Personally - I'm looking for c No7 bits. I have an unmarked bolt and receiver, and a barrel. Now to find some pretty wood.(That sounds so bad when said by a guy...) I mean FURNITURE... that sounds almost as bad...

f