tahunua001
New member
I just picked up a longbranch no4 MK1*. the receiver and mag serials don't match. is that common or do I just have a mixmaster?
paging tikirocker and wogpotter
- Thread starter tahunua001
- Start date
No. 4s were issued with matching numbered mags. Somehow yours just got replaced/swapped over the years. Actually, I have NO idea why the Brits numbered those mags. They all generally interchange, so I see no real reason why it should be. In fact, I have some in my spares that have no numbers.
For that matter, as official policy, No. 1 mags were NOT numbered to the the guns. I don't know why they instituted it on the No. 4s.
Just because the mag doesn't match doesn't mean you have a "mixmaster." See if all your other numbers are matching (bolt, etc.); That's the most important thing. If it bothers you too much, you can always find an un-numbered mag and have some jeweler that has a pantograph machine number yours (they were done with electropencil).
Maybe wogpotter can shed more light on the practice.
For that matter, as official policy, No. 1 mags were NOT numbered to the the guns. I don't know why they instituted it on the No. 4s.
Just because the mag doesn't match doesn't mean you have a "mixmaster." See if all your other numbers are matching (bolt, etc.); That's the most important thing. If it bothers you too much, you can always find an un-numbered mag and have some jeweler that has a pantograph machine number yours (they were done with electropencil).
Maybe wogpotter can shed more light on the practice.
Mystery to me as well.
The big deal is the bolt & receiver matching.
I've had Savages with no numbers on the magazine, so it seems to be a British preoccupation.
My best guesses?
Back then every part was a "firearm" in the U.K. unlike U.S law where only a specific part counts as a "gun" legally. Many European guns had every part numbered because of this, even small internal parts had the last 2 digits stamped. I'm guessing administrative rather than functional concerns.
Individual mags need a little "tweaking" so it makes sense to match them up post tweak.
The big deal is the bolt & receiver matching.
I've had Savages with no numbers on the magazine, so it seems to be a British preoccupation.
My best guesses?
Back then every part was a "firearm" in the U.K. unlike U.S law where only a specific part counts as a "gun" legally. Many European guns had every part numbered because of this, even small internal parts had the last 2 digits stamped. I'm guessing administrative rather than functional concerns.
Individual mags need a little "tweaking" so it makes sense to match them up post tweak.
Last edited:
tahunua001
New member
my savage MK1* also has no numbers on the mag, why I was asking.
I have seen some Savage No. 4s with numbered mags, but I'm not sure if they left the factory that way or were numbered by the Brits later on. To the best of my knowledge, only the Long Branch guns and Brit guns had numbered mags from the outset, a practice they followed until the end of production of the No. 4 Mk 2s in the 50s.
Those magazines were never intended to be replaceable or expendable, like the STEN or U.S. Carbine magazines. They were considered part of the rifle and were to be loaded with chargers ("stripper clips"). The original Lees, back in the late 1800's, came with two magazines fitted to the gun. One was installed in the rifle; the second was kept in the soldier's kit or pocket as a spare or for a quick reload if necessary. A chain kept the main magazine from being lost when/if the second was in use.
Still, as mentioned, not all magazines were numbered and if it was required by regulation, the rules weren't followed.
The numbering of parts did not come about because of any law; it was because the parts were all were hand fitted "in the white", numbered, and then the gun disassembled for hardening and final finishing of the parts. The numbers were used to make sure the fitted parts got back together on final assembly.
Jim
Still, as mentioned, not all magazines were numbered and if it was required by regulation, the rules weren't followed.
The numbering of parts did not come about because of any law; it was because the parts were all were hand fitted "in the white", numbered, and then the gun disassembled for hardening and final finishing of the parts. The numbers were used to make sure the fitted parts got back together on final assembly.
Jim
tahunua001
New member
alright my brother and brother in law pointed out some things I hadn't noticed before. there appears to be some pitting in places on a lot of the stock hardware but the finish covers it. it looks like parkerizing to the untrained eye but could this be a coat of sunorite? the receiver has a star and N stamped on top which I've found means that it had been found to have a rusty bore but I don't know the level of repair/refurb it would see in response.
the safety spring piece is also blued and does not match the rest of the metal finish. is this a replacement part or did they simply not paint it because it was spring steel?
the safety spring piece is also blued and does not match the rest of the metal finish. is this a replacement part or did they simply not paint it because it was spring steel?
Luger (and Mauser) parts were originally numbered for the reason I gave. But the German Army, in writing its requirements, incorporated the numbering, possibly without really understanding the reason for it. The result was that Army contracts required numbering and inspection of parts even long after hand fitting was no longer necessary. The unnecessary costs, in time and labor, must have been significant for Germany in two wars.
Jim
Jim