StAubyns Posted 13 October , 2015 Share Posted 13 October , 2015 I picked this rifle up today. I am told that it is a 1916 manufacture but I cant see a date on it at this early stage. Any information would be gratefully received. It has the name "H Burton Wilson" stamped on both sides of the stock. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
StAubyns Posted 13 October , 2015 Author Share Posted 13 October , 2015 A couple more photos Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Beerhunter Posted 13 October , 2015 Share Posted 13 October , 2015 I don't think that it is Great War production at all. It looks like a between-the-wars so-called BSA Commercial (not made for the UK Government) to me. As such is should have Birmingham Military Proof marks. If you take a look under the upper hand guard you ought to find crossed sceptres containing the Birmingham Proof date code. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
4thGordons Posted 13 October , 2015 Share Posted 13 October , 2015 I don't think that it is Great War production at all. It looks like a between-the-wars so-called BSA Commercial (not made for the UK Government) to me. Agreed. The lack of a cypher and the BSA trademark on the barrel support this too. according to the discussion here H.Burton Wilson was a gunsmith specializing in setting up SMLEs for target work, fitting sights like yours etc. and operated at Bisley from @1907-1930 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lancashire Fusilier Posted 13 October , 2015 Share Posted 13 October , 2015 I picked this rifle up today. I am told that it is a 1916 manufacture but I cant see a date on it at this early stage. Any information would be gratefully received. It has the name "H Burton Wilson" stamped on both sides of the stock. Nice rifle. H. Burton Wilson was an Armourer/Gunsmith who worked at Bisley from pre-WW1 to pre-WW2, with a good reputation for his customisation of target rifles, your's being one of his examples. Regards, LF Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Allison01 Posted 13 October , 2015 Share Posted 13 October , 2015 Nice rifle, looks like a fine example of H Burton Wilson's work. Congratulations Alli Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Andrew Upton Posted 14 October , 2015 Share Posted 14 October , 2015 A question - the second picture in post 2 shows the thickening of the wood before the front sight on the left side of the rifle. This is usually associated with the cross-over period early/mid-war when the change is made from making the MkIII (which would have had the front part of the volley sight located here) to the MkIII* (which had the volley sight being eliminated amongst other features ). Did any private manufacturers continue to make them like this post-war/interwar? It just seems an odd feature to me that would be retained in the interwar period, and would have made me think that the stock at least could be earlier, or ex-military stock, or... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
4thGordons Posted 14 October , 2015 Share Posted 14 October , 2015 While I would agree that the stock does look like one of the intermediate ones - I believe there was a return to this general style in the inter-war period. There are 5 basic forms of SHtLE fore-ends 1)The initial shape with volley sight base, pointer cut-out and slim fore-end has two forms - the first with the inner barrel band under the outer and the handguard with a single spring, the second is externally similar but with the inner band moved, 2)similar to 1 but inletted for the charger bridge then 3) from late 1915 on the volley sight and cut-off was removed (so the side wall was higher) and there were a intermediate fore-stocks which exhibit elements of both of them forms,4) towards the end of the war the fore-ends became significantly thicker and chunkier and the bulge/thinning disappeared. Post War there was a return to the slimmer 5) profile fore-end and the lower sidewall to allow for the cut-off. Quite a lot of MkIII* rifles were returned to the MkIII standard with the cutoff installed) and these thinner profiled fore-ends in the inter war period however, as you point out, these fore-ends do not usually have the swell. I do not know if there were any private manufacturers of stocks and I would have thought that it would have required a very significant investment in machinery which would have been difficult economically I suspect stocks could have been purchased from govt contractors. There may be inspection stamps on the furniture that would help resolve your question, like you I suspect an earlier surplus stock but I would not discount an inter war stock that had been thinned and shaped by the custom gunmaker. Chris Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Andrew Upton Posted 14 October , 2015 Share Posted 14 October , 2015 While I would agree that the stock does look like one of the intermediate ones - I believe there was a return to this general style in the inter-war period... There may be inspection stamps on the furniture that would help resolve your question, like you I suspect an earlier surplus stock but I would not discount an inter war stock that had been thinned and shaped by the custom gunmaker. Thanks Chris - another point that I only just noticed - the positioning and fitting of the target sight would appear to make it either a permanent or semi-permanent feature, and one that would either interfere with the use of the rear volley sight or even mean it could not be fitted at all. Which would entirely defeat even the idea of having the forward volley sight fitting... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Beerhunter Posted 14 October , 2015 Share Posted 14 October , 2015 A question - the second picture in post 2 shows the thickening of the wood before the front sight on the left side of the rifle. This is usually associated with the cross-over period early/mid-war when the change is made from making the MkIII (which would have had the front part of the volley sight located here) to the MkIII* (which had the volley sight being eliminated amongst other features ). Did any private manufacturers continue to make them like this post-war/interwar? It just seems an odd feature to me that would be retained in the interwar period, and would have made me think that the stock at least could be earlier, or ex-military stock, or... All of the BSA Commercials of that I have observed of that period have that style of stock. It was never fitted with a volley sight however. I have one made for the South African Government in 1936 (IIRC) that is almost identical to the one pictured. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
StAubyns Posted 15 October , 2015 Author Share Posted 15 October , 2015 Thanks for the replies! I will be taking it to the range today so hopefully that will go well. I have received some more information about the history rifle that I hope to confirm soon and I will post that if I get a reply. One other thing about the rifle target sights, if you look at the first photograph, the bottom piece of the sight is made from the volley sight. regards Geoff Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
T8HANTS Posted 15 October , 2015 Share Posted 15 October , 2015 I hope you don't discover why those sights are called "nose knockers", have a nice day at the range. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GeorgeB Posted 15 October , 2015 Share Posted 15 October , 2015 Having said all of this; there is an example of the round cocking knob on the back of the bolt that I ask about in a different posting. Would this feature indicting it the rifle may have been made before WWI? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
4thGordons Posted 15 October , 2015 Share Posted 15 October , 2015 One other thing about the rifle target sights, if you look at the first photograph, the bottom piece of the sight is made from the volley sight. Which piece do you mean? The sight base replaces the safety/locking lever mount and the safety spring (hour glass shaped) is used to provide tension to the folding sight - is that what you are referring to? These remained part of the rifle after the deletion of the volley sights. Chris Having said all of this; there is an example of the round cocking knob on the back of the bolt that I ask about in a different posting. Would this feature indicting it the rifle may have been made before WWI? Non not necessarily, these continued to be made during WWI and in the inter war period also there seems to have been retro fitting of this style. The rounded cocking piece was the original style on the MkI, MkI*** and MkIII so it was fitted pre-war, but the flat, slab sided style was introduced in 1916 as an alternative standard and rounded ones continue to be fitted. In the interwar period many of the MkIII* rifles refinished to MkIII seem to have had the original style fitted. Chris Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
StAubyns Posted 15 October , 2015 Author Share Posted 15 October , 2015 This part of the sight has been manufactured from the volley sight, which I thought was unusual. Shooting the rifle at the range was a delight, 9's and 10's all the way after the first 3 shots regards Geoff Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
4thGordons Posted 15 October , 2015 Share Posted 15 October , 2015 Wow. Thanks.I did not notice that. Is the peep still present at the top? Who is the manufacture of the sight? There are several very similar patterns, but I am not sufficiently familiar to tell which one it is, it looks like it may have a Parker-Hale logo on it but I cannot make it out. Chris Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
StAubyns Posted 15 October , 2015 Author Share Posted 15 October , 2015 The peep is still present. The base plate says "Parker" but the sight is marked with the BSA logo. The sight elevation screw is not working at the moment so the sight is coming off at the weekend for a precision engineer, who is a member of the club, to have a look see what he can do. The unverified story, as yet, says the rifle is 1916, the sights 1910 and that the rifle was gifted in 1930 to an English Lord. I have written to the Estate in question and hopefully I will get a positive reply. regards Geoff Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
303man Posted 15 October , 2015 Share Posted 15 October , 2015 A question - the second picture in post 2 shows the thickening of the wood before the front sight on the left side of the rifle. This is usually associated with the cross-over period early/mid-war when the change is made from making the MkIII (which would have had the front part of the volley sight located here) to the MkIII* (which had the volley sight being eliminated amongst other features ). Did any private manufacturers continue to make them like this post-war/interwar? It just seems an odd feature to me that would be retained in the interwar period, and would have made me think that the stock at least could be earlier, or ex-military stock, or... I have a commercial BSA .22 SMLE and it has the bulge in the for-end where the front volley sight would have been assume they just used up what they had or the surplus better quality wood was kept for the commercial rifles after the war. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
303man Posted 15 October , 2015 Share Posted 15 October , 2015 This part of the sight has been manufactured from the volley sight, which I thought was unusual. Shooting the rifle at the range was a delight, 9's and 10's all the way after the first 3 shots regards Geoff They were affectionately know as nose knocker sights. If you did not have correct length butt or incorrect eye relief you got a whack right on your nose! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Khaki Posted 15 October , 2015 Share Posted 15 October , 2015 All in all, a very nice looking rifle, congratulations, khaki Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PhilB Posted 15 October , 2015 Share Posted 15 October , 2015 I notice the modern leather sling. I've only seen webbing slings on SMLEs - how many types of official sling have there been? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Andrew Upton Posted 15 October , 2015 Share Posted 15 October , 2015 I notice the modern leather sling. I've only seen webbing slings on SMLEs - how many types of official sling have there been? Modern? http://www.karkeeweb.com/patterns/1914/components/1914_associated.html Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
4thGordons Posted 15 October , 2015 Share Posted 15 October , 2015 I notice the modern leather sling. I've only seen webbing slings on SMLEs - how many types of official sling have there been? Assuming you mean in British service there was the Sling, rifle, web, G.S.(of which there were several variations with minor differences in hardware etc including some empire variations) See here Then the leather sling Sling, rifle, Pattern, 1914. (linked above by Andrew) - both common in the GW era. There was also the earlier leather sling used on the MLE and earlier which I feel sure at some point would have found their way onto SMLEs . I have some interesting photos of members of the 33rd Division (AEF) who participated in the attack on Hamel with the Australians on the 4th of July 1918 and they have US M1907 slings on their SMLEs! In WWII there was a substitute standard "economy" sling of rubberized cotton (which are invariably dry and crumbly these days), as well as blue/grey web RAF pattern slings (approved inter-war I think). Chris Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PhilB Posted 15 October , 2015 Share Posted 15 October , 2015 So is that not a modern sling? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Andrew Upton Posted 16 October , 2015 Share Posted 16 October , 2015 So is that not a modern sling? Even if it is new made, the general style is 100+ years old now... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now