What do you think of the Aussie Lithg. rifles compared to the brit #4 mk 1? (Same vintage ww2)
Lithgow rifles are well built military rifles. WW1 era Lithgows have a fit and finish equal to commercial rifles. For military rifles, the WW2 Lithgows are well crafted. The only complaint I have about Lithgow’s is the wood on mine is fairly soft and so it was easy to crush the wood with the action screws. I bedded a 1916 Lithgow and that got the thing to shoot smaller groups, but these are not target rifles.
I am of the opinion that the better sights of #4 make it a better rifle, supposedly the #4 is a stiffer action, it was supposed to be easier to make, but neither action is all that stiff, and just looking at the receivers, both require a lot of machining. You could not build that action today and be cost competitive.
World War 2 barrels are basically a tube with rifling. There was no expectation of target grade accuracy. However my two groove Savage shoots cast bullets better than my five groove #4 Mk 2. Neither are target grade weapons but the Mk2 is slightly more accurate, both are serviceable as military weapons. The best built #4’s are the #4 Mk 2 made after WW2, less tooling marks, nice looking barrels.
I think SMLE’s are more fun to play with, that square snout on the front, with a M1907 bayonet attached, that is a real trench war fare weapon. The WW2 spike bayonet just does not hold a candle to the M1907.