No 3 (P14) 22 trainer

[John Sukey]

Just curious on how you would fit a tang sight on a P14 unless it was one near the buttplate and you shot feet first lying down (which was used at Bisley)

[p246]

Just curious on how you would fit a tang sight on a P14 unless it was one near the buttplate and you shot feet first lying down (which was used at Bisley)

I'm wondering the same thing. I have a visual image of Tommy Bubba drilling and tapping the stock:-).

[p246]

I copied this from that site regarding the P'14 rimfire conversions. It's from the chronology list of .22 trainers.



The other info in the columns are marked as n/a or unavailable.




If yours is one of those it's a desireable specimen. I wouldn't know how to set a price, but I would negotiate one to get it!

Well its Chucks and he wants to sell it but I'm probably gonna pass. The two local experts we called in said there were a few experimental s made hence the no 3 designation but it was not excepted into mass production. One said its hard to tell if this was a Greener or AG Parker because the records were destroyed. The other one said Greener always installed better sights and deleted the volley sights and AG Parker always inscribed the barrel crown. He thinks its a legit No. 3. One guessed value at $1500.00 and the other said $2000 to 2200.00. Both admit the market is largely unknown till it hits an auction.

[JB White]

Just curious on how you would fit a tang sight on a P14 unless it was one near the buttplate and you shot feet first lying down (which was used at Bisley)

I was thinking 1920's and the Martini conversions in the post Great War period. Had my thoughts muddled together while typing...obviously!

[JB White]

Well its Chucks and he wants to sell it but I'm probably gonna pass. The two local experts we called in said there were a few experimental s made hence the no 3 designation but it was not excepted into mass production. One said its hard to tell if this was a Greener or AG Parker because the records were destroyed. The other one said Greener always installed better sights and deleted the volley sights and AG Parker always inscribed the barrel crown. He thinks its a legit No. 3. One guessed value at $1500.00 and the other said $2000 to 2200.00. Both admit the market is largely unknown till it hits an auction.

It is indeed a nicely done professional job. Depending upon who might be looking at it on auction the price might be scary. It should fetch at least a bit more than double of a 303 in that same condition. Much better than that if someone really wants it and a bidding war starts.
If it were mine to sell I would set a reserve somewhere around $1800-$2000 just to test the market. Too bad you can't manage to get your hands on it for keeps. I know that feeling very well.

Thanks for showing it here

[p246]

Thanks JB. He has a lot more neat guns than this one. Hopefully I can get some more photos of others. I've been drooling over an all original IH Garand.

[5Batt]

Well its Chucks and he wants to sell it but I'm probably gonna pass. The two local experts we called in said there were a few experimental s made hence the no 3 designation but it was not excepted into mass production. One said its hard to tell if this was a Greener or AG Parker because the records were destroyed. The other one said Greener always installed better sights and deleted the volley sights and AG Parker always inscribed the barrel crown. He thinks its a legit No. 3. One guessed value at $1500.00 and the other said $2000 to 2200.00. Both admit the market is largely unknown till it hits an auction.

All P14s got the designation No3 in 1926 when the SMLE became the No1
My P14 which is still a .303 is a No3
If your "experts" are calling it a No3 just because its might be an experimental .22, then i would not place much trust in what they are saying!

[p246]

All P14s got the designation No3 in 1926 when the SMLE became the No1
My P14 which is still a .303 is a No3
If your "experts" are calling it a No3 just because its might be an experimental .22, then i would not place much trust in what they are saying!

They are not. If I wrote everything they said it would take hours on this tablet. What they said is several companies...Greener, AG Parker and one other I cant remember submitted a small run of 22 trainers based on the P14 conversions. The Brits decided to stay with the Lee enfield as the donor gun and not use the No 3 platform. One says there's no way to tell because those records were destroyed, but this one would be a correct "example". The other one thinks it is and give a long list of reasons as to why. I posted the two I remember above. Its a very neat rifle regardless.

[JB White]

If it was a No3 rifle proposed for conversion in the private sector but never adopted by the MoD to be given its own new number...what else would we call it?
I'm pretty sure it was called a No3 or P14 for lack of another name.

[5Batt]

If it was a No3 rifle proposed for conversion in the private sector but never adopted by the MoD to be given its own new number...what else would we call it?
I'm pretty sure it was called a No3 or P14 for lack of another name.

A P14 in .22 or a No3 in .22 or what ever else you wish to call it, my concern was with the words "The two local experts we called in said there were a few experimental s made hence the no 3 designation"
Sounds like they were saying it's a No3 because it's a .22