[quote=“enfield56”]Its a strange one and I’ve never seen its like.
The slots in the base would normally have been cut out at the same time as the holes in the sides which leads me to think it is more than just a missed production stage. That the end spring hasn’t been slit at the narrowest part, which I think was the final stage of forming the charger (as opposed to finishing) leads me to think this was done on purpose.
Very interesting and I wouldn’t mind getting my acquisitive little mitts on it.
Happy collecting, Peter
edited; early morning foolishness of mind[/quote]
I agree with Peter, this sort of omission (the four slits in the base) could not be missed by accident. It may be a trial of a production simplification, I would think that the four narrow slits were difficult to punch. Later designs (Mark III and IV) switched to simpler circular holes. One further oddity about this charger, besides the lack of a cutout for the end spring tabs is the lack of the pressed retaining lugs for the end cartridges on those springs. Too many differences to be unintentional. Possibly an attempt to overcome the deficiencies of the Mark I charger but with a simpler design than the standard Mark II. This charger has the additional “third lug” on the side in common with the Mark I and the earlier Mark II’s, it was deleted in the later Mark II’s and all subsequent marks.
A nice item which my collection now needs!