Proud of my No 4!

[Ridolpho]

My 4C has no detectable trace of the "US Property" and, if removed, it must have been milled off quite professionally. What are the crucial dimensions of a body with the lettering in place that I can compare with mine to verify removal (I assume the main one would be bottom of body up to top of bevel where the markings are normally)? Thanks.

Ridolpho

[Peter Laidler]

To be honest Ridolpho. If your body was made by Savage, it WILL have had the mark! The Chinese were masters of removing all traces of US ownership. But if you really want to check, have another Savage or even better, a 4C at hand

[Ridolpho]

Peter: Yes, I don't doubt it. Unfortunately the only Savage I have to compare with is a later Mk1* (23C).

Ridolpho

[tlvaughn]

I have two Savage No4 MkI's in the 4C block and they are both marked US Property. I have been down this road before numerous times on this forum and others and even though I explain that all Savage rifles from 0C1 to 0C63110 (or higher) were marked "US PROPERTY", it is just impossible to convince everyone that they were.

BTW Ridolpho, this is not directed at you, just general conversation!

[longshot1972]

Had a nice long reply all plugged in ready to go, and got logged off.

Sporterized with original furniture, P&H replacement parts, scope rings and mounts, and mag.

Any way to find a history of combat action or unit assignment? Did it kill Wehrmacht, etc.?

[longshot1972]

Can't tell you how much I appreciate your input, and patience, with us relative newbies! I was so wrong in my non-marking assumption (based on taking it completely apart a few years ago) that I am going to post a photo of the affected area!

I hereby affirm that I shall never again imply or assume that ANY Savage No.4 ever left The United States without having the marking US Property

My follow up questions were, "How many came back? and "was it sporterized at P&H?". I will answer the second. No. It must have been done in the US. Why outsource for a Japanese 5rd magazine? Would P&H have left the original furniture, no matter how aesthetically pleasing it is, on the rifle? No.
While it shoots straight, functions exceptionally, and is damn pretty, it must have been sporterized here (I bought it at a pawn shop on the Oregon Coast a week or so prior to 9/11).

[longshot1972]

You can make out the uneven surfaces, indicating removal, and a few other pics just for fun.

[Surpmil]

Funny that they would go to the trouble of marking them there instead of on the receiver wall.

Were there not two serial ranges? One with four digit numbers after the "C" and one with five digits and if so, did the SN range not start again at 0C00000 for the second range?

I have a 0C59-- 1942 MkI (not MkI*) here that is US PROPERTY marked, albeit rather faintly.

Any rifle made without US PROPERTY would have been paid for "cash and carry" as it was in the USA while the British had any cash and assets to be divested of.

[Peter Laidler]

Yes, they did start a second batch of serial numbers and there was an information circular sent to Quartermasters to this effect in order that there should be no confusion relating to apparent duplicated numbers.. It was because after 99C9999, the numbers re-started at 0C00001. But the numbers only went to somewhere near the 0C38500 or thereabouts region.

I have a feeling in my bones that ALL Savage series production was marked US PROPERTY

[tlvaughn]

The serial numbers at Savage started at 0C1 and went to 99C9999 before changing over to 0C00001 as stated above by PL. The rifles in my collection range from from 0C37 (rifle #37 - 1941 No4 MkI) to 0C54632 (rifle #1,054,632 - 1944 No4 MkI* - near the end of production) and they are all marked US PROPERTY. A member of this forum owns 0C1 and I have seen pictures of it and it is also marked US PROPERTY. I obviously have not seen all 1.2 million +/- rifles made by Savage, but I do know that the first rifle off of the line (0C1) to one of the last to come off of the line (0C54632) were all marked US PROPERTY.