need help with a HT sniper,buy or not?

[superbee]

Looking at buying this Australian sniper.Have to import it into canada.
Is it legit?
What would be a good price?
Looks like scope matches,as well as bolt receiver and barrel
No markings on butt,top wood was replaced.May have been sporterized at one time.
FTR on receiver
MA/54 on socket
nice bore
shoots great,very accurate.
let me know your thoughts.Attachment 47926Attachment 47925Attachment 47924Attachment 47923Attachment 47927Attachment 47928Attachment 47929Attachment 47930Attachment 47931Attachment 47926Attachment 47925Attachment 47924Attachment 47923Attachment 47927Attachment 47928Attachment 47929Attachment 47930Attachment 47931Attachment 47926




Engraved on scope: 'RIFLE No 4014
Stamped on eyepiece ring: '1789'
Stamped on front mounting ring: '1789' (I can't see any stamps on the rear mounting ring at all)
Stamped on front base: '839' on the front and '74' on the back.
Stamped on rear base '839' on the front and '74' on the side next to screws.

Information

Warning: This is a relatively older thread This discussion is older than 360 days. Some information contained in it may no longer be current.

[Badger]

For research purposes and comparisons, check the MKL for hundreds of close up pics displayed for both versions of the HT snipers.

1917/1945 No.1 MkIII* H.T. Sniper Rifle (Short Bracket)

1916/1945 No.1 MkIII* H.T. Sniper Rifle (Medium Bracket)

Hope that helps...

Regards,
Doug

[CINDERS]

Last H T Mk III I saw went last week was a WWI vintage for $7,000.ooAU on used guns it all boils down to how much you are willing to pay the bonus is having shot it at least you know your getting a rifle that goes well. nice looking rifle...

[RobD]

I am not an expert, but from what I can see everything looks pukka.
In Skennerton's book "The Lee Enfield", a rifle is listed (Z 4014) which was completed on 17/11/1944, and it was FTR'd on 17/8/1954
Yours is clearly a low mount, and the 'scope is made for a low mount (Aust/l), yet Skennerton has it listed as a high (medium) mount.
The style of the hand-engraved Rifle No 4014 matches the style shown in Skennerton's book.
Is it a heavy barrel?

[Craig Eberhardt]

I think this one would originally been a high mount but converted to a low mount when FTR'd. Son will know.

I looked carefully at this one but bought another. The top foreword has been replaced and the nose cap has been damaged. Otherwise looked pretty good to me for the price.

[Homer]

That's right, converted to low mount at FTR.

I've handled a few of these that were FTR'd in 1954, all appeared very good untampered with rifles, and the butts were all new replacement with no dates and no H. I'm not suggesting this should be the case every time but its what I've noted.

[Son]

Hi mate.
This rifle first appeared for sale in Aug '12 for $8000. It cropped up again in March '13 for $7000 and again in Oct for $6000.
The rifle was built on an English receiver, an EFD 1915. As Homer has said, it all appears right for an FTR'd HT. The bases numbered 839 were original to the rifle at conversion (It was a highmount) on 17/11/44. It then went through the 100 rifle FTR 17/9/54. The low mount scope numbered 1789 is also in the correct range and timing for that rifle during the FTR replacements, and the serial number engraving looks original too.
There had been some question about the handguards in previous discussions, but they are parts, no real way to be sure if original to the FTR or not. The rear sight ears are on backwards (have seen that a few times) and the front band is backwards too.

All up the major bits are all present, intact and apparently functioning very well. There has been a drop in value of these here over the last year or two, but as said above, 7 was paid recently for a very nice one! (what price do you put on want?) Without going into the asking rice, work with the info above and check the costs involved in the export/ import to decide on a figure. There are a couple about for around the 6.5 to 7 at the moment, but there isn't much money about for the high end stuff here which may be why they are considering exporting.

[RobD]

Son,
I understand a number (100?) of high (medium) mounted No 1 Mk III (H)T rifles were FTRd in 1954, and changed to low mounts - is that correct?
My Q concerns the marking on the scope: if the scope is pantograph-engraved "Aust/l" (as seen in this rifle) then that means it is intended for a low mount, yes?
So, if the mounts were lowered during FTR, was the scope re-engraved, or was a new scope fitted?
Were the high and low mounted scopes different in some way, to be marked in this fashion?
Rob

[Son]

RobD, good question.
There was to be 2500 HT rifles made. 1250 high mount and 1250 lowmount. It appears that probably almost all of the scopes with rings (already fitted at the factory) and bases all numbered to together were supplied as assemblies before production of the rifle was ordered stopped at the end of the war. The highmount rifles were converted first, 1132 finished by July 45. Then 480 lowmount conversions were done before production was stopped.
The scopes (along with rings and bases) were numbered in order, the last being used was around the 1720 mark. When the 100 rifles were FTR'd as an exercise for the tradesmen, the next consecutive 100 scopes were used (all lowmounts)
Because the scopes were assembled at the factory with the rings on, they were either low or high from there. The low scopes given the extra "/1" mark on the tubes. It seems most of the FTR'd rifles retained their original bases, just having the new scope (with rings) fitted.