So we all know what BLR means, but what about the rest of the marking on this 1942 savage No. 4 Mk1* stock. Rifle is 100% all matching. Looks like it was shot dirty (quite a bit of blueing rubbed off sides of bolt). Grampa was in the Navy and we believe he picked this up on his 1946 goodwill tour of europe on the USS Houston.
Thanks in advance for any help in deciphering these markings:
Attachment 29489
61/2-BWS is very probably certified as BLR by examiner/inspector 61 at 2 Base Workshops REME (I'd need to look up where exactly it was). However, BWS was the code for (40) Base Workshop Singapore but that was much later
That would be extremely interesting if you could look that up. It might confirm the story behind this rifle. Im in the process of restoring it, and so far it's 100% all Savage '42, except the lower forestock, which is marked "L" and "40", which I take to be Longbranch 1940, so somewhere along the way, it got that that replaced, but all else matches.
At the moment, im debating whether it's better to keep the original, but rusted Savage magazine, or swap for a much nicer, but non-original British one I picked up. My nephew wants the original one as it's a family heirloom, so im leaning towards giving him that and swapping for the nicer one, since weapon is not 100% Savage. What do you think?
Anyway, Ive been searching around and according to this website:
REMEDistrictWorkshops
2 Base Workshop1946 – 1956 was in Eygpt: K and D Camps, Tel-el-Kebir, Canal Zone
Now, here’s an interesting historical tidbit from the US Navy historical website:
http://www.history.navy.mil/danfs/h8/houston-iii.htm
[the USS Houston] sailed 16 April 1946 for an extended goodwill tour of European ports, visiting cities in Scandinavia, Portugal, Italy, and Egypt.
Looks like grandpa may have picked up this No.4 in the Egyptian canal zone, rather than in England as family lore suggests…
What makes you say the longbranch handguard was not original? my recollection was that there was parts swapping between Savage and Longbranch, therefore the part could well be correct. It's not a Garand in disguise is it? (read forestock for handguard)
This is a '42 Savage Mk4 No.1* with all the other wooden pieces showing the enclosed "S" stamp. I guess its possible Longbranch sent 2 year old forestocks / handguards to the Savage factory in '42 as part of their original production. Seems more likely to me that it was swapped onto this rifle later, so do you have further info on this?Quote:
Originally Posted by muffett.2008
Hey Longbranch, your rifle is as original as it's going to get with a pedigree like this. It's a genuine wartime rifle and you know it's history that's marked there for all to see. IF (and it's a big if...) the fore-end has been changed, it's been changed by some British Armourer in a dusty old tent in the middle east after it's arrived there on a ship that's ploughed it's way down the Atlantic and through the Med to get it to where it was needed. Look, if it ain't broke, don't fix it..................
Very cool! thanks fellas for the information and encouragement here.
Barreled action is all cleaned-up, re-blued, oiled, and put back together. It's one smooth action! Waiting for the stock refinishing products, double-check the headspace, then it's off to the range!
By the way, I just found the Discovery channel "top ten" show raking the SMLE the #3 battle rifle ever, behind the M-16 and AK-47, but really it seems to me that it's historical importance and length of service makes it trump both of those others in the "big picture" of world history.
One more thing.....…I had to share this.
Peter, I think you are correct about Tel-el-Kebir. :cheers:
I just got the butt plate off, and look what’s inside!!
Attachment 29515
This is a really fantastic piece of history here!!
All that AND you're looking to refinish it......................... Can we all assume, sadly, that you've already obliterated the workshop markings? The trouble is that now, when you want to dispose of it or pass it down to your kids, there'll be hard nosed forumers out there wanting to buy but without the proof, they'll be saying to themselves............. 'great story' but something else will be telling them 'make sure you buy the
rifle and not the unproven story' I'd leave it well alone. Anyone else out there in forumland agree with me?
Many years ago, No5 rifles with the Malaya Command - 40 Base Workshop markings/date stamped into the butt were considered to be the least desirable. Today, with a known and proveable history, they command a premium
As far as I have been able to determine, Savage did not use Long Branch parts in its production. When Savage ceased producing No. 4s, all of its left over parts were sent to Long Branch, so for 1944 production Long Branch, it is very common to see Savage parts on their No. 4s.Quote:
Originally Posted by muffett.2008