No4 MK1 T

Just posting these photos for feed back, thoughts & the usual kick around
to see if I can learn what I might have here
Barrel is 6 grove I know it's a 53 scope But I know they trialed 15 I think and changed the cross hairs I doubt this is one of them
I have had it about 20 years & the person before me about the same if I recall correctly he brought it from army disposal auction
Thanks in advance
https://www.milsurps.com/images/impo.../BOC015a-1.jpg
https://www.milsurps.com/images/impo.../BOC016a-1.jpg
https://www.milsurps.com/images/impo.../BOC017a-1.jpg
https://www.milsurps.com/images/impo.../BOC018a-1.jpg
https://www.milsurps.com/images/impo.../BOC019a-1.jpg
https://www.milsurps.com/images/impo.../BOC020a-1.jpg
https://www.milsurps.com/images/impo.../BOC021a-1.jpg
https://www.milsurps.com/images/impo.../BOC022a-1.jpg
https://www.milsurps.com/images/impo.../BOC023a-1.jpg

Take-down, No.53s used in the trials were in a different adjustablebracket to allow the 'scope to be zeroed to the rifle. The magazine is from a Long Branch rifle. The front trigger guard screw became standard in '44 and retrofitted to earlier (T)s. Others will have more detailed Savage (T) info.

Brad

OK the things that cause me concern:
1) in the second photo the screws for the front mounting pad aren’t staked in place and the font of the “T” is not correct for an H&H conversion
2) In the third and forth photo I’m surprised to see the 4753rd Savage made No.4 stamped with US Property. I thought this happened much higher in the serial numbering of the original Savage No4 (Non *).
Also the little bit of the back pads you can see in these two photos (2&3) it looks as though the stake marks for the screws don’t align with the screw slots and the screw heads have not been machined AFTER installation when the final alignment of the bracket is preformed and the pad is machined to it’s final contour. This would be correct for a Long Branch conversion but by the time L/B started doing “T” conversions the No.4 was in full production so I just don’t see them using a Savage receiver.
3)In the fifth photo the forearm is Long Branch marked.
4) In the sixth photo, though it’s hard to tell because it has been sanded or poorly struck the stamp in the Butt stock may also Long Branch.
5) Seventh photo, Yep…..early Long Branch serial number on the magazine.
6)The 53 scope… Great source of parts for a No.32 but it has no place on a No.4T when mounted in a standard bracket.

No4Mk1(T), Didn't RSAF Enfield convert some early Savages (sounds too religious, eh?) along with the Trials rifles?

0C17 (or 14) has the US PROPERTY mark.

Brad

PS Somewhat OT, but a salute is due to the SEAL sniper(s) that took out three of the pirates holding the ship's master for ransom.

It Apperrs as I always thought that it was a collector made up one
Cheers for all that info and thanks to you all
Graham

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by take-down

Just posting these photos for feed back, thoughts & the usual kick around
to see if I can learn what I might have here...

---

Hi .... :)

Although issued without a scope, if you want to compare your Savage Enfield, go to the England - Milsurp Knowledge Library (click here).

With thanks to an article created by Advisory Panel member Lance, there's a rare "all correct" 1942 No.4 Mk1*(T) Savage Sniper Rifle (less scope) (click here) .....

Lance's article, accompanied by a detailed 165 pic photo montage, speaks to this example as being one of approximately 3,400 Savage rifles converted by Holland and Holland and re-barreled with an Enfield 5 groove barrel, however, it was never fitted with a matching No.32 scope.

Hope this helps... :)

Regards,
Badger

I agree with all above, it is a mix-master garage special. Good new is that the mount appears to be authentic, tough to confirm without better pic's. Butt looks like a Savage made piece that has been sanded.

On the same topic, my early T 0C907 is US Property marked, it went through H&H in '43 and was paired with a Watson Mk I. Pads are not staked as this started in late '44 early '45.

My Savage No.4 Mark 1(T) is OC 864 - real close to yours Lance

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v1...g?t=1239667134

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v1...g?t=1239667255

looks like it also had an early watson

https://www.milsurps.com/images/impo...IM001015-1.jpg

https://www.milsurps.com/images/impo...IM001014-1.jpg

https://www.milsurps.com/images/impo...IM000997-1.jpg

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by bradtx

No4Mk1(T), Didn't RSAF Enfield convert some early Savages (sounds too religious, eh?) along with the Trials rifles?

---

I had considered this. What Led me to believe was not one of them was the font of the “T”.
The one RSAF converted “T” I have personally observed and the few I’ve seen photos of all used the same font as the later ones did.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by bradtx

0C17 (or 14) has the US PROPERTY mark.

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Lance

On the same topic, my early T 0C907 is US Property marked, it went through H&H in '43 and was paired with a Watson Mk I. Pads are not staked as this started in late '44 early '45.

---

Now this is why I love the MKL. We can all teach each other something new. I thought I had read someplace that several of the very early Savage No.4’s came out without the US Property mark.
Thank You for sharing this information with me!