Fake Canadian No 4(T)

In rsponse to No4 T's post above------

Yes I was a at that Sidney show as well and gave the poor (kidding) fellow a bit of an education on No4 t markings even though i am certainly NO expert.

Even I was able to figure out that this guy had back humped these rifles into bogus No4 T rifles.
Funny to see how as soon as he realized one knew what to look for his certainty in their "real status" dropped to --Zero in his descriptions of the rifles.

Sad to see scumbags willing to rip off fellow gun collectors. Wish I knew his name.

But to answer your question of--- (I haven’t heard about that yet. Do you know who it is?)

No I do not know the name of the fellow but can get it easy enough. (I think)

Regards
Terry in Victoria BC

Doesn't do to let the fakers learn too much from you. It just makes their next effort harder to discern!

The M1 Garand forum took to scrutinizing cartouches on stocks some years ago and guess what? The stock cartouches got better and better. It is now impossible to tell the differences between originals and fakes unless you are familiar with aging of finishes.

There is little doubt that the stamps being hawked on eBay are as good as the originals in size, letter perfection and details.

The end result? The fakers even learned that original stamps were often struck incompletely or on an angle, producing partial stamps. Older fakes are easy to spot with their full face, deeply struck cartouches, which were almost never seen in the arsenal. I am certain there are exceptions to all rules and someone will point out my errors here as well.

No doubt, as we speak, someone is out there figuring out how to age BLO or how to produce that grainy, new finish from fifty years ago that we see on Collector Grade Garands or that rare example that has been stored and left untouched. I recently read an online report on how to produce the Springfield Arsenal tung oil finish for that "new, from the arsenal" look.

The detail guys can tell whether something has been milled at certain angle or should have park or blue, but most collectors will get soaked by fakes unless there are legitimate dealers who won't touch the questionable stuff.

:banghead:

Hi All,

Here is the message which was posted on the LERA website.

"To ALL Members, I have recently been made aware of a fake Canadian No.4Mk1*(T) being offered for sale for around the £2200 mark. If any members are considering this rifle (or any other rarities being offered by the same person and his colleagues) please be advised that it is not what it appears to be and it seems to have been purposely faked using specifically manufactured stamps. The level of deception is very good which must border on criminal (?). The serial No. of this rifle is 81L1497 it is fitted with a British Mk1 No.32 scope made by Kodak. Be alert, Andy "

Its an pitty that there are guys who want to make an profit using fraudulent methods.

We all know these rifles are scarces and high in price. They still could make some good money in telleing the buyer they will buy an repro. Than no harm is done....

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by terryinvictoria

In rsponse to No4 T's post above------

Yes I was a at that Sidney show as well and gave the poor (kidding) fellow a bit of an education on No4 t markings even though i am certainly NO expert.

Even I was able to figure out that this guy had back humped these rifles into bogus No4 T rifles.
Funny to see how as soon as he realized one knew what to look for his certainty in their "real status" dropped to --Zero in his descriptions of the rifles.

Sad to see scumbags willing to rip off fellow gun collectors. Wish I knew his name.

But to answer your question of--- (I haven’t heard about that yet. Do you know who it is?)

No I do not know the name of the fellow but can get it easy enough. (I think)

Regards
Terry in Victoria BC

---

Thanks for the reply Terry. This sucks as now any No4T sold in Canada will have to be scrutinized very closely. Additionally any rifles being sold from west coast sellers will also carry an additional burden of proof.
PS are you going to make it up to the Duncan show on the 23rd?

Yes I plan on being at the show early in the morning (relatively). Between 9 and 10 I suppose.

Have not been to the shows regularly for a little over a year now although did make one show a long time back.

Now as to these No4T pads and mounts I have not seen them yet. Apparently word is that they are a serious copy of the original. But if they are not cast I find it hard to believe that they will not be easy to spot as fakes.

It is possible that one has made a casting and is having it machined I guess. Will be neat to see the finished product so I can report the quality or lackof to the masses.

Seems to be under wraps maybe for a very good reason--that being the maker who is not the machinist is going to pass off fakes as real T rifles.

Terry

Regards
Terry

I think that you will more likely find the parts for "AUCTION"(I DETEST THAT DESCRIPTION as it is nothing more than the refuge of the GREEDY)on fleabay.

The Long, tall ,bearded drink of water you guys are referencing has ALWAYS flogged stuff on e-PAY AND I have never had him try to mis-represent anything to me.He knows that I am quite au fait with anything Long Branch and REL and don't really care about the Brit made stuff so perhaps that explains it.Has anyone actually had him MIS-REPRESENT anything to your face(s)? I bought a Brit'bracket' from him and he told me that he had renumbered it but the bracket WAS RIGHTEOUS.IT WAS TOO !!

Please do NOT cast the first stone as it were unless you are rock bottom POSITIVE that your facts are indeed FACTUAL.He told me that he was having brackets made and that they would be spot on albeit expensive and that he would be flogging them on fleabay.IF he is trying to pull the wool over anyone's eyes and anyone has PROOF of this...okay.BUT,as many of us know Dr Roger Payne has gone through great difficulty having GOOD repro brackets made and has NEVER said anything other than the fact that he had them made either.Nobody has thrown any brickbats at Roger and I hope they won't in this instance either unless PROOF of chicanery comes to light.

Nuff said,

JR

I have to say first and foremost that I know Dr Roger. Not well, but to say hello to and recognise, so I have no interest one way or the other. BUT, his brackets fall into an entirely different category than the 'fakes' simply because while his weren't actually manufactured for the UK MoD, it's a simple fact of life that some 50+ of his first batch were actually purchased by the MoD to refurbish needy L42's that were destined for mobilisation stores/War-Reserve. They were thoroughly trialled and tested for durability, material strengh and spec beforehand too! And those made subsequent are to the same spec so I understand. So are they fakes, repros, aftermarket, original equipment or what?

I feel that the acid test is this. Can anyone out there think of a simple test to ascertain whether a material is or isn't malleable 'whiteheart' cast iron, cast to BS-309 or malleable 'blackheart' cast iron. The difference between the two is that blackheart is mixed using scrap iron while whiteheart is crucible mixed using new...... If it's not made from one of these materials, then it's a fake. And if you're interested, his were cast from malleable whiteheart cast iron. On that basis, I'd be inclined to say that they were somewhat better than good - or passable! I'd say that they were as near to original as you'll ever get.

Although no mention of castings was made I DID hear the CNC word.This being the case(I think) I would logically assume that the repro scope mounts/brackets would be machined from bar stock or billets.

The point of the exercise was NOT to start throwing rocks/brickbats/mud/ordure on account of INSUFFICIENT intelligence or information on the matter.Flights of fancy and conjecture are NOT in order when a person's reputation is on the line.Now,if it were a slug like George Liakos and his dodgy M1 Carbine fake parts anyone throwing mud/slagging etc would be on safe ground but NOT in this instance.

I recall Peter L. referring to the party in question as "an ENTERPRISING LAD" too I do believe.Shall we leave it at this? JR

I believe the question is not regarding the manufacture of reproduction / copy parts - which is a useful service for those wanting to build a clone, or who cannot afford an original - but more a question of what the parts are sold as.

If sold as reproduction parts (as Roger Paynes parts are) then everyone knows what they are buying, if the parts are sold as 'originals' then there is an issue.

Bigger problems could happen further down the line when the seller / dealer sells the rifle as 'original' either intentionally misleading, or because he has no knowledge of the repro' parts.

Maybe the answer is to mark up the parts "copy" (or similar) but then some enterprising seller would no doubt claim it was a special rifle as it belonged to the "Company Of Paratroop Yankees"

Its been a problem in the automotive industry for years - Caveat Emptor.

Let the buyer beware.