Printable View
Pics of another Trials Sniper.
This one is on display at the National Army Museum, Waiouru, New Zealand.
Sorry, no serial or year details.
Appears that there is no scope number on the wrist, but it is fitted with both a centre sling swivel and an extra one on the front band - as per No1 MkV.
Attachment 42159Attachment 42158Attachment 42157Attachment 42160Attachment 42161Attachment 42162Attachment 42163
Tell that little boy standing by the grand old Centurion, that he is a little boy of good taste.
Here's another interesting Trials sniper.
31 dated yet it appears to be stocked with later British furniture and has the X marking on the top of the forend. No cut out for the cut off and an "Ishapore screw". The butt has the remains of a S 51 as well as several other Indian (?) markings. None of the markings are similar to the ones on my other Indian No.4(T). As you can see, no staking on the screws.
The finish on the receiver almost looks sandblasted or wire brushed. You get that pebble grain finish if over zealous with a wire brush and that is how the receiver and about 6 inches of barrel appears..
Attachment 42242Attachment 42234Attachment 42235Attachment 42236Attachment 42237Attachment 42238Attachment 42239Attachment 42240Attachment 42241Attachment 42233
Hmm. I wonder if it was refurbed by the Indians along with other 4T's & upon reassembly ended up wearing some other old girl's clothes?
The old girl has more mixed parts on it that the car in John Cash's car song.
The forend, even though marked with the X has the holes and cuts for the grenade launching sight. Parts run the gamete.
Trigger guard is LB and rear sight is F. Just cleaning the gunk off the wood right now so should have it back together in a couple of days to a week. It's been sitting here for a coons age and time to get the grease cleaned off it and in the rack.
No doubt it was severely overhauled by the Indians and what a mixed bag.
Non-original parts:
1. bolt
2. trigger guard
3. safety lever
4. magazine
5. trigger
6. backsight (the plunger has been thinned significantly so as to clear the shallower recess. The trials rifles were all spring and ball - no plunger, and as this is not the original sight, but a regular No4 one, the plunger would not fit in it's normal state. The sight has been ground to match as well by the look of it.)
7. cutoff
8. foresight protector and probably foresight block.
9. barrel (probably a 1950s Fazakerly)
10. butt and forend.
The scope is a bit of a mystery I must say. I had about 30 No32 MkIs I picked up in the UK in 1986/87 in various states of disrepair and all had the usual markings on them. If those were the ones you refer to Warren, this ain't one of them. I polished a few that were smooth enough to do so and had them reblued by J.P. who passed on those spare brass eyeshades to you at the time. Anyone who saw one of those tubes would know immediately they had been reblued! Most were too pitted to polish and one would have to be pretty stupid to polish off the markings in an effort to get a smooth tube when the correct finish for a rebuild was phosphate and Suncorite! In the end, that is what most of them got, but that was after they went back to the UK. I certainly never polished the markings off any. Did someone else have a stash of No32s out here?
Polishing the tubes would thin the markings somewhat, especially on W. Watson tubes which had shallow markings, but to completely erase them you would have needed to remove a lot of material. That would show up with a vernier, if not just by eye.
I see no signs that this tube has been polished; look at the wear and colour on the bluing, it corresponds exactly to the colour and wear patterns you would expect and those on the rest of the tube.
There is a problem though: if it were an early tube that went unmarked for some reason, the fitting of the drum plates or covers would be better IMO: notice the misalignment of the drum plates or covers. It was noticeable on those scopes I had that the earlier scopes had better fitting and finishing than the later ones. You could also see just from that small sample, the slight differences in manufacture: KL for example had a particular style of knurling on the drums and solder-filled markings thereon. W. Watson beveled the knurled edges more and had rounded corners on the drum plates like these. HBMCo. had a finer convex knurl and sharper corners on the drums and plates etc. etc. Same with the locking segment covers and screws: minor differences in manufacture and screws used etc.
Notice the different diameter locating pins on the drum plates: someone has grafted on one of the drums from a spare. Certain makers used a thick pin and certain ones used thin pins: they didn't mix. Could just be a service repair of course.
The drum block or turret is too rough cast or finished to be REL, nor do the details of the casting correspond, so it must be a UK made tube. My recollection is that KL had similar rough castings. HBMCo. and W. Watson smoothed theirs, at least those I've seen.
Would a scope have been accepted for service without markings? Seems doubtful. It should at least have some sort of acceptance mark or stamp; normally the Broad Arrow.
Overall the rifle has been massaged: the wrong cut off, the beech butt with marking disc carefully inlet LOL. The lack of a cheekrest...yes, someone has gone to some trouble!
Pads are right IMO, unstaked just means left UK service early on if I remember my reading correctly.
The bracket is close to being as smooth as an early Rose Bros. (going from the vast sample of two I had), but the rear cap is obviously a replacement. The gaps around the screw heads suggest they may not be tapered or in tapered holes.
If it was an ex-Indian rifle you'd expect the Royal Cypher to be ground off and the various other abuses we're used to seeing.
What of the Case, No.8 markings? Anyone?
Probably just another sporterized No4(T) that was carefully "restored" to as close as original as the owner knew or could get.
The scope is a mystery though!
Bigduke, the RNWMP LEC is a nice one, but sadly a mismatching bolt. I saw it at a local gunshow last Sunday. Asking was 2.5G CAN.
I've done a number of scopes from out west without markings and some I know came from the Edmonton area. Others farther west. They MIGHT have been part of the stash that a a guy got from Wainwright some years ago ( late 70's early 80's). Most of the scopes I had the chance to look at had been turned, polished and blued were finished with what appeared to be cold blue by the thickness and wear. Not the high quality blue that JP does. I also got one or two from the Winnipeg area. A possibility is someone who worked at REL or stores in Montreal 25 COD moved to the west with a trunk of "retirement goodies". Never did get any sun shades from JP so not sure where they went but it sure was not here.Quote:
The scope is a bit of a mystery I must say. I had about 30 No32 MkIs I picked up in the UKicon in 1986/87 in various states of disrepair and all had the usual markings on them. If those were the ones you refer to Warren, this ain't one of them. I polished a few that were smooth enough to do so and had them reblued by J.P. who passed on those spare brass eyeshades to you at the time. Anyone who saw one of those tubes would know immediately they had been reblued! Most were too pitted to polish and one would have to be pretty stupid to polish off the markings in an effort to get a smooth tube when the correct finish for a rebuild was phosphate and Suncorite! In the end, that is what most of them got, but that was after they went back to the UK. I certainly never polished the markings off any. Did someone else have a stash of No32s out here?
The scopes that were sold off by Crown Assets from Wainwright were British and I cannot recall seeing a single REL in the lot. Most were well used, no mounts and just wrapped in brown paper with the usual duck tape type sealing.
I used to own that RNWMP carbine many years ago. It's a nice one, but I've advised the seller for the estate that it is likely not RNWMP. There is some variation, but for the most part, the Ross and Enfield rifles/carbines owned by the RNWMP were stamped with an oval stamp, not a crescent shape. This one has a crescent shaped mark, which is not described in Phillips' book and was as far as I recall only used on the Winchesters, which were of course NWMP. The "Royal" designation was added after their time. There is no stippling around the edges of the stamp. The carbine has had its stock lightly sanded and a coat of varnish put on, and that was another issue with the stamp. The Canadian Forces' M&D stamp and the rack number are rather faint, but the RNWMP stamp is deeper and newer. Since the stamps, if correct, would have been applied around the same time, they should all be equally faint. There is a faint other mark visible. IMO, the carbine may well have been in the Mounted Police service, based on the number stamped on the butt, but it has been massaged; I believe the RNWMP stamp is a fake. Others may disagree, but there are a lot of MP fakes out there. It is a sweet little carbine, mismatch bolt but otherwise complete and in nice shape. I have three, so didn't want it back even with a lower price, but if I didn't have one, I would buy it as a carbine, not as an RNWMP item. I believe the seller is going to lower the price.Quote:
Originally Posted by Surpmil
Re: the sniper. I have decided to take the plunge and purchase the trials sniper. Even with several replaced parts, it is still a 1931 #4. Once I own it and have it in hand, I will disassemble it, take lots of photos of everything, including the mystery scope, and post them here for everyone to admire or castigate at will.
Cheers
Ed
That's interesting Warren. One thought that crossed my mind was were some unmarked scopes sent out as samples to REL when their production was getting going, the way some No4 MkI trials rifles apparently were?Quote:
Originally Posted by Warren
But of course the Canadian Army in WWII were supplied with their No4(T)s from UK stocks, so most were UK-made rifles and scopes. I assume we brought them home again in 1945 and if these came from some retired weapons tech/armourer then he might have been concerned to cover his tracks and so polished off the markings. I have to say though, that even if they were cold blued at that time, perhaps even 30 or more years ago, that wear looks more like the result of long use to me.
Of course there was a story going around 10+ years ago of some 200 No4(T)s being destroyed in the Toronto area. If someone saved something from that lot they might have been keen to cover their tracks as it was probably all recorded to the last digit.
You'd think they could have done a better job of cutting and smoothing the magazine cutoff relief in the stock!
https://www.milsurps.com/attachment....9&d=1366023169