"Unissued" Savage No.4MkI*

Do you have the rifle and bolt box that came with the rifle?

I bought one back in 2000 from Robert Paddon, he was handling an estate at the time and had some real treasures, including about 5 of these "unissued" Savage rifles. Wish I had bought one of the No3 T rifles he had, complete with scope for the princely sum of 1500Cdn. I opted for the matching No4T set instead. Should have eaten beans and ramen and purchased both.

Things were crazy back then with the long gun registry starting up. Bargains to be had for sure. We will never know how many milsurps ended up destroyed because of that crap.

Sadly no, both boxes are history.

A good find, you should be well pleased. Great photos as well, gives me something to compare to, as I have a Savage No4 Mk1* (in the 29C serial range) that is from the total other end of the spectrum - bashed and cracked wood, with appalling scrap tin looking plate used for centre bedding, and an ishy screw that appears to have been bent and rusty even before it was roughly and crookedly drilled thru forend, 95% of orig finish gone (in fact most metal parts have so little finish they look almost to be "in the white") bent and mangled sling swivels, bent trigger guard/bottom metal, vice marks on the barrel, bent ears on front sight protector, stampings/marks almost worn off on action and but socket - the list goes on, it is far from a thing of beauty :) On the up side it has no rust (its caked in what looks to be old axle grease)does have matching bolt, headspaces is good and bore seems remarkably crisp and shinny compared to rest of it, and I got it for free - I've never shot it, will do the labour of love one day and try bring it back to some semblance of serviceability.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Claven2

... over the years, I have found that the visual differences between RLO and BLO are really only evident after MANY applications. On factory-sanded wood, it's never that dramatic for a normal owner's level of effort. Now if the wood were sanded past 400 grit, the BLO would look shinier and Tru-Oil-like much sooner. That's a great look for a WW1 era No.1MkIII, but RLO is more period-correct for a No.4 IMHO.

---

Excellent observation. The issue of what finish is best for an Enfield presents a few dilemmas. I started to write a more detailed response to this post, but when I got to 5 pages in length, I decided to share the thoughts on Enfield Restoration Guidelines via a separate link: Dropbox - Laws Principles of Restoration V1.0.pdf

Any other expert opinions on my Guidelines are always welcome.

Best wishes for the New Year, Robert

Fine looking Savage! It will be a fantastic addition to your collection. I added one of these unissued '43 examples this summer as well, around the 49Cxxxx mark I believe. You can truly see the craftsmanship in these examples.

From " Armourers Guide - Rifles & Pistols"

Preservation of woodwork of Rifles
A.C.I. Number 1148

Approval is hereby given for the treatment with raw linseed oil, of the furniture of rifles in use in all stations at home or abroad, irrespective of climate.
The oil will be applied by the soldier once a month to the outside of the fore-end, butt and handguards of the rifle in the following manner :-
1) Remove all dust and dirt by wiping well with a dry rag
2) Apply a small quantity of raw linseed oil to the woodwork and rub it well into the wood, care being taken to keep the oil away from the metal parts.
3) Allow the rifle to stand for approximately three hours and then wipe off all surplus oil with a clean dry rag.

Raw linseed oil will be demanded by the units at the scale of ten pints annually for every 100 rifles.
A.C.I. 80 of 1940 is hereby cancelled

57/S.A./654 (S.D. 10)

Looks great! The color of the wood is beautiful...

So what really is the difference between RLO and BLO? Is it just the finish like mentioned?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Meshuggah

So what really is the difference between RLO and BLO?

---

This is a very important question in the restoration of an old Enfield. I've been restoring antique furniture, guns, cars, and boats for over 50 years and have a good understanding of the difference in terms of how Raw Linseed Oil, Boiled Linseed Oil, and Tung Oil interact with wood over the long term.

First, Raw Linseed Oil (RLO) comes from the pressing of the Flax Seed (in Colonial times, the flax stalk was used to make Linen). RLO does bond with the pores of the wood, keeping fungus, dirt, and bugs out. Wood is very amenable to linseed oil. RLO will repel water, to a limited extent, but if wood treated with RLO is immersed in water, the water will penetrate the oil. RLO will also breakdown in sunlight, oxidizing and then drying out unless heavily mixed with pigments. For this reason, wooden boat restorers don't use RLO on their teak or mahogany. While RLO was called for by the British Armourers in wartime, they were emphatic about rubbing it all off after 3 hours because RLO does not harden (without Japan driers). In high humidity it becomes very gummy and sticky. For example, I have a 1944 Maltby Enfield that a well meaning owner coated with either RLO or BLO, and even in low humidity it is always sticky to touch and the finish is yellowing. Had the owner wiped off all the oil, then rubbed the finish hard with a terrycloth towel (creating heat on the surface), the burnishing would have stabilized the surface layer.

Boiled Linseed Oil (BLO) starts as RLO, but is subjected to high temperatures (boiling) during the refining process which enables the molecules to "polymerize," which means they link together in longer chains. Consequently BLO is more stable, and less prone to being sticky. Often BLO has chemical dryers added which ensures a hard final finish.

The biggest problem from a restorer's perspective is understanding what happens to both RLO and BLO over a 100 year period -- first it yellows, then it turns brown, then chocolate. In my Enfield Restoration Laws and Principles (see Dropbox - Laws Principles of Restoration V1.0.pdf ) I show some pictures of a Pilgrim era chest in my collection that shows the darkening process wood experiences when treated with linseed oil for 350 years.

It's so important to remember when restoring a gun, we are preserving it not just for our use, but for people hundreds of years from now.

For my own restorations, one option is to use BLO, then wipe the last coat very dry, burnish with terry cloth then coat with Briwax, to prevent the BLO from oxidizing.

The other alternative (instead of using Briwax) is to use Tung Oil (which is also made from seed) for the final coat. It will not oxidize or turn yellow then brown over the years. Just be careful to put on thin coats, and remember it too many coats will produce a very glossy finish that looks modern, versus the satin finish of the original. Tung oil is more resistant to mold, will not get gummy, and has better water repellant qualities.

Hope this helps answer the question.

Robert

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Claven2

Sadly no, both boxes are history.

---

https://www.milsurps.com/attachment....7&d=1374132633

https://www.milsurps.com/attachment....4&d=1374132574

---------- Post added at 03:07 AM ---------- Previous post was at 03:00 AM ----------

Here is a link to a thread with several pictures of my unissued Savage. they start at post #13

Un-issued no4 enfields from 1940~1945 bull?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by SMcGeown

Fine looking Savage! It will be a fantastic addition to your collection. I added one of these unissued '43 examples this summer as well, around the 49Cxxxx mark I believe. You can truly see the craftsmanship in these examples.

---

They are much better fit and finished than a similar-vintage UK-made example - there is nothing to debate there.

It's still well shy of the fit and finish of a 1943 Longbranch though. For one thing, at this point in the war, LB was still polishing the metal to 800 grit (or so) and providing a semi-gloss salt-process hot blue to all the parts, was machining those beautiful serrated a-symetrical safety levers and had not begun using any stamped and welded parts. They were also still using a high grade of black walnut for the stocks and had started (some time in 43) fitting the CMkIII sight, which is a step up from the MkII flip sight.