Trials "T" with a "T" stamp on underside of receiver

Printable View

09-30-2011, 04:37 PM
rayg

9 Attachment(s)

Trials "T" with a "T" stamp on underside of receiver

This must be where they stamped the "T" before moving it to the left side of the receiver or is this not normal? The rifle it self is all matching and never upgraded except to sniper. It's missing the cutoff. Apparently it takes a different cutoff then the early III's as the slot were the end of the cutoff fits into the receiver where the screw goes is narrower as I have one I believe is for the Lee Enfield and it needs a wider slot, Ray
Ray

Attachment 27240 Attachment 27239 Attachment 27241 Attachment 27242 Attachment 27243 Attachment 27244 Attachment 27245 Attachment 27246 Attachment 27247
09-30-2011, 04:47 PM
Peter Laidler

That letter T is just a run of work stamp that indicates something to someone but it's not the 'T' telescope indicator. The addition of the letter T was to be marked adjacent or close to the rifle designation in order to indicate its telescope something or other. That's why on some of the earlier trials rifles, it's marked on the butt socket '....adjacent or close to the rifle designation........ Yours was presumable converted before they'd sorted out the sniper nomenclature - and certainly before they'd configured the cheek rest.

The cheek rest was originally designed by the Small Arms School at Hythe to suit the high scoped Pattern '14 sniper rifle rifle.
09-30-2011, 04:57 PM
rayg

It once had a cheek rest on it as there are two screw holes were it had been, I've since replaced the cheek rest. Ray
09-30-2011, 05:55 PM
jmoore

https://www.milsurps.com/images/impo...DSC01534-1.jpg

No "T" here!

ETA: Well, I'm not quite sure just WHAT the one letter is supposed to be, but it's not like the other rifle shown above.

https://www.milsurps.com/images/impo...SC015341-1.jpg
09-30-2011, 06:52 PM
rayg

The T on mine sure looks like the standard sniper "T" stamp to me. It appears the same size and style as the ones stamped later on the receiver side not the same size of the other underside receiver stamps. . With nothing formalized early on as far as sniper stamping went in the first snipers, it could be they first tried stamping the underside of the receiver at first. I always thought that type of T stamp was special and used mainly for the snipers.
As none of the trials were converted in order, this could have been one of the very first earlier ones. Anyway. just some of my thoughts, Ray
10-01-2011, 05:49 AM
rayg

If they were using that style "T", as a normal stamp as peter said, they must have adopted later it as a sniper stamp and it's just a coincidence that it is on a sniper, Ray
10-01-2011, 08:34 AM
rayg

Coincidentaly I have another 1944 "T" "less telescope made rifle" that doesn't have a stylized "T"'s on the side of the receiver but it does have a couple of smaller standard style "T"'s on the underside of the barrel in front of the receiver if I remember, which I figured were just a workman's normal stamping. Ray
10-01-2011, 09:16 AM
jmoore

Quote:

Originally Posted by rayg

Coincidentaly I have another 1944 "T" "less telescope made rifle" that doesn't have a stylized "T"'s on the side of the receiver

Which is as it should be! If Holland's didn't fit a scope, then no "T". If a scope was added later, then a "T" should have been as well. (According to certain relialble source(s)...)
10-01-2011, 04:25 PM
Peter Laidler

RayG. Believe me. If I read you right - and forgive me if I don't - and without being harsh....... If you need to indicate a rifles telescopic status, you put the letter T where the Armourers and arms storemen can read it. Close to the rifle designation. Nowhere else and certainly not where it can't be seen

JM's right too. If a sniper rifle came across my bench without the T then I'd mark it
10-01-2011, 06:50 PM
rayg

Quote:

Originally Posted by rayg

If they were using that style "T", as a normal stamp as peter said, they must have adopted later it as a sniper stamp and it's just a coincidence that it is on a sniper, Ray

Peter, I understand what you are saying and had added the above later after I thought about what you said to be a sniper stamp it should be were you can see it. And that the stamp just looks like the sniper style stamp but that it was just a regular work stamp. Probably later they decided to use that style as the sniper stamp and then stamped it as you say, where it could be seen on the side of the receiver. At first I though it could be a sniper stamp because it was the same style and looked like one. Ray
10-02-2011, 06:24 AM
RJW NZ

re the cut off, I've used a stock no1 mk3 cut off, in the absence of the other, but had to grind off some thickness at the screw pivot for it to fit the slot, for what its worth your observation is correct I think.
Anyone need a uk hinged front band?
10-02-2011, 03:03 PM
Roger Payne

As an aside I've seen rifles that have been marked with a non-standard 'T' in the appropriate place on the receiver sidewalls. I have two & have seen a couple more. All have the correct style T with serifs, but the letter is smaller, probably only 1/8". Interestingly the few I know of are all marked consistently & are ALL 1943 BSA rifles. Anyone else seen any rifles with 'tiny T's'??

ATB
10-02-2011, 05:24 PM
muffett.2008

Usually the young ones, the T's get bigger as they get older.
10-03-2011, 01:36 PM
rayg

Quote:

Originally Posted by RJW NZ

re the cut off, I've used a stock no1 mk3 cut off, in the absence of the other, but had to grind off some thickness at the screw pivot for it to fit the slot, for what its worth your observation is correct I think.
Anyone need a uk hinged front band?

I can see were one could grind off the larger portion at the screw pivot to the same thickness as the rest of the cutoff and I may give that a try. The only problem I see is, I need a longer screw as the LE one is to short, Ray
10-03-2011, 10:55 PM
jmoore

Different thread as well on the cut-off pivot screw.

https://www.milsurps.com/images/impo...DSC01535-1.jpg
10-04-2011, 12:41 AM
jmoore

https://www.milsurps.com/images/impo...DSC01563-1.jpg
SMLE cutoff screw

https://www.milsurps.com/images/impo...SC015351-1.jpg
No.4 Mk.I cutoff screw

ETA: Photos aren't the same scale! But the No.4 screw is shorter and does have a smaller head- I think!. Not really prepared to do a detail strip just to find out right now- these are older photos.
10-04-2011, 02:34 PM
rayg

Ah it appears that the problem is not that the SMLE screw is not long enough but it is too narrow and also the threads are different then the 4 screw.
Any ideas were I could get a no. 4 screw? Ray
10-04-2011, 04:52 PM
jmoore

Finally! Found the old thread. :banghead: :bitch::confused:

Link here (pages five and six are most pertinent to your situation): magazine cutoff

:dancingbanana:

Here's some more screw info from post #52:

Quote:

Originally Posted by jmoore

SMLE cutoff screw- 48tpi roughly Thread OD- 0.118"
https://www.milsurps.com/images/impo...DSC01563-1.jpg

Trials No4 cutoff screw- hard to nail down ~38tpi Thread OD- 0.140"
https://www.milsurps.com/images/impo...SC015351-1.jpg
10-04-2011, 05:58 PM
Roger Payne

I think you'll find the thread on the No4 screw is 4 BA. If you know anyone with a correct size die-stock, a piece of mild steel rod & a model engineers lathe, then it should be easy enough to make one (if that would be acceptable).

ATB
10-05-2011, 03:51 AM
Peter Laidler

Standard 4BA cheeseheads with the shank turned down to suit
10-05-2011, 06:22 AM
oldhound

I have a 43 longbranch that has the letter T underside the receiver as well.
10-05-2011, 08:35 AM
jmoore

Quote:

Originally Posted by oldhound

I have a 43 longbranch that has the letter T underside the receiver as well.

Dang, oldhound! It's your thread (linked in post #18) that had the discussion on the No.4 magazine cutoffs . So now you're involved in this thread on two areas of interest. Any progress on posting photos?
10-05-2011, 08:57 AM
rayg

Quote:

Originally Posted by oldhound

I have a 43 longbranch that has the letter T underside the receiver as well.

Just curious, is that a standard LB or a "T" and was the T stamp on the receiver a serif one or a standard one, Ray
10-05-2011, 06:05 PM
oldhound

I'll have to look. There were pictures posted awhile back, maybe a year or more ago as I was wondering if anyone else had one. Might have been on the gun nutz. Maybe somone can find that link. I don't know how to do it.
I will strip the gun later and try and get some pictures posted if it can't be found.
10-06-2011, 01:02 AM
oldhound

2 Attachment(s)

the T is different than yours. It is about 1/8 th of an inch. The rifle belonged to an uncle who worked as a quartermaster during the war. He told my father that it had been set aside as a sniper. Thats all I know.

Attachment 27332

Attachment 27333
10-06-2011, 05:57 AM
muffett.2008

This is the identical T and in the same place as mine, and I'm damn sure that I have'nt got a No.4 T of any variety.
10-06-2011, 07:14 AM
rayg

It appears a "T" stamp found on the underside of a receiver is fairly common, Ray
10-07-2011, 12:30 AM
oldhound

Quote:

Originally Posted by muffett.2008

This is the identical T and in the same place as mine, and I'm damn sure that I have'nt got a No.4 T of any variety.

would your rifle be a longbranch?
10-07-2011, 05:43 AM
muffett.2008

Yep, sure is, 1942.
10-07-2011, 02:12 PM
oldhound

must have meant something back then. Who knows?:)