No. 4 (T) DP rifle

I've had this sniper rifle since late 2009 when I picked it up at Sarco in NJ. That was the good old days when they still sold guns here. In any case, what I know of the rifle from the salesman is that it came out of Israel from a cache of weapons the Israeli military confiscated a number of years ago. He actually showed me the FFL log confriming that as well. What I didn't know when I purchased it was that it was a DP rifle. Being a novice with enfields, I assumed that it was some unit marking. It wasn't until I discovered this forum that I realized what I had.

I contemplated restoring it, and actually shooting the rifle, but after having read numerous posts, especially Peter Laidler who's word as a English armorer is in all likelihood gospel, I have decided against it. Not sure when it was last fired, but my guess is, if it truly came out of ISrael, it did see some use up until the time it was purchased by SARCO. Interesting enough, it looks like it may have been de-snipered at some point. The cheek piece had been removed and the screw holes filled in with dowels. Not certain if this was a DP process or if had been changed by the previous owner.

Would love to get more info on the gun if possible, at least where it may have been on a unit level, but in speaking with Peter, seems near impossible. At this point I will probably sell it at some point and put the cash towards a shootable model. If anyone has info on it, or some of the other markings, would love to hear. I'm particularly curious what the "NZ" on the reciver stands for "New Zealand"

Enjoy the pics.

https://www.milsurps.com/images/impo...5_175255-1.jpg
https://www.milsurps.com/images/impo...5_175606-1.jpg
https://www.milsurps.com/images/impo...5_175551-1.jpg
https://www.milsurps.com/images/impo...5_175543-1.jpg
https://www.milsurps.com/images/impo...5_175535-1.jpg
https://www.milsurps.com/images/impo...5_175516-1.jpg
https://www.milsurps.com/images/impo...5_175506-1.jpg
https://www.milsurps.com/images/impo...5_175457-1.jpg
https://www.milsurps.com/images/impo...5_175448-1.jpg
https://www.milsurps.com/images/impo...5_175423-1.jpg
https://www.milsurps.com/images/impo...5_175351-1.jpg
https://www.milsurps.com/images/impo...5_175334-1.jpg
https://www.milsurps.com/images/impo...5_175323-1.jpg
https://www.milsurps.com/images/impo...5_175315-1.jpg

Nice close up shots. Your rifle surely seems to be well traveled. England to NZ to Israel to NJ. No telling where it went in WWII, but being a 1943 rifle, probably saw action somewhere. I wouldn't go to any "restoration" efforts, it is interesting just like it sits.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by jmoore

Nice close up shots. Your rifle surely seems to be well traveled. England to NZ to Israel to NJ. No telling where it went in WWII, but being a 1943 rifle, probably saw action somewhere. I wouldn't go to any "restoration" efforts, it is interesting just like it sits.

---

Thanks Jmoore. Not sure what the NZ 1781 stands for but assuming New Zealand. Will actually probably end up selling it. I'm looking for a shooter.

I wouldn't take any notice of the Israel story on the basis of 'buy the rifle and not the story.........' IT is a New Zealand Army No4T that has become worn out and relegated to DP status and then sold off in the normal course of events. DP-ing was done with hundreds (?) more in NZ and UK military service when the need arose for more DP rifles. DP No4T's are not common but not uncommon either. You could occasionally see one or two of them among/with batches of standard DP's Ex-No4T's could also be seen among the shorty skeletonised rifles too.

I often used to see ex T rifle S51 marked butts with plugged holes on other rifles too

I would keep it just because of its curiosity value in much the same way as I retained an ex DP skeletonised rifle. No real value but............

I have no trace of telescope 3975 or 8975 in my lists but several VERY close

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Peter Laidler

No real value but............

---

We ought to put the rifle number in a sticky for posterity. My money is on the rifle re-surfacing in a few years' time, but without the DP marks........!

I see that the white tape on the butt mentions 5L-4242 as having gone to England too. Looking at the fore-end number (pic 2) I would imagine that someone has read the SL maker as 5L and added the 4242 to come up with this red herring.

The rifle number seems to be A-14242. Maybe DRP can tell us when BSA started to number their rifles commencing 3xxxx

But seeing the lightly etched rifle number A-14242, you can imagine the problems we encountered at our big workshops with 'lost' numbers once they'd gone through the system. The progress chasers and R&I staff (that's Receipts and Issues staff who were responsible for the control of the special stores such as rifles etc etc to you civvies.....) used to pull their hair out over 'lost or indistinct numbers. But I'll let you into a secret if you promise not to tell anyone...........

Look............ If 125 rifles came in as serial numbers X,Y and Z and so on. regardless of how many numbers were 'lost' in the bead blasting, phosphating, machine shop, workshop system, then 125 rifles went out with those numbers attached to 125 rifles. Whether they were on the SAME rifles was not a point that we were concerned about.

The same went for Bedford trucks. If 50 came in for a complete chassis up rebuild, then they were stripped down to the last nut and bolt and chassis and......, well.........., you get my drift!

The rifle number actually looks like lie AT4242 when I look at it up close. Is the NZ a unit number?

Yep, could be right. AT 4242 it is. But it does illustrate the point about lost or indistinct numbers doesn't it? And don't get me going about Mk5 Stens and Fazakerley made L2A3 SMG's

I've got AT4264, which is now an L42A1. Only 22 difference!

Our rifles must have been sequential when they became 4(T)s, given that about 1 in 300 BSA rifles went to H&H, calculated by the numbers range.


Mine is also a 1943 rifle, although the original number was stamped quite well.

Scope is 22127, but thats stamped into a beech replacement butt so could be a later upgrade.


https://www.milsurps.com/images/impo...05545391-1.jpg

https://www.milsurps.com/images/impo...05545390-1.jpg

Yep, AT 4242 it is. This is typical BSA 1943 marking; with A followed by a second letter, working sequentially through the alphabet: AA, AB, AC,..........AP, AQ, AR, AS etc., followed by four numerals. I have seen a couple of rifles that were serial numbered like this & dated 1944, but I think BSA must have changed over to the five digit number starting with a '3' very early in 1944 as 44 rifles are ALMOST invariably of this latter numbering system. After the first batch a letter prefix was added; random examples might be 30159, then A34227, then B39088 etc etc. This system continued until the end of hostilities, when production seems to have ceased, although I have seen & heard of a couple of post-war Y prefixed rifles (I saw a Y prefixed 1947 dated rifle on World Wide Arms stand at Beltring a few years ago - sadly it had already been deactivated!), so there may have been some limited assembly most likely of parts to hand.

ATB

Thank you for all the info gentlemen. It definately helps. Does anyine have any ideas about the New Zealand markings. Would that have been a unit marking ir their serial number?

From what I've heard they are NZ inventory numbers.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by gsimmons

From what I've heard they are NZ inventory numbers.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

---

Thanks

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Peter Laidler

I see that the white tape on the butt mentions 5L-4242 as having gone to England too. Looking at the fore-end number (pic 2) I would imagine that someone has read the SL maker as 5L and added the 4242 to come up with this red herring.

---

I'm wondering if someone has filed paperwork to state AT4242 has gone to England and someone has found this rifle and realised rifle 5L4242 (Longbranch) was sent instead and so this rifle has a sticker with some dodgy hand writing to highlight that the wrong rifle was sent or the wrong serial number was recorded. It appears to say somthing like '?????? #10 listed as gone to England 5L-4242 went to England'

I also suspect the person who wrote the note on the sticker was an idiot and was most probably the same individual who sent the wrong rifle in the first place. I don't think I've ever seen some one fluctuate back and forth between capitals and lower case letters so much in such a short note. Perhaps he was what we like to call 'A Blanket Stacker' AKA, a storeman.

Seems a bit odd that the TR and T are not struck out if the rifle was really converted to DP by a military force, rather than just being stamped by someone.

Also rather odd to have black paint on the side of body, but not on the butt socket. Presumably put on to cover the bare areas where the pads had been.

Overall, the wood and finish look quite original. I would wonder how a rifle could be worn to the point of DP status and yet never have been even refinished in workshops once?

Looking at photos like this one there is very little wear at all!

: https://www.milsurps.com/images/impo...5_175423-1.jpg

I wonder if this was just a T that was orphaned somehow and stripped of its pads to make it as close to being a standard No4 as possible, or made into a DP just because of its "odd man out" status as an ex-No4(T), rather than because it was worn out?

IRRC, there is evidence that other arms were converted to DP status because they were considered obsolete or non-standard, rather than because they were worn out.

Oooh ..... don't restart the DP debate!

But yes, I think you may well be right. Hard to tell from photos, but the rifle doesn't look as beaten up and worn as might be expected for something out of gauge. Perhaps the scope got broken or lost, so the rifle just went onto the pile for the local cadets or recruits. Probably a common occurrence in countries in which 4(T)s were the only remaining bolt rifles in service.

They're not struck out because there was no requirement to do so! It was only for the L59 that there was a requirement to delete anything - and that was the proof marks

To be honest Surpmil, a selection of photos isn't really a true indication of wear. The best indicator is the Base Workshop examiners gauge set!

I know one L42 that was scrapped because the front pad had sheared off and no one could find it. After it had been returned to Ordnance, it was found, still screwed to telescope bracket

I must admit I'd want to gauge it & if it checked out ok to restore it to original trim, if I were lucky enough to own it.

I like it as it sits. Possibly even more pulled apart. It's a useful reference for the machining steps that went into the creation of these rifles. Cutter paths, tooling set-ups, lots of possiblities! It's not often the H&H modified areas on the action body are exposed for long periods on reasonably complete rifles.

As noted before, interesting! And potentially useful. Certainly has value, just perhaps not as a .303" projectile launcher.

;)That's the engineer in you speaking!

Has anyone else noticed that this one looks to have been a No4T where there would have been the distinct 2.5mm or so allowable gap between the front pad and the breeching up ring.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Roger Payne

;)That's the engineer in you speaking!

---

And quite the bothersome little fellow he is! I've about unburied the old lathe bed that could possibly, maybe, be utilized in a fashion similar to H&H's concept of lore. Just one good photo of their rig would be horrible. The amount of unprofitable work following...

Peter: With this one being a BSA, why would they have set the pad back like that? Surely Shirleys are all the same. Would it just be variability in the process due to different operators of the old hand controlled machinery and some "artistic license"?

Ridolpho

Nothing to do with that. The allowance was made under a special agreement in order that the front screw of the rear pad would clear the induction hardened surface of the rear locking shoulder should the hardening have extended further into the body. Moving the pads rearwards by 2.5mm or so just allowed the screw to clear. You'll also notice that this is the reason for the front screw to be slightly higher than the rear one too

There....., another little bit of useless Enfield info!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Peter Laidler

The allowance was made under a special agreement in order that the front screw of the rear pad would clear the induction hardened surface of the rear locking shoulder should the hardening have extended further into the body.

---

So that means each one had to undergo a hardness check before drilling? Aside from the potential loss of the front support for the front pad, which seems not to be a real factor, why not shift them all back?

That's a good Q JM. Ain't got a clue why they didn't do them all. But I suspect that the breeching up ring was a constant datum. Like you say, there's no frontal support loss bringing the pad slightly rearwards. I am not quite sure whether they were hardness tested as such but with an old IZOD tester of the era, it would have been a simple and quick matter, but seem to think NOT. You could actually see the hardness marks when that part of the steel was chemically washed clean to work the body although even under bluing you can see the material colour change

Love the character to it. If only they could talk.....

I'm glad to see that the rifle has generate dsome discussion. Quite educational. If she only was a shooter, it would make it all better.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Brit plumber

I'm wondering if someone has filed paperwork to state AT4242 has gone to England and someone has found this rifle and realised rifle 5L4242 (Longbranch) was sent instead and so this rifle has a sticker with some dodgy hand writing to highlight that the wrong rifle was sent or the wrong serial number was recorded. It appears to say somthing like '?????? #10 listed as gone to England 5L-4242 went to England'

I also suspect the person who wrote the note on the sticker was an idiot and was most probably the same individual who sent the wrong rifle in the first place. I don't think I've ever seen some one fluctuate back and forth between capitals and lower case letters so much in such a short note. Perhaps he was what we like to call 'A Blanket Stacker' AKA, a storeman.

---

Took a look at it again today "Crate #10 listed as gone to England"

Something else I just noticed going back to the photo's at the start of the thread; it has a modified SMLE mag in it. Note the flutes running to the very bottom of the mag casing. However, the locating rib down the rear face of the mag looks to have been shortened as per the norm for No4 mags. I have a couple of these somewhere - not fantastically rare, but scarce-ish.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Roger Payne

Something else I just noticed going back to the photo's at the start of the thread; it has a modified SMLE mag in it. Note the flutes running to the very bottom of the mag casing. However, the locating rib down the rear face of the mag looks to have been shortened as per the norm for No4 mags. I have a couple of these somewhere - not fantastically rare, but scarce-ish.

---

The mag actually does not match the serial number of the rifle, that may explain the mismatch there.

Thanks Tower. It could have been correct I guess, as a number of SMLE mags seem to have been officially modified to fit No4's, presumably during WW2. It is certainly perfectly acceptable - & you don't see lots of them.

It's turning out to be quite an interesting rifle......

Talking of which...... For the .22" N9 programme, it is said that BSA pulled a fast one on the Admiralty NOB's (that's not being impolite, it's the Admiralty Naval Ordnance Board.....) and told them that they had to use these No1 rifle magazines (called 'special' magazines in the documents.....) in order to make the rifle magazine fed. Accordingly, the price was upped and BSA were able to get shot of a load of redundant almost un-saleable No1 magazines to boot plus almost 50% extra for spare parts.

Interesting. This truly is turning out to be an interesting rifle. I found original pads and mount for it, shame it cant be shot. Guess ill save them for when I find a shooter.

Thanks again for the info. Im learning more everyday.