Looking for some help/direction with a No 4 Mk 1 T

Hi all. I am new to this forum. I own one of the above noted rifles and am out looking for validation and/or valuation. Ultimately I would like to sell it, but with proper authentication. To what end can I do that here or am I better off finding the best Smith I can in Canada and having him sign off on it?

Some history if you like and a photo (more can be provided). I bought the rifle about 30 years ago from a fellow who was selling off his late fathers estate. He claimed his father worked at one of the Enfield factories, obtained the rifle and eventually emigrated to Canada. The fellow claims the rifle had never been fired. I can't confirm that, but I can confirm that I have not. Something I would also like to try and confirm as well.

Attachment 59931

This picture is a camera exported jpg. I can provide full size RAW files with metadata that will show no photo editing was made.

Thanks

wow i do not know much about the fine rifle but that is sure nice looking. those that knowwill be along soon to tell you.

Thanks mmpres. Looking forward to it.

Well it looks amazing and yes please post more pictures that show serial numbers etc on the gun, scope etc. It appears to be a beauty, not too often you see one in that condition.

It would have been test fired at the factory however by the look of it probably never issued.

Look forward to more pictures, will help a lot in ascertaining value etc.

Amazing rifle.

Yes, close ups please. As the others have said, it certainly looks pretty & little used; the look of the rifle woodwork, the hinges on the transit case etc. However, odd that it has a three handed scope adjusting tool along with a Mk3 scope - but the tool could have been a pick up of the original owner's along the way. Detailed close up pix especially of the rifle body with scope OFF are always very helpful........

Would there have ever been No. 4 Ts without a S51 marking? Just since this rifle looks like it doesn't have one (opened the picture in an seperate window and looked at it in full resolution).

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Promo

Would there have ever been No. 4 Ts without a S51 marking? Just since this rifle looks like it doesn't have one (opened the picture in an seperate window and looked at it in full resolution).

---

Yes, IMHO all those up until sometime in 1943, when the S51 mark became a S.O.P., to use a North American term.

In "Without Warning" it is mentioned that, "...a survey of British Army sniper equipment taken in November 1943 revealed that there were 3,756 rifles with No.32 scopes, 900 rifles with Patt. '18 scopes and 450 rifles with Aldis scopes (Alex Martin P14 conversions - not all with Aldis scopes) still on issue to the British Army." The Canadian Army was not up to establishment in No4(T)s until around January 1944 according to the same source and their requirement was about 1400 rifles.

When you subtract the reputed 1407 converted at RSAF(E) that's not very many produced in some two years: 2349 and if we add the 1400 or so that brought 1st Canadian Army up to establishment by Jan. 1944, that's 'about' 3749 produced until that date.

One can see why the vast majority of No4(T)s have 1944 and 45 dates.

Anyway, that's my guess: S51 not appearing until some time in '43. You may hear different from others better qualified to say!

It was part of the contractual arrangement that H&H were to mark their output with - and I think the wording was something like '...........a recognised trade mark or one to which you will/would be allocated' And the latter was the S51 that was allocated to them! I never saw one without the mark unless of course it was one that'd had the but changed for several reasons.

I never really thought too much about the numbers game (always fraught with toooooo many variables of course) but in the grand scheme of things, it wasn't until the fighting got into Southern Europe/Italy that sniping really took off.

Incidentally, that little packing note could usually be found in the little pressed/folded tin holder thing nailed to one end of the chest. And the woodwork looks a bit too much like something from an apprentices trade test example...........

Rob,
There were a number of 1941 dated BSA Savage & Maltby rifles in the batch we bought back in the 1990's, & of those that still had butts on them, all bore the S51 except one, which had obviously been rebutted at some point. You might be right, but for this reason I've always assumed that as far as the marking system went, the S51 was probably the first to appear in regular use (our rifles generally lacked the other characteristic markings such as the 'T', 'TR', etc.). Admittedly we are talking of a small sample size, but of around ten or a dozen rifles, all the same. We also bought some cannibalised spares & amongst the several sacks of bits was an early 4T butt bearing a TINY S51 stamp, only about 1/8" tall. Perhaps it was added after the event, or maybe it belonged to one of the first rifles to be converted & marked by H&H, before they'd got into their stride......??

Out of interest was the stamp "S51" a stamp itself or impressed from individual stamps ?

I have attached a Dropbox link to a file with more photos. If there is a another preferred method to viewing photos, let me know. Or if folks want more photos.

Dropbox - Enfield Milsurps shared files

It has been a few years since I have opened the box. While taking photos I managed to tear one side of the leather scope cover (see pic) and have noticed a few things. Those and some based on what I've been advised to look for. Others will surely see more:

1. The scope tool has broken teeth. Though it sounds like this may not be part of the kit anyway
2. There is some frosting of one of the lenses within the scope (see pic). Causes some blurriness when looking through the scope
3. The rear stock number doesn't match (28070 vs 33968)
4. Forestock and bolt numbers match
5. Scope number doesn't match (34168 vs 33968)

People a lot more expert than me can comment on the woodwork - but the scope (no 25502) is clearly matching with its case. The rifle is marked with a different scope number on the (28070) butt top. The scope bracket is marked with the rifle number of the rifle it was originally matched with (24168?) rather than the one it's on (33968). So... it's a lovely matching scope and case with probably the bracket it originally came with then put together with this rifle (which looks refinished).

So as you can probably work out from what I've said rather than the mismatches you suggest above, on no4ts the scope no is marked on the butt, and the rifle no is marked on the scope bracket and the scope number is the one on the scope, not the bracket. I hope that's not too confusing!

The S51 was done with 3 individual stamps. How do I know this? I took the actual 5 and 1 (the S wasn't there.....) off the examiners bench when I went to the old original H&H factory before it closed shortly afterwards. Did I take anything else interesting? Don't even ask but look at the Armourers perspective.

I think that the rifle is the real McCoy etc etc but like the hundreds of other No4T's sold in the USA and Canada in the 50's or so, you took a rifle and then took a telescope/bracket/case out of a cupboard close by. Or so the story goes..........

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Peter Laidler

The S51 was done with 3 individual stamps. How do I know this? I took the actual 5 and 1 (the S wasn't there.....) off the examiners bench when I went to the old original H&H factory before it closed shortly afterwards. Did I take anything else interesting? Don't even ask but look at the Armourers perspective.

---

Thanks Peter, Have read the book a few times and the scope book.... still can't take all the info in, but they are well thumbed.

Pic of front scope mount on receiver please?

I don't think the rifle has been refinished. Look at the sharpness of the stamps. You still see crisp rifles like this sometimes - little used examples. As everyone has commented it is unfortunately mis-matched, now having the scope & bracket off a U prefix 1945 dated BSA rifle.

It might not be so valuable as a fully matching example, but it's still worth money.

ssj - Some receiver area and mount photos added to the Dropbox folder. Thanks for the comments thus far. As noted earlier and having done some reading, I understand the buttstock number is related to the scope. Not the rifle. Short of taking the buttstock off (which I'm not willing to do at this point) I have to assume the buttstock matches. When I look at the milling of the metal to the wood, it's part of the original setup. Wood is something I do know things about and I can confidently say this was not refinished. To crisp. No finishing oil build up or bleeds into the stamps. no sanding marks or sharp edges around the stamps. No grain pop.

The old adage is "Buy the rifle, not the story". The Enfield factory story is unlikely I think. In that case one would expect a matching set. The numbering of the rifle serial number on the scope bracket ("U34168" ? in this case) began on British rifles circa 1950 (ref. Peter Laidler's AN ARMOURER's PERSPECTIVE p.83), years after the factories had released the items to army stores.

Is there an ENGLAND stamp on the body anywhere? If it is stamped ENGLAND then it likely went through the surplus system enroute to the USA. Such a marking would not likely be found on a rifle still at the factory as it relates to the requirements of the U.S. McKinley Tariff Act to mark the country of origin for import to the USA. The lack of the ENGLAND stamp would not be proof that it remained in the UK, as it could have been imported directly to Canada.

Is there an "S" stamp on the right side of the (metal) body on the small flat area just below the bolt head? I would expect to see it there as it was made at a time when the markings had been standardized.

The rifle is lovely and as mentioned by others and the scope with its bracket is mismatched to the rifle. Great for display, but as Peter Laidler points out elsewhere on Milsurps, the scope is not collimated to the barrel with mismatched No. 4 T sets. This is a very common problem in North America due to some major surplus dealers who did not realize or care that these were meant to be matched. I agree that the set looks original but is mismatched. The bayonet and scope tool have been added at some point as I believe snipers did not carry bayonets and one does not encounter the bayonet in the chest usually. The tool is for the earlier scopes and would not have been used with the No. 32 Mk. III (aka No. 32 Mk. 3). Also this scope case No. 8 Mk. II does not have provision for holding this tool (note its label states this) whereas the earlier No. 8 Mk. II steel cases have a clip for the tool.

Seaforth72 - thank you for reviewing and posting. Very clear. There is no England stamp that I am able to find. So the original owner may well have brought it with him minus scope or switched later. Whatever the story and since I chose to not fire it, I am more than happy with this rifle.

Here is a picture of a matching S on the bolt head and receiver.

Attachment 59994

Just wondering as far as value goes.....let's talk on a percentage basis instead of real dollars. What percentage in value would a miss-matched set be less than a fully matching set (I'm talking...rifle,scope and bracket). I know that the market out there is basically what people are willing to pay but there must be some kind of rule of thumb...isn't there???

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Seaforth72

whereas the earlier No. 8 Mk. II steel cases have a clip for the tool.

---

Typographical error. This should read "whereas the earlier No. 8 Mk. I steel cases have a clip for the tool."

As for value, my guess is you will find a buyer in the US somewhere over $5,000 but and in the UK somewhere over £5,000.
The prices for a pukka No 4 (T) have risen steadily since VE day and show no signs of plateauing yet.

Don't want to nit pick but more on an Engineering point (I,d love to say on an Armourer's point also, but thats just a matter of time) looking at AR44's pic in post #20, the front pad screws don't look like they were finished flush, could be just the pic etc ? can't imagine it leaving H&H like that or an Armourer's bench either, as most similar views of T's show the screws flush and in most cases hardly visible.

Bare in mind you are looking at an extremely close image. Its shot through a 4x macro filter. When I look at it really close by eye, the screws are flush and the indentations you see in the picture are the convex tips of the screws. They are no deeper then the S stamp which is microns deep.

As for value bros, yeah I'm not sure either lol. It would be nice if there were a value matrix of condition vs completeness, but think it simply not much more than what the market will bear at any given moment. Auction theory at its best. I tend to believe what others have said and these are more likely to sell privately. Maybe someone tracks auction or dealer sales out there? I continue to look...

Thanks AR44, it does look better on my Mac.... using my old pc last night/ early morning. I don't think you will have any trouble shifting it, does pay to keep an eye on recent sales etc, just looking last night and found a No32 Mk 111 scope for sale with tin but no bracket that was £2000 ........

No worries Bigduke6. That's a whole learning curve I had to go through some time ago. Photo rendering via various software and their capacity to read and interpret the colour profiles. You'd think it would be minor, but the contrast is huge. Window's is atrocious. Apple and Adobe software are much better. Then it depends on monitors and calibration, blah blah blah. Anyway, I do appreciate the time people are taking to go through the thread and photos. Thanks.

AR44 Don't know your circumstances but If your not desperate for cash I would oil it up and keep it until the need arises, you may even look at getting another Enfield to shoot..... I,ve got a few bits saved for a rainy day, in fact selling a M1903 soon as its to fund another rifle, don't want to sell it but the replacement is going to get more outings, cheaper to run and value is only going one way.

Cash isn't the issue so, yes, time is on my side. My life has simply taken a different focus over the years and I'm just not able to find the time to enjoy my collection which is mostly sold now. I had three Enfield plus many other rifles. This No 4 and a project match rifle (current on Gun Broker - Prairie Gun Works Timberwolf 338 Lapua project : Bolt Action Rifles at GunBroker.com
- but that is a topic for another thread) are the last to go. Those two are hands down my favorites and the reason it has taken so long to move them. Bottom line is I haven't changed my mind in the last three years. Time to let someone else enjoy them.

well you know since you lost interest you could leave this rifle in my hands an i would give them a loving home an take care of that wonderful rifle i would be happy to spend hours a day making sure that rifle is enjoyed:)

Not so much lost interest. Time to appriciate. I could rent it out hourly :)

That's very interesting Roger, and one is left wondering. I had the remains of a 1941 Maltby T myself and we've seen three or four on this forum over the years, usually in MkI type birch forends n'est pas? Mine had a smaller S51: 1/4" to 5/16" going from memory now. When these rifles were converted is the mystery isn't it? Could it be that a decision was made to set aside rifles of at least presumed better quality, in 1941 or early 42, for later sniper conversion? It might have made sense if to put away enough rifles for the contract, or at least part of it, if there was concern that later production might be of lesser quality for a few years, or that bombing might interfere with production, or shipping losses with supply from North America. Those things were all somewhat unknowns in 1941/42. There is the precedent of 10,000 Winchester P14s being set aside after WWI, though obviously from a situation of surplus rather than shortage, or potential shortage.

Pity H&H didn't keep a ledger or two!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Roger Payne

Rob,
There were a number of 1941 dated BSA Savage & Maltby rifles in the batch we bought back in the 1990's, & of those that still had butts on them, all bore the S51 except one, which had obviously been rebutted at some point. You might be right, but for this reason I've always assumed that as far as the marking system went, the S51 was probably the first to appear in regular use (our rifles generally lacked the other characteristic markings such as the 'T', 'TR', etc.). Admittedly we are talking of a small sample size, but of around ten or a dozen rifles, all the same. We also bought some cannibalised spares & amongst the several sacks of bits was an early 4T butt bearing a TINY S51 stamp, only about 1/8" tall. Perhaps it was added after the event, or maybe it belonged to one of the first rifles to be converted & marked by H&H, before they'd got into their stride......??

---