1941 Savage No. 4 Mk 1 Sniper rifle?

I'd like some opinions and info on this rifle I took a bit of a gamble on at a recent gun show. Hopefully I didn't pay 3x what it's worth! From my basic research it appears to have many correct features and markings of a No.4 T, at least for a Savage. The photos show most of the details, but a few other points to mention.

SNs match on bolt and magazine
5-groove barrel with excellent bore
The forehand was cut off in shorter style with no upper hand guard but a milled band refit
Buttstock has aluminum buttplate and holes where a cheekrest was mounted
Micrometer rear sight was butchered into a V-notch (what buffoon thought that was a good idea??)

I'm most curious about whether this is a legit No. 4 sniper and about the TR and FTR markings. I would like to refit a full fore end and possibly a retro scope and mount as I probably can't afford originals.

https://www.milsurps.com/images/impo.../ivy3UXy-1.jpg
https://www.milsurps.com/images/impo...EZK5jpg1-1.jpg
https://www.milsurps.com/images/impo...C9Y2jpg1-1.jpg
https://www.milsurps.com/images/impo...ECs2jpg1-1.jpg
https://www.milsurps.com/images/impo...2hdsjpg1-1.jpg
https://www.milsurps.com/images/impo.../SHYzFVA-1.jpg
https://www.milsurps.com/images/impo.../1DI8qg0-1.jpg
https://www.milsurps.com/images/impo...SqALjpg1-1.jpg
https://www.milsurps.com/images/impo.../0iDX8B9-1.jpg
https://www.milsurps.com/images/impo...wIDmjpg1-1.jpg
https://www.milsurps.com/images/impo.../lRK5Eru-1.jpg
https://www.milsurps.com/images/impo.../GeeutL1-1.jpg

You can stop worrying, it's real! Well, at least, IMHO it is. As you say, an early Savage rifle, converted to T specs, & having been FTR'ed & wearing a few replacement parts, but a genuine conversion all the same. The FTRing is just a part of its service history. If you need a replacement cursor for your rear sight pm me. I have a plastic ice cream tub full of them somewhere in the garage.......

It's certainly legit and well worth restoring properly.

Interesting that the "TR" and "F.T.R" marks appear to have been struck over the finish that presumably went on at the time of the 1945 or later (based on barrel date) FTR.

The "TR" is not the usual font seen on later rifles, so perhaps one of the not-uncommon retroactive stampings done to early conversions to make them conform to the later markings SOP.

If both stampings are over and through the FTR refinish, then it seems quite likely they were both done at the same time: as the last steps in the FTR. That is interesting as I don't think we've seen that here before.

Just about everything but the bolt, and probably the backsight, appears to have been replaced, probably during the FTR, but Peter has told us in the past that common and standard parts were not kept with a particular rifle through FTR.

Savage No.4's selected for sniper conversion weren't marked TR as original so it had to be done during FTR. The TR stamp was a selection mark that came into being during production for standard BSA service rifles that shot above average during the range testing. Those rifles so marked were then shipped to Holland and Holland for conversion to No.4T. Very early examples from BSA, Savage, Fazakerley and Maltby up until 1943 seldom have those markings present. At some point in 1943, markings became standardized along with BSA becoming the only supplier of rifles for conversion.

Thanks for the responses. Would I be correct in assuming that even though this rifle is scope-less, it was probably not one of the rifles partially converted without a scope, since it wouldn't have gone through FTR unless it had been issued and used? I will take it to the range tomorrow to see how it performs before how I decide how to proceed. I'd like to pick up a mount at least to put some kind of scope on it along with fixing up the fore-end.

Having been made & converted relatively early it is unlikely that it would have been left scopeless. It would probably have had a Mk1 scope, or just possibly an early Mk2 on it.

I would agree absolutely with Surpmil & Brian. The TR & FTR were applied after the black paint & were probably applied, at least in the case of the TR, to bring it up to the accepted 'standard'. The TR & FTR are in fonts that I have seen on a number of early conversions (both Trials rifles & early run of production rifles), that have been through the FTR process perhaps late in WW2 or immediately afterwards, before the standard pantographed FTR markings became the norm.

P.S. I was just looking at smleaddict's post about his Maltby 4T - if you look at the FTR & TR stamps on the butt socket of his rifle I reckon they're pretty similar to those on the Savage. They might even be the same font, although I'd hesitate to go that far as the markings on the Maltby are not very well applied, with parts of most of the letters missing. Note that both of these rifles are (presumably) early conversions of early rifles that got early FTR's!

Took it to the range today to sight in and function check. Function was fine but sighting in at 50 yards with the irons and PPU ammo took some time. It was shooting way to the left and to get it centered up I had to move the front blade almost all the way to the left side of the dovetail block. With the butchered rear sight aperture it was difficult to get good vertical alignment and the grouping showed that. Horizontal dispersion looks like it will be capable of 1-2 MOA (the six shots along the left were adjusting elevation up; the 5 shots farthest to the right in the bull were my last. I made another front sight adjustment but was out of ammo). Since the sight is already ruined I might drill and tap it for a removable aperture and see if that helps. Bedding with the cutoff stock may be part of the problem too.

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

Answered my own question by re reading the original post!

Bigwagon, if you want a replacement cursor for the knackered one on your existing rear sight, I'll give you one. Just drop me a pm. It does mean though, that you'll have to take the sight apart to remove the old one & put on the new. There are plenty of people on this forum who can talk you through that, if you need any advice. It's not really complicated, just a bit fiddley.

I can provide a rear hand guard to suit if wanted but I'm afraid will have will have to charge for it plus post, I gave a set away not long back to complete a rifle but it was sold not long after............for a profit.

A little background on the rifle Bigwagon that you may not yet have come across: this is I believe the 1064th rifle built by Steven-Savage on the initial British contract and these pre-Lend Lease rifles were paid for in cash by the British government which is why they do not have the "U.S. Property" marking seen on later Savage No.4s. It's a significant rifle just for being that early, even without the (T) conversion. We've seen a few such early Savage rifles converted to (T) spec here, including 0C0001 and 0C0006 if I remember correctly. The MkI* modification was soon introduced at Savage as well as Long Branch; an ill-advised step, but that's another story.

You might try it at the range with the forend removed entirely. At that range with decent ammo they should all be in the X ring, if not the next one, if the barrel is in very good condition? The missing handguard is probably evidence of someone's abortive attempt to resolve the likely problem with the forend bedding which is causing that inaccuracy.

It's a bit odd that you have a No.3 bolthead fitted, but it may have been fitted by some civilian owner. We are told that a rifle that would only headspace with a No.3 bolthead would have been scrapped during overhaul or Factory Thorough Repair and judging by the finish your rifle has not had enough use post-FTR to need a bolt head replacement. If a civilian has replaced the bolt head it may well not have been done properly and that might also be a cause of the inaccuracy I believe.

You could check the squareness of the bolthead face by getting a good guality .303 "no-go" headspace gauge, coat the face with layout blue and close the bolt against it. The squareness of the contact will be visible in the marks left in the blue.

I assume the bolt number matches the rifle and appears original?

Surpmil, The bolt number does match. I don't know what to make of the comment about the US Property marking, as the rifle does appear to have this mark. Although it is mostly obscured by the front pad, the T and Y are still clearly visible on the top of the rail. The accuracy was disappointing, so I will have to dig into that as I put this rifle back together. Hopefully it is something simple, or just the shooter!

BigDuke, I'll send you a PM.

The rifle 0C001 has the "US Property" marking, as was already said on this forum (if I remember correctly)

Well, I stand corrected on the matter of the US Property markings - will have to now find out where I got that idea! I have a 0C MkI action downstairs, but can't put my hands on it at the moment.

Checked Skennerton and he mentions an agreed price of $75 each for the first Stevens-Savage contract of 300,000 rifles. The Lend Lease Agreement wasn't signed until February 1942, but such things are often signed retroactively.

The thread:

https://www.milsurps.com/showthread.php?t=24683&page=2

They are all marked U.S. Property. Starting at 0C1 as stated above.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by giove

The thread:

https://www.milsurps.com/showthread.php?t=24683&page=2

---

I see I was "in good company" so I don't feel quite so bad about it. :ugh:

Thanks to Roger Payne, I was able to replace the butchered rear sight cursor with a matching SM marked piece. Thanks Roger! Still looking for a nice walnut fore end and hand guards. If anyone has any leads on those, please PM me.

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

That sight cursor looks like it grew there!

Bigwagon, I don't have a Fore-end but have plenty of the Handguards........ When you get the Fore-end then PM me some pics (in Natural light) then its possible I can match the hand guards to it.

I swapped out the fore end for another sporterized one I have from No. 4 Mk. 2 that fit much better and along with the repaired rear sight, the results on target were much better than last time. This is a five-shoot group at 100 yards that measures 1.5 inches (disregard the shot in the lower left from another rifle). Considering my eyesight challenges with irons, I'm quite pleased. I expect to be able to improve on this considerably with a scope and handloads.

https://www.milsurps.com/images/impo.../jJS9rpm-1.jpg

Bigwagon:

Some photos of details No. 4 Mk. I (T) 0C820, which was one of the 1,403 No. 4 Mk. I rifles converted to sniper equipment at R.S.A.F. Enfield are on this page on my web site. https://captainstevens.com/military/...ment-markings/ Yes, it also has the U.S. PROPERTY mark as discussed above.

Some things for you to check on:
1. Is there "S51" stamped on the underside of the butt, aft of the pistol grip?
2. Is there an inspection mark on top of the front scope pad as shown on 0C820 on the web page above?
3. When the butt is removed, is there a rifle serial number stamped on the top ledge (hidden when the butt is installed). IF a number is present they usually left off any letters, so it might read "1064".
4. Is there a scope serial number stamped on the top of the wrist of the butt, below the cocking piece?
5. Is there a "T" on the left side of the body flat? The partial detail views in your photos suggest there is no "T", but it would be good to have confirmation.

I am in the middle of selling (just awaiting final payment) another No. 4 Mk. I (T) Stevens-Savage rifle, serial number 0C5130 which also has the F.T.R. stamp superimposed on the U.S. flaming bomb and also has the "TR". It does not have the "T" nor the Enfield examiner's mark on the topside of the front scope pad. It does have the matching No. 32 Mk. III scope 23815 fitted to it during F.T.R. The butt is an "S" Stevens-Savage marked one, with no "S51" The rifle was fitted with a MK. II cocking piece and a Mk. II rear sling swivel and a sniper's swivel in front of the magazine. It has an Enfield marked low-wood fore-end. It retained the "S" Stevens-Savage backsight, modified of course to clear the scope. The scope SN is stamped into the wrist of the butt. The magazine is engraved (not stamped) on the bottom "0C5130" It has the U.S. PROPERTY mark as discussed above. The bracket is also numbered to this rifle. Bigwagon - if you want to send me your email by private message, I can send you detailed photos of both the factory original 0C820 and the F.T.R.'d 0C5130.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Seaforth72

Bigwagon:

Some things for you to check on:
1. Is there "S51" stamped on the underside of the butt, aft of the pistol grip?
2. Is there an inspection mark on top of the front scope pad as shown on 0C820 on the web page above?
3. When the butt is removed, is there a rifle serial number stamped on the top ledge (hidden when the butt is installed). IF a number is present they usually left off any letters, so it might read "1064".
4. Is there a scope serial number stamped on the top of the wrist of the butt, below the cocking piece?
5. Is there a "T" on the left side of the body flat? The partial detail views in your photos suggest there is no "T", but it would be good to have confirmation.

---

I don't see any of those marks on the rifle. I had earlier removed the buttstock to check for a SN but it doesn't have one. The only mark on the butt is a Crown stacked above R3 and the letter E under the wrist with a smaller "96" lower down the wrist. I will PM you about the photos.

I'd be curious about opinions as to whether this rifle is one of the early ones converted at Enfield.

Just at thought Bigwagon, but if you are having problems sourcing a full set of walnut, you could look at another option. When your rifle (along with all or very nearly all other Savage made No4's) left the factory from 1941 onwards, it would have been stocked up in birch. If you've seen a few Savage made rifles that are still in original trim you'll know exactly what I mean; the wood was stained with a rather attractive orangey-brown stain, & is quite characteristic. Savage rifles that were selected for conversion to 4 (T) retained their wood, so you could opt for a set of birch, if that is any easier for you to find. Of course, it does leave the question as to why your particular rifle bears walnut butt! I suspect it could have been swapped over at the time of its FTR.......

Not trying to push you in any particular direction - it's your rifle - but you do have more than one choice.

ATB.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by bigduke6

Bigwagon, I don't have a Fore-end but have plenty of the Handguards........ When you get the Fore-end then PM me some pics (in Natural light) then its possible I can match the hand guards to it.

---

Bigduke is a true gentleman, he helped me out with a set for a 43 restoration.

Sorry to say that resto has stalled with the recent addidtion to the family but once he's up and running I will have that complete pile of parts back on the bench!

Take all the advice you can from the very knowledgeable members here, they are a truly invaluable resource!

And please dont drill that receiver!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by jonh172

And please dont drill that receiver!

---

Why on earth would you think I'd drill it? It's already got unmolested original scope mounts. :confused:

I'm with Roger. Because it's been through obvious FTR, you can mix beech, walnut and birch to your hearts content. Armourers used what was on hand and the specification is that woodwork has to match reasonably well and that's all. If you want to stain it, I recommend Chestnut Ridge alcohol based military stock stain. I recently finished restoring a No.4T and the supplied woodwork is walnut and beech. It all matched remarkably well without having to stain. All I did was soak down the very dry but new woodwork with raw linseed oil.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Bigwagon

. Since the sight is already ruined I might drill and tap it for a removable aperture and see if that helps.

---

My appologies! I read this too hastily haha. Phew!

Another update as the restoration progresses. Through a couple of eBay purchases I acquired a replacement forestock (actually a Mk 2) and used hand guards along with a reproduction scope mount and cheek rest from Sarco. The bedding of the fore end seems pretty good even if not the correct style, but I'm not happy with the contour/dimensions of the cheek rest so I think I will return it and try to find another more authentic one.

Loaded up some Hornady 150gr SPs with IMR4895 and zero-ed the Weaver K2.5 scope at 50, 100 and 200 yards. Accuracy was really not much better than with the irons and PPU, which was a bit disappointing but progress continues!

https://www.milsurps.com/images/impo.../f1A6cb2-1.jpg