No. 4 Mk 1 (T) bolt mismatch - how much does it hurt value?

A local shop has a really nice No. 4 (T) that I'm interested in. Overall, it's a nice, complete sniper set up with a No. 32 Mk III scope & mount, canvas covered metal scope case (not the hinged clamshell type), sling, and transit case, all in excellent condition.

The rifle itself is in exception condition, with beautiful wood, all proper markings and finish, but there is one big problem. It appears someone replaced the original bolt with a modified bolt. It's fully polished with a handle that looks re-worked.

I've bought a lot of guns from this shop and I think the owner will work with me on the price. He doesn't have a firm number, but knows that no-excuses complete rigs sell regularly for upwards of $5K. I'm thinking quite bit south of that given the bolt issue, which is really a shame because otherwise this rifle is pretty close to being the top of heap.

Here are a few shots of the bolt. Thoughts on how much of a value hit this makes?

https://www.milsurps.com/images/impo.../egSEXO1-1.jpg
https://www.milsurps.com/images/impo.../KNeYG3D-1.jpg

Find who the previous owner was and see if he has the bolt sitting in a box somewhere.
Mismatched bolt is a serious hit in my book. Might even be a deal breaker, unless the kit is full and in excellent condition. Just my opinion.

The rest of the package is exceptional. No issues. That's what makes it so tough. It will never be worth truly top-dollar because of the bolt, but even as-is, I'm thinking around $3,500.

Well the difference in the colour of the cheek rest from the rest of the timber on the rifle says to me its been replaced does the rifle bear any FTR markings, there is the lack of the serial No. of the scope on the top wrist which if the woods been replaced was it done by a competent armourer or just someone trying to get the best looking T on the block.
What markings are on the left wrist, what year, who made it, are there any markings in the left side of the receiver like the small "T", and stampings on the bolt race flats at the back, does the timber have any markings like S51 from H&H, the unserialed bolt is a worry as its not just a case of drop in fit they are quite the technical piece to fit as BIOZ said a while ago they are a helical lock up so all recoil surfaces have to engage equally.

More photos would be good to make a determination from the people with the real expertise with these weapons systems as mine is only limited from owning a T

I didn't do an exhaustive examination, but from memory it was marked TR on the socket, M47C maker. Don't recall the year ('44 or '45). S mark on the right side of the action. Don't recall if it had a T mark by ejector. I did notice the lack of scope number on the stock, but it is marked S51 on the bottom of the stock and the fore end was numbered with matching SN. I agree about the cheek rest. The screws holding it on also looked a bit too new. It's not actually on sale in the shop, so it's not going anywhere soon, and I will have some time next week to do more due diligence. It's starting to look more like a sum of the parts offer, if I do decide to make one. I would really like to have the scope and mount for my other No. 4 (T) if nothing else.

K see if the shop can give you more detailed pics from memory I think mine has the Weedon star on the underside of the wrist if I am correct (pic).
I just find it a bit odd if the stock was done at H&H why the scopes serial No. is not stamped on the wrist stange things happen I guess and who knows what the rifles have been up to all these years.

The bolt would be your haggling point or not so much that but as its a crucial piece and is not serialised to the rifle at this point its an unknown if you can get the whole shebang for say $2,900 ~ $3,000 then you have a bargain and can then get the bolt checked out by a gunny familiar with the lock up on the Lee Enfield line. Haggling is a done thing!

The possibility of it being a "scopeless" T just occurred to me as well. Need to get back over there any take more photos!

From the first photo the wood next to the bolt handle looks very new.

Not only is that bolt un numbered but it appears to have been cut and had a new knob put on it.

Color cheekpiece should not be a problem. They were fitted after the rifle was issued to fit the shooter. I doubt that there was any attempt to match color or grainm they just grabbed what was next in the box.

I would agree with Paul. In fact the only 4T's I've noted where you get a perfect colour match (usually) between the cheekpiece, fore end, guards, & butt, is on Canadian T's, as all of the wood is invariably American black walnut, including the 'piece. In the UK, whilst most rifles were set up in walnut the wood was not generally used for cheekpieces, which are most commonly beech & less commonly ash & stained birch. Consequently, there will generally be at least a slight variation in colour, & sometimes a quite noticeable variation.

I also thought the bolt handle has been lengthened & fitted with an over size bolt knob. Ironically, it looks to have been quite nicely done. Shame, but not the end of the world, particularly if reflected in the price. The original bolt handle knob would have had a hole counter bored in it, typical of BSA throughout their No4 production history.

Added later: I forgot to mention earlier but if the rifle body lacks the side wall 'T' it may well be a 'scopeless T' as bigwagon suggests.

In the real world of Armourers, fitting new or second-hand/used bolts, woodwork and other odds and ends was an everyday occurrence. If the bolt wasn't mated exactly to the rifle, we'd work our magic until it was, then carry out all of the usual associated tests, CHS, squareness etc etc, lift and so on. Then range test it for accuracy when it was assembled and then re-number the bolt to match the rifle. Done hundreds of 'em......, week in and week out. Sadly, when we were using and repairing them the words safe queens or investments didn't come into it. And concourse was reserved for fancy cars.

Sorry, but that just how it was..........., just another killing machine.

I was able to make a closer inspection of this rifle today and get better photos. I think the rifle may be a late-war converted scopeless No. 4 (T) based on the lack of "T" mark on the receiver or a scope number on the wrist. The No. 32 Mk III scope and bracket match the numbers on the scope can, but not the rifle, and there are no serial number markings on the transit case. As previously noted the bolt is altered and mis-matched. Overall it's a very nice package, but my guess is possibly pieced together. Other than the bolt issue, the rifle is in beautiful condition and the package is very tempting.

Here's an album of more detailed shots.

Imgur: The magic of the Internet

There is not nearly enough information to form a proper conclusion.

A mismatched bolt on a Lee-Enfield is a VERY SERIOUS problem form a collector's point of view and would break most possible sales deals, both now and in the future. The chance of finding the original bolt is EXTREMELY slim. Milsurps.com has a thread set up by ~Angel~'s "Match Making" Service for "rifles looking for bolts." https://www.milsurps.com/showthread.php?t=1035 A mismatched Lee-Enfield bolt will ALWAYS hurt a deal. If selling the rifle to a re-enactor or shooter, it might not matter as much, but even they would not want to pay a top dollar.

The lack of a scope serial number on the butt just below the cocking piece, tells me that this is ALMOST CERTAINLY a No. 4 Mk. I (T. LESS TELESCOPE) which was NOT a sniper rifle as it was an unfinished conversion in that it never had a telescope and bracket fitted in service. Such a rifle would usually have "TR", "S" and "S51" markings. If that is the case there should be no "T" on the left side, no scope number on the butt (as noted) and the rifle serial number on the bracket would be for a different rifle.

We do not know all the reasons why there were so many No. 4 Mk. I (T. LESS TELESCOPE) rifles made. Many of these were early Stevens-Savage production and some were late-war BSA Shirley production. The late-war examples are understandable, for the contract ended on a specific date, so regardless of how many rifles were partway through the conversion process, it was a case of "down tools" at the appointed hour. (Info from Peter Laidler as I recall).

I disagree, most respectfully, with "breakeyp" in that I have never seen any indication that the cheek rests were only fitted after issue to snipers. The one exception is that the very first No. 4 Mk. I (T) rifles were reportedly issued without cheek rests, but these were fitted as soon as they became available.

For American Garand collectors, they can identify with this unfinished sniper conversion situation by thinking of the "SA-52" marked M1 rifles. Drilled for the M1C scope base, 4,796 unfinished M1C receivers had the special scope mount holes plugged and the rifles were issued in the Korean War as standard M1 rifles, marked SA-52. As a result, they are not and were not, technically snipers as the conversion was never completed. [Ref: The M1 Garand Rifle - Bruce N. Canfield p. 526]

I concur. As a buyer and collector, a bolt mismatch on a (T) gives me serious pause. SERIOUS pause. It would have to be a really good bargain, as you'd never get market price for it. Always discounted.

Yes, worth rather less than a matching bolt rig to a collector, but I always let the price make the ultimate decision for me. The scope & bracket alone (assuming they are in good functional & cosmetic condition) are worth somewhere between two & two & a half thousand pounds on the UK market. I suppose it depends on if you want a one-off purchase as the example of a 4T for your collection, or whether you want to shoot it, re-enact, or (heaven forbid), move it on again & earn something out of it. I'd have no qualms about splitting it up to sell on, as it's a non-matching set. A correct pattern bolt body could be fitted as a replacement - it'll never be 'factory original', but a much better prospect than what's in the rifle at the moment.

I agree on the bolt mismatch being a serious hit to value and desirability, as well as it likely being a "T less scope" in the first place. But the accessories are of great interest to me for my early Savage No. 4 (T). I think I can get the package for about $3500-3800, at which point I probably would replace bolt, sell the rifle, and keep the scope and transit case for my other rifle. The scope has clear glass and appears in overall good condition, but the elevation and windage knobs are very stiff so it probably needs some attention.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Seaforth72

The lack of a scope serial number on the butt just below the cocking piece, tells me that this is ALMOST CERTAINLY a No. 4 Mk. I (T. LESS TELESCOPE) which was NOT a sniper rifle as it was an unfinished conversion in that it never had a telescope and bracket fitted in service.

---

Just another thought.

My No4T has been vetted and 'authenticated' by Peter Laidler and it does not have the Scope serial number on the Butt - apparently this was common with RAF No4Ts, the butts were replaced by the armourers to 'fit' the Sniper to whom the rifle was issued.

Mine is a fully authenticated RAF No4T and has all of the relevant markings used by the RAF armourers.


Example :


34 BWC 8-68


Means it was "overhauled at 34th base Workshops at Catterick August 1968"

Probably what happened was the fellow who made up the oversized bolt knob, or had it made up, was wise enough to set the original bolt aside and modify another.

How well he or his gunsmith got the lugs to bear on each other is anyone's guess, but quite possibly nothing was done. Lapping them in would have also changed the recoil shoulders in the receiver/body and if the owner was wise enough, he may not have wanted to do that.

So, the original bolt is probably out there somewhere, perhaps even still in his basement or garage: if the owner passed on and his family got rid of his guns, they may or may not have dealt with the bits and pieces yet.

You need to find out who the owner was and talk to him, or his family ASAP.

Stop press: just had another look at the photos and this might well be the original bolt judging by the taper put on the handle, which could be enough to completely erase the original numbers.

Have a good look at the wear patterns on the bolt and check the bearing of the lugs with layout blue. Should be possible to tell if this is the original from that.

Regardless if it is original, if it is a good fit with proper contact on the lugs, you might as well get an appropriate bolt and use the handle and knob to restore this one. There should be enough "meat" left to splice the two together as far away from the bolt body as possible.

Obviously, to someone like me and the hundreds of other real Armourers who have fitted hundreds of new or part used/worn bolts to hundreds of rifles it's a bit of a kick in the crutch to know that a new bolt makes a rifle worth less. Being a big grown up lad who's been there, been round the block and done it a few times it's not that I care tooooo much. But surely if it's properly done, gauged and all the tests done and then range tested, out inspected by the ogre of an out inspector then, surely, what's the problem? Am I less skilled that the fitter at Maltby or BSA? Not as skilled or experienced as the.......... Anyway...........

I don't think the rifle is worth a jot less from a functional viewpoint - maybe one could even argue it's worth a premium as it's been 'gone over by someone who knows how to' recently. It's just 'collector mentality' - they like things (or at least many of them do) 'just like it left the factory in 1944'. I suspect this 'armourer vs collector' difference will probably never be reconciled.......simply two different points of view that perhaps could just do with peacefully co-existing!

I'd think restriking a number would solve that mystery. Then who would be able to say when that was done?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by browningautorifle

I'd think restriking a number would solve that mystery. Then who would be able to say when that was done?

---

Careful! You will open a can of worms of people accusing you of forgery!
I made the mistake of asking "what if" I did that to my bracket.... whoa boy...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by jonh172

You will open a can of worms of people accusing you of forgery!

---

That was exactly what the armourers did. Restike the number on a bolt that wasn't suitable. Buy the rifle...not the story.

At the end of the day, opinions will vary, depending if he's the seller or the buyer!
:lol:

To address the Q in the title my guess is that a mis matched bolt will reduce the value by 10 to 20%. Just a guess.

A number on a bolt may match the action number but does the bolt match the action.

I gotta go with Pete on this one, we simply adjust and refit a new/old bolt and renumber.

However, as a collector, I also look at the existing proof stamps and view marks on the bolt, if they do not agree with the age of the rifle, than that gives me pause in purchasing.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by muffett.2008

I gotta go with Pete on this one, we simply adjust and refit a new/old bolt and renumber.

However, as a collector, I also look at the existing proof stamps and view marks on the bolt, if they do not agree with the age of the rifle, than that gives me pause in purchasing.

---

Why don't you trust your own work.

This conversation is straying somewhat far afield from the issues with this particular rifle. If the bolt had been refitted and renumbered in service, it would be a non-issue, to me at least, but in this case it is an obviously incorrect mis-match. But that does beg the question as to how how easy it is to tell if a bolt has been replaced at any point as long as the numbers match. There seem to be many different styles of fonts and marking procedures. In most cases I'd just be happy if the numbers match.

As PL aludes to the kick in the nurries the easiest solutions to see if the bolt has been correctly fitted is to -
A) Get it to a gunsmith familiar with the lock up & contact points of the Lee Enfield get it checked if all good then you can work on the other stuff numbering & getting the bolt handle sorted if your gunna keep it if you onsell it one would expect you tell the new buyer its not the original bolt but is fitted correctly and was numbered to the gun.
B) If you have the experience & engineers blue coat recoil surfaces on the bolt and see how it is contacting as they are not just drop a bolt into an action and expect it to be safe.

Not QUITE that simple Cinders (see b) above but getting close. Full details of fitting a bolt AND setting it up so that all the interlocking features operate in unison are written down somewhere as I recall

Many years ago a kindly soul pointed me in the direction of a copy of the No4 EMERS. They've been an absolute godsend. ;)

Roger

As my 4(T) has been through your hands, and the scope through Peter's, I wonder if some kindly soul out there would like me enough to do the same to me :D