Another Variant of the No4 Mk1???? ;)

Attachment 108424Attachment 108425

For your consideration, the No4 Mk1" (Quote). The picture on the left is my No4 Mk1 (T). The picture on the right is a No4 mk1 (T) that was for sale on GB recently. They are only 117 serial numbers off, I'm sure they were built at BSA on the same day. Both were advertised as No4 Mk1* (star).

Does anyone know the reason for or has seen the " at the end? In my (very) limited experience I have not seen that symbol used except these two instances. Lets call it my quarantined curiosity wanting to know.

I've seen a fair few, but now only have one BSA 1943 4T marked with the two little 'speech marks' as you indicate (AS prefix). I checked a couple of standard BSA 1943 No4 stripped bodies (not 4T's) & they are not so marked. I'm speaking from memory now but I think I've only noticed it on 1943 BSA's - definitely on some T's but I honestly can't remember if I've noted it on standard rifles. I have doubts as to how significant it is.......quite likely just an idiosyncrasy of the engraving machine, (or person using it), in use at the time, though I'm open to suggestions if anyone has any ideas.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Roger Payne

I have doubts as to how significant it is.......quite likely just an idiosyncrasy of the engraving machine, (or person using it), in use at the time

---

I agree, especially remembering the stories I heard from my Aunt, and my Grandmother from their time in WW2, working in the munitions factory that was at the end of their road......!!

There was some No4 Mk1s incorrectly marked as Mk1*, There was a thread about this some time back.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Bindi2

There was some No4 Mk1s incorrectly marked as Mk1*, There was a thread about this some time back.

---

Them wos 'Maltby's'.

That was my first thought, but when Roger said he had one and it was a BSA, that quashed that idea.

Thanks chaps. Yes, I remember that thread, but this seems to be slightly different in that the marks definitely look like two little speech marks, & so far as I can recall from limited personal observations, only noted on 43 BSA rifles. I suspect it will turn up on non-4T rifles as well, if we look hard enough, as it looks to have been part of the (BSA) factory engraving of the rifle's designation.

They were probably put there just to confuse all of the collecting world nearly 80 years later...:madsmile::lol::madsmile:

Master gunsmith to apprentice: Engrave this exactly, "No4 Mk1". Apprentice does as instructed.

Master gunsmith returns and says: I didn't mean for you to engrave the quotes!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by CoatiMundi

Master gunsmith to apprentice: Engrave this exactly, "No4 Mk1". Apprentice does as instructed.

Master gunsmith returns and says: I didn't mean for you to engrave the quotes!

---

40 years ago, I trained as a technical draughtsman, and I certainley wouldn't bet against that being exactly what happened as I've seen exactly that with back in the drawing board days, when an Engineer would mark up a drawing with notes and comments, and the trainee would add ALL the markup's to the drawing, including comments like "Check dimensions" :bash:

I have had and seen a number of rifles marked with this variation. No one seems to know if or what this might mean.

I suspect that it was intended to indicate some variety of change, but obviously it wasn't a significant change.

Similarly I have always wondered if the No4MkI* Maltby marking "error" was in fact a specification / production change which was later deemed to be insignificant.

I'm late to this conversation. I was in the gun safe, and all of my 1943 T's have the quote stamps (No 4 Mk I").

Best picture I could conjure up.

My 1943 BSA T has such feint markings It is virtually impossible to see the 1 in No4 Mk1, let alone any " markings.

It just won't 'clean' up enough to get a good picture in any lighting.

Just remembered I've got a photo of the non-T, 1943 Maltby that I used to own, and while it was FTR'd in 1948, just for reference it doesn't appear to have the odd marks or miss-stamps either?

My '43 BSA T has the markings.

It might be helpful now to hear from people who own standard BSA 1943 rifles. It seems to be on quite a few 4T's, as observed, but is it also on non-4T rifles? It looks like it was done at the same time as the rest of the body wall engraving at the Shirley factory, so you'd think it ought to be on non-snipers as well........but is it?

I had a couple of 43 rifle bodies in a box which I had a quick glance at & couldn't see any 'speech marks', but the two bodies concerned are absolutely filthy & well worn, so I wouldn't be too confident about that observation. Anybody got a standard production BSA 43 they could tell us about?

Is it possible they were marked that way at H&H? That might give a plausible answer if no non "T" rifles are found with the marks. The engraving looks very nice versus some of the other wartime expedient work I have seen in my very limited experience.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by CoatiMundi

Is it possible they were marked that way at H&H? That might give a plausible answer if no non "T" rifles are found with the marks. The engraving looks very nice versus some of the other wartime expedient work I have seen in my very limited experience.

---

In 30+ years of collecting old mil stuff and items I've learnt never to say 'never' in regards what did or didn't happen in wartime.
However, given the info in the No.4T Armourers Perspective obtained 30 years ago by Ian and Peter L from the old H&H staff involved with the 4T conversion work, I would be sure such a thing would have been identified as occurring.

We really need more details of '43 BSA rifles to see which ones possess the 'speech marks' & which don't. I've only noticed it on 4T's, but I don't handle many standard rifles, & it does look to me as though it was done on the same engraving machine as the rest of the side wall markings immediately in front of it, which would mean it was done at BSA Shirley. But if more info comes in & it appears that it is only found on 4T's, then I suppose that would call the theory into question.....!?%

Were not the rifles selected for their accuracy at the factory for the conversion to a T. The " mark applied to identify those potential Ts just my 2cents worth.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Bindi2

Were not the rifles selected for their accuracy at the factory for the conversion to a T. The " mark applied to identify those potential Ts just my 2cents worth.

---

They got stamped with the TR at the factory to denote passing that test.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by GeeRam

They got stamped with the TR at the factory to denote passing that test.

---

43 is before they got the stamps organized. But I will stand corrected on the date.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Bindi2

43 is before they got the stamps organized. But I will stand corrected on the date.

---

Well, that's an idea....I've not got my book to hand at the moment, so not in a position to double check.

As Roger says, we need to find a cross section of non-T BSA made 1943 dated No.4's as reference.
20 odd years ago, I was specifically looking for a 1943 dated No.4, (not a T) for family connection reasons, but it wasn't easy to find one back then for some reason.....lots of 1942, 1944-45, and post war dated but very hard to find a '43 dated. Must have taken a couple of years to find one, and it was the Maltby one I posted a photo of earlier, which was a nice bonus. Would have liked to have kept that, but the chance of the getting the mint 4(T) I now have, meant it had to go.

1943 was a funny year.....it was during this year that we see the standardisation, if we can call it that, of the markings that Peter describes in the book. Certainly by late in the year they were being marked as you might expect to see & as continued through 1944 & 45, but earlier is hard to be dogmatic about. For example, some 1943 rifles lack even the crown/D6/E examiner's mark.

I pulled two 1944 No4Ts out of the safe to see if either had the quotation marks. One was covered in brunofixing, and I was unable to make out any extraneous markings.

The other 1944 is an F-prefix, and has some bluing left over (not sure when the transition from blued to brunofix took place). No quotation marks on this one, so perhaps as Roger and others had theorized, this was something peculiar to the 1943 dated rifles.

Here's another T with similar markings for sale currently on Gunbroker:

https://www.gunbroker.com/item/870237041

Check photo #11

Brian B

And it's an AT prefix '43........

It may all come down to just a peculiarity of whoever was doing the engraving at that time.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Roger Payne

And it's an AT prefix '43........

It may all come down to just a peculiarity of whoever was doing the engraving at that time.

---

Most likely.....maybe if all these seem to be quite close in number, it was just as a result of a damaged set of * stamps, which they had to wait for a replacements and thus used the " in the set as it was 'closest' to looking like a * when stamped....?