Savage No4 (T) Register

Hi all,

Firstly apologies if this already exists, I did a quick search but couldn’t find a list of savage No4 t, what I did find was a surprising number of people telling me they don’t exist. A renouned gun smith who is no stranger to enfields recently said he had never seen a real save No4(t).

Having recently acquired one, I am keen to reach them, initially starting by building but a list of existing rifles.

If you are happy to please reply with:
Rifle S/N (or as much as you are happy to share)
Scope S/N
Notes, e.g. current state, precision scope numbers, if it is a known Less Scope.
And a photo or two, particularly of any conversion markings.

With this data

Maybe if update is sufficient this may become a sticky?

So to get the ball rolling:

Rifle S/N 0C1551
Scope S/N 8572 (Not original scope, Roger Payne mount)
Notes:
Original scope number [?]461
Fulton regulated post service.
Conversion markings ghost of scope number, t on rear of receiver.

Attachment 112481

OC109 is a L42

No.4 Mk1 NZ Marked (no.49)
Serial: 15C4921
Scope bracket: 14C3293
Scope: No.32 Mk1 H.B,M.Co 9537
No T stamping, but Enfeild inspection marked.

https://www.milsurps.com/showthread.php?t=65692

Savage No.4 MkI* dated 1942
S/N 14C0114
5 groove Enfield rifled barrel
Butt stock is annotated "S51" in proper place with proper font
Cheek piece is also walnut and secured with blackened straight slot screws
Butt plate is brass
All small parts are S marked
Bolt is original to rifle and has a #2 bolt head
Front sight hood is milled and S marked
Scope pads are original and not staked
No scope S/N on wrist
the stock extension that goes into the receiver socket is properly numbered to the rifle S/N

Jim

Rifle S/N: 0C3661
Scope S/N: original scope not present
Notes: Has been through FTR. Was later sporterized, and is now missing front scope mount pad. Will restore to original.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Troglodyte

Rifle S/N: 0C3661
Scope S/N: original scope not present
Notes: Has been through FTR. Was later sporterized, and is now missing front scope mount pad. Will restore to original.

---

Is there a scope number on the wrist?

1941 Mk1 0C3XX 6 groove barrel. Matching bolt. Woodwork original Savage 4T wood but from another Savage rifle. Forend serialled 8866 (?C8866) & butt bears S51 in usual place & scope number 6707.

1942 Mk1* 12C93XX Replacement British 5 groove barrel & walnut forend. S51 in usual place. Less Telescope rifle.

1942 Mk1* 14C02XX Original 2 groove barrel & woodwork. S51 in usual place. Originally fitted with scope serial number 7386 (already missing when I acquired the rifle).

I'm only thinking out loud here, but I wonder if there may be a tendency for the Less Telescope rifles to be the ones that got replacement 5 groove barrels & often replacement forends as well? I have seen one or two LT rifles that bear replacement front woodwork as well as replacement tubes. And on the other hand the unaltered 2 groover Mk1* rifles may tend to be the rifles that were completed with telescopes. It will be interesting to see what trends emerge, assuming some do! I have a pal who has a scoped up 2 grove Mk1* T so I'll try & get his data as well.

Roger: I agree with your hypothesis that a particular subset of these rifles received new barrels and new fore ends from H&H. I say that because my 14C series less scope rifle has both. You would only know the fore end replacement if you knew where to look for serial numbers.

Jim

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Micheal Doyne

Is there a scope number on the wrist?

---

No--wood is not original, though the cheekpiece seems to be.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Roger Payne

1941 Mk1 0C3XX 6 groove barrel. Matching bolt. Woodwork original Savage 4T wood but from another Savage rifle. Forend serialled 8866 (?C8866) & butt bears S51 in usual place & scope number 6707.

1942 Mk1* 12C93XX Replacement British 5 groove barrel & walnut forend. S51 in usual place. Less Telescope rifle.

1942 Mk1* 14C02XX Original 2 groove barrel & woodwork. S51 in usual place. Originally fitted with scope serial number 7386 (already missing when I acquired the rifle).

I'm only thinking out loud here, but I wonder if there may be a tendency for the Less Telescope rifles to be the ones that got replacement 5 groove barrels & often replacement forends as well? I have seen one or two LT rifles that bear replacement front woodwork as well as replacement tubes. And on the other hand the unaltered 2 groover Mk1* rifles may tend to be the rifles that were completed with telescopes. It will be interesting to see what trends emerge, assuming some do! I have a pal who has a scoped up 2 grove Mk1* T so I'll try & get his data as well.

---

Thanks for these! Do any of yours exhibit the t stamp and rear of receiver top as per my photo?

I had a No.8 Mk1 scope tin with a Savage Rifle serial number stencilled on it - 0C6903.

Thanks

Here is mine....rifle, scope, scope tin, bracket, buttstock, forestock and chest all matching!

Pictures are in this link to the old thread I started.

https://www.milsurps.com/showthread.php?t=63330&page=1

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by bros

Here is mine....rifle, scope, scope tin, bracket, buttstock, forestock and chest all matching!

Pictures are in this link to the old thread I started.

https://www.milsurps.com/showthread.php?t=63330&page=1

---

That is a lovely looking rifle. Are there any markings on the top right rear of the receiver under the bolt handle? I have seen 3 0CXXX whith a T within a circle here, and I am keen to see how prevalent it is.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Micheal Doyne

That is a lovely looking rifle. Are there any markings on the top right rear of the receiver under the bolt handle? I have seen 3 0CXXX whith a T within a circle here, and I am keen to see how prevalent it is.

---

I just added photos to my earlier post to show the area in question. It looks as though mine (from the 0Cxxxx series) has the stamp, but it was lightly struck.

I've shown the serial number markings, TR, and FTR markings at the wrist as well.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Troglodyte

I just added photos to my earlier post to show the area in question. It looks as though mine (from the 0Cxxxx series) has the stamp, but it was lightly struck.

I've shown the serial number markings, TR, and FTR markings at the wrist as well.

---

Thanks, yes a lot seem to be lightly struck. Maybe due to the difficult surface, I wonder if this is part the reason for the later standardisation side wall.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Micheal Doyne

That is a lovely looking rifle. Are there any markings on the top right rear of the receiver under the bolt handle? I have seen 3 0CXXX whith a T within a circle here, and I am keen to see how prevalent it is.

---

Hi Michael....I had a look, even with a magnifying glass and nothing seems to be there!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by bros

Hi Michael....I had a look, even with a magnifying glass and nothing seems to be there!

---

That is interesting, particularly as yours is irrefutable.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by bros

Hi Michael....I had a look, even with a magnifying glass and nothing seems to be there!

---

I stand to be corrected......had another look today and yes the T within the circle is there. Took a closeup picture with my cell and then enlarged it......wonderful things "sometimes" those phones!!

Anyhow was going to post the picture but they changed how you post pictures since the last time I posted pictures, can't figure it out so I gave up.

Hello Michael. Sorry I've been a little slow to respond, but tonight I had a look at the three rifles for the markings on either side of the bolt way on the rear of the body. (None have a receiver side wall T). As follows:

1941 0C3XX LHS bolt way - nothing. RHS bolt way - Upside down stamped 'T' within a circle. US ordnance flaming bomb.

1942 12C93XX LHS bolt way - nothing. RHS bolt way - stamped letter 'P'.

1942 14C02XX LHS bolt way - nothing. RHS bolt way - either a figure '8' or possibly a US ordnance flaming bomb. Poorly stamped.
- just 'round the corner' on very top edge of RHS butt socket is an Enfield examiner's stamp. Crown/7?/E. I really can't say
what the letter is after the '7', & am not sure about the 'E' but think that is most likely. Again, poorly stamped.

Thanks, the Roger.
The t on the RHS of the bolt track is starting to sound so quite common on the 0CXXXs.

Probably already in registry.
Receiver: S No.4 MK I (No T stamp)
Serial No. - OC3695/butt-socket, bolt, forearm and mount.
Scope - Kershaw Ltd., No. 32 MK I/OS.466A.KL./1941 REG.No7615.
Mount - OC3695/rings 23 (rear)/24 (front).
Upper Stock Wrist - Scope No. - 7615.
Bottom of Stock - S51.
All Savage components.
Illegible circled mark on upper right side oof receiver near bolt channel.
Left butt-socket stamped with serial number above small Ordnance 'Shell & Flame'/no additional markings.
Scope can marked with matching scope and rifle serial numbers.
Original finish.

Thanks very much TGJ,
I have added that data in. Sounds like a nice rifle. Your illegible mark in a circle may well be the same t stam found to some degree on most 0CXXX rifles I’ve seen so far.

Rifle No4 MK I 1942
SN# OC5791
"T" receiver marked... no wrist marks
Less scope/mount/cheek riser
buttstock sanded, hard to see stampings, rear sight removed and holes for sight ground flush to receiver top. Holes in butt stock for riser... look old, holes in receiver for pads and receiver relieved for pads.

Any other markings I should be looking for?

Here is a link to mine

https://www.milsurps.com/showthread.php?t=54928

In Skennerton's book, there is a pic of 0C1 and it's a T.

Thanks, yes that seems to be the only one even the die hard “no savage t rifles where ever completed with scopes” agree was a t.

How many Savages were also converted to L42

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Bindi2

How many Savages were also converted to L42

---

Minimum of 6, Maximum of 8.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by XL39E1

Minimum of 6, Maximum of 8.

---

So a survivor would be a little on the rare side then.

I would be a happy man to own one of those!!!

From a PM, in case anyone is confused.

Picture, as promised. Looks like a "1"

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Bindi2

So a survivor would be a little on the rare side then.

---

What's the serial number?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Roy W

What's the serial number?

---

0C109

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Bindi2

0C109

---

Nice, it's on the list as being made on 28/03/72 as one of a batch of 13 rifles.

During the '90's belonged to Rob Hallam & was part of the Charnwood collection.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Roger Payne

During the '90's belonged to Rob Hallam & was part of the Charnwood collection.

---

Now in Aussie and I didn't import it.

I'd noticed it was now yours Bindi. I used to see it often, twenty five years ago. It was one of the batch that Charnwood got & Rob kept it for their collection (after exporting it to Canada & then reimporting it to keep the government happy) because of it being rarer than your average L42. I've no idea who bought it in the auction at Bonhams, but it obviously made its way to Oz somehow! You have a nice rifle....

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Lance

From a PM, in case anyone is confused.

Picture, as promised. Looks like a "1"

---

That is very interesting, has any one seen this mark on a non T savage?

We were discussing in another thread whether the Savage and perhaps Maltby rifles were converted as they had Mk.I backsights already fitted and other No4s did not at that time.

Could it also be the case that the incomplete "Less Telescope" Savage rifles we see were put aside unfinished when either a supply of Mk.I sights was secured from Savage or UK production caught up, allowing BSA rifles to be used exclusively?

The fact that a quantity of them could possibly have built up at H&H does suggest that the conversion process was in two parts: the fitting of the pads, and the later fitting of the brackets. Perhaps the latter process was slower as otherwise it's hard to see how a quantity of any rifles could accumulate without brackets being fitted. Fitting the brackets did involve range zeroing, transportation etc. so wouldn't be so surprising if a backlog developed?

Michael Doyne, are you compiling an Excel spreadsheet with all these details?

IIRC PL told me that when he was researching the book he discovered that the pads/bracket fitting & machining was indeed carried out in two parts. The pads were made & fitted, but the precise machining of the spigot was left until the time came for the actual fitting of the bracket, when mating surfaces on both parts were done as an ensemble. It makes sense. I have never bought this line that the 'Less Telescope' rifles were all set up late on to ensure H&H got the maximum remuneration before the contracts were cancelled in April 1946. I know I've banged on about this before, but there are minor but very real differences in the contour of the radius running along the top front face of the front pad. The radius of the edge of the 90 degree turn becomes progressively 'sharper' as production history goes on. It is very easy to distinguish a set of pads off a 1941 to 1943 rifle compared to a 1945 rifle if you know what you're looking for. The pads on ALL Savage rifles conform to the 'early style'. However, if the initial machining was done early on, but the rifles were not finished off until near the death, that might just explain the apparent dichotomy.

I don't know any better than anyone else on the early conversions but I suspect that in the early days, when H&H were just getting started on the conversions, any rifle that satisfied the accuracy standards & generally fitted the spec requirements was set aside for conversion, regardless of manufacturer. And perhaps the fact that a lot of (all??) early Savage & Maltby rifles came with the appropriate Mk1 rear sights clearly didn't hurt. Equally evidently, over time relaxations in the spec were allowed, such as the solid foresight block & the acceptance of rifles with the wrong pattern of rear sights, so long as correct replacement sights were available.

I have never seen an sign of hand fitting on pads or bracket mating surfaces, but have others?

The 6(?) MOA tolerance for alignment is surprisingly generous, so much so that it suggests to me that brackets and pads were machined in standard jigs, assembled and then perhaps checked for collimation with a zeroed scope of some kind, before the No32 scope was fitted to the bracket and the lot sent out for range testing.

Is it your understanding Roger that the mating surfaces on the brackets were machined at H&H or at the factory making the brackets?

To machine the pads the barrelled action was held in a jig with a hardened rod running down the bore as the control surface, that much I remember of Peter's comments.

There is no way to change the lateral alignment once the front pad is machined, except to remove material from the shoulder around the spigot, (or the corresponding surface on the bracket), but that only moves the MPI to the left - there is no way to move it to the right except to remove metal from the mating surfaces on the rear leg/pad, and of course unless that is done perfectly evenly, the vertical alignment is changed!

Another option would be to move the rear pad up or down before securing it, but we know the mating surfaces were cut after it was fitted, so that is out, and we never see any variation in the placement of the rear pad ?

Seems the relationships of the mating surfaces to each other just don't permit adjustment without throwing other surfaces out of alignment, meaning I think that it must all have been done on jigs and selective fitting of different brackets was only option for adjustment.

And the relevance of all that to the Savage rifles would be that IF that was the process, then the pad surfaces were cut on a jig, and if there was any adjustment it was done later, and probably on the brackets, meaning a backlog of rifles with finished pads would be a possibility from that perspective.

:dunno:

Very valid points. I don't know how relevant this observation is, but one thing I have definitely noticed over the years, from re-fitting many sets or part sets of pads to original 4T's, is that the vertical variation noticed was quite small, & the amount that a rifle was 'out' in lateral adjustment was small, in MOST cases, but could be considerable in rifles encountered from time to time. I mention this because when David I bought the batch of around 140 partially stripped 4T's back in 1997 we spent the next ten years (we weren't in any hurry!) slowly rebuilding them all in my garage workshop. The vast majority had had one or both pads removed. Fortunately, we also bough several bags full of removed parts, which included the pads for most of the rifles (plus a lot of the woodwork, less checkpieces). The late Graham Smith made us some truly magnificent reproduction pads to make up the shortfall. You can imagine the fun & games we had retro-fitting the pads, & it was very much a learning experience as one went along. A lot of what little I know of the subject came from this experience. PL received periodic phone calls for advice, & was always helpful. I remember on one occasion I had to use a reproduction rear pad & the lateral setting was way out. I had to sweat & unsweat that rear pad several times, surface grinding a couple of thou off its rear surface each time, until we could achieve collimation. PL laughed & said he was glad.......simply because that was the correct way to do it, & having to go through such a bXXl-ache procedure was the best way of learning! He was right......
Having done all that I came to the conclusion that the large lateral errors we occasionally experienced were when I was trying to fit an 'early' front pad, say from a B1941 or ROFM1941 rifle to a BSA 1945 (or vice versa), & was probably down to the minor dimensional differences in the rifle bodies resulting in rather different amounts of meat being removed from the pads at the time of the 'mating machining'. As might follow, I also found that so long as a front pad off a 1944/45 rifle was re-fitted to a 1944/45 rifle, they almost invariably fitted sweetly, with relatively few problems in collimation. I am not disagreeing with what PL & others have always emphasised about the importance of keeping the appropriate scopes, brackets & rifles mated together, indeed my observations, such that they are, tend to confirm such, but, if correct, may give a little more insight into why it is important.......

Just my ramblings.........forgive me!

Very interesting Roger, I suppose it was accepted in service refits of brackets that changing the lateral alignment inevitably meant only partial contact on the front pad mating surfaces, as removing metal from those surfaces would misalign the spigot and the corresponding hole in the bracket, which have to be a tight fit to maintain any zero?

(Sorry about the slight hijack Michael!) ;)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Surpmil

Michael Doyne, are you compiling an Excel spreadsheet with all these details?

---

Yes all going into an excel, is love to understand the savage conversions better. Hoping post covid to visit a few more, as I've only seen a couple in person.

0C769 Less telescope and apparently never issued judging by condition.

Thanks I will add it to the list. I am interested does it have any stamps top right rear of the receive, above wrist to the right of the bolt track?

12C top and 15C btm

https://www.milsurps.com/images/impo.../JlR1Qz9-1.jpg

Those two are very nice looking rifles. Are you happy to share there markings and location. Am particularly interested in any T stamps, S51 and scope numbers. Thanks

I'm happy all the time !

https://www.milsurps.com/images/impo.../bowzP7X-1.jpg

https://www.milsurps.com/images/impo.../E9EzDiH-1.jpg

I will photograph or dig up some pictures.

Thanks.

Hello Michael,
I just remembered a few details about another Savage Mk1 4T that I used to own. It's probably still in the UK somewhere, but sadly no longer mine. It is the only Savage rifle I have personally owned that I am sure was a RSAF Enfield Lock conversion rather than one effected by H&H. There was no S51 on the butt, & the back of the body was profusely marked with Enfield examiners' marks. The barrel was a Trials era EFD replacement, as was the magazine. In spite of the many examiners' marks elsewhere on the rifle body there was no mark on the front pad. The forend had been replaced with one of beech, that quite poignantly had had the girl's name 'Yvette' scratched into it. It was a 1942 dated Mk1 rifle & was scoped up with a mis-matched Mk3 telescope. Rifle serial number; 0C4335. I'm afraid I can't remember any more of it, but hopefully this may be of a little use......

Thank you very much, every bit adds to the picture.

Roger, I had a chance to buy 0C0303 (less scope T) in 2002 or 03. The seller wouldn't budge on negotiating, and I was poor. I am poorer today for not finding the few more $ he was asking. This was in Canada.

Looking through the old Bonhams catalogue from 1997 I noticed L42A1 Savage 0C109. Not quite the same demand for Lee-Enfields back then.

It was in Rob Hallam's personal collection & now resides in Australia with a forum member.;)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by husk

Looking through the old Bonhams catalogue from 1997 I noticed L42A1 Savage 0C109. Not quite the same demand for Lee-Enfields back then.

---

I note that the "matching LB" L42 sold for the lowest price :rofl:

God, I wish I could find l42s for that kind of cash!!!!!

If only we had a time machine! Charnwood offered my friend & I thirty L42's in the chests for 500 GBP plus VAT apiece. IIRC VAT was 15% at the time, so they'd have cost 590 all in. I declined the offer....!?$

1941 - Scope-less, OC3XX, No markings of any kind on either side of bolt way.
1942- Scope -less, OC33XX, On RHS is the letter P and below that the number 1 in a circle.

Both retain their original Savage barrels.

Hope this helps.

Thanks very much, I will add them to the register.

savage us property marked 1942 ser 15C6098 front pad missing ,sporterized .parker hale pads fitted a20 front, ba21 rear.no inspectors marks on top of wrist .guessing scoopless has brit barrelAttachment 117005Attachment 117006Attachment 117007Attachment 117008

Attachment 117009Attachment 117010Attachment 117011Attachment 117012Savage Scopless 13C7248 both original pads missing brit barrel

Savage Scopless 13C7248 both original pads missing brit barrel Attachment 117013 redid with better picture

13C7248 is Is a no4 mk1* gun with the bolt cut out yet 15C6098 is a later gun but it is a no4 mk1 gun with a bolt release catch . I find this interesting why would a later gun have a bolt release catch

Hi folks,

I'm a newby so apologies if this isn't quite the correct area. I have found what I believe to be a Savage No.4 Mk1* (T) Less Scope. It has what appears to be an original No.32 Mk3 scope and mount with it. I have pictures if required. I'm based in the UK and wondered (obviously approximately) what value this 'rig' may be. It's in beautiful condition and the serial number is in the 13C range. Any help/guidance would be welcome. It's an interesting piece, but I don't want to pay scoped T prices for it.

The 13Cxxxx rifle is amongst certainly not a sniper rifle as Scouser (T) stated.

Look for a scope serial number on the top of the stock, just below the cocking piece. If that is not there, and the butt has the Holland & Holland wartime code of “S51” on the underside, then the rifle is almost certainly a (T. LESS TELESCOPE) variant. These rifles were partially converted and most appear to have then been put straight into storage “for the duration”. Later they were sold surplus, sometimes in a No.15 Mk.I transit chest with the added marking (T. LESS TELESCOPE) on the front of the chest. Most of these rifles are found in near mint condition. They are not common, but some estimates are that about 3,000 of these rifles, which had been selected for conversion to sniper equipment, were left unfinished. Why? I do not know for sure, but the British obviously made a decision to standardize, using BSA Shirley made rifles, rather than having H&H have to deal with variations that stemmed from receiving rifles made by several different manufacturers. I speculate that H&H lobbied for one consistent supplier. Some 1944-1945 BSA made rifles are also No.4 Mk. (T. LESS TELESCOPE), but that is because they were unfinished at the time the contact ended, or else they had been rejected.

Another sign to look for is a “T” marking, with serifs, on the left side of the body. Early conversions did not always have this marking and it has been reported that some had it added retroactively in service. Naturally one does not want to be fooled by such a marking that might have been added after the rifle left military service to increase the sale price.

Genuine Stevens-Savage sniper rifles are rare, usually in the very low serial number range. One comes across these unfinished conversions much more frequently. When the serial number is in the 13Cxxxx range, one is pretty much guaranteed that it is an unfinished conversion.

The (T. LESS TELESCOPE) rifles are the easiest to fake as sniper rifles, since much of the conversion work had already been done by H&H i.e. cheek rest added, battle sight removed and scope pads fitted. As a result the presence, or not, of a matching No.32 scope/bracket/No.8 scope case, scooe serial number on wrist of butt and possibly a “T” marking are all features that need to be examined very closely.

The Stevens-Savage sniper rifles were fitted with No.32 Mk. I scopes. If the rifle went through Factory Thorough Repair (F.T.R.) for example, it might well receive a newer model scope in which case the old scope number would be cancelled on the butt and a new scope number added. As well, the bracket would normally have the rifle serial number stamped into the left side. One could expect such a rifle to have been well used. If it had new wood fitted, that wood would not likely have all been Stevens-Savage wood, but rather could be from any of the suppliers. The front scope pad on a well used one would likely have several stake marks per front pad screw, indicating heavy usage. The Imperial War Museum has a Stevens-Savage L42A1, presumably with the L1A1 conversion of a No.32 Mk.3 scope. They could not tell me the serial number however as they had not bothered to record that when they catalogued the rifle! Also it was on display, so it was not easily accessible.

Popping on an orphaned scope and bracket makes it look just like a sniper rifle, which is great if the set-up is cheap, but that does not mean that it ever was a real sniper rifle. Spending a lot of money on this would not be recommended unless the rifle was carefully examined and vetted by a very knowledgeable person such as Roger Payne.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Seaforth72

The 13Cxxxx rifle is amongst certainly not a sniper rifle as Scouser (T) stated.

Look for a scope serial number on the top of the stock, just below the cocking piece. If that is not there, and the butt has the Holland & Holland wartime code of “S51” on the underside, then the rifle is almost certainly a (T. LESS TELESCOPE) variant. These rifles were partially converted and most appear to have then been put straight into storage “for the duration”. Later they were sold surplus, sometimes in a No.15 Mk.I transit chest with the added marking (T. LESS TELESCOPE) on the front of the chest. Most of these rifles are found in near mint condition. They are not common, but some estimates are that about 3,000 of these rifles, which had been selected for conversion to sniper equipment, were left unfinished. Why? I do not know for sure, but the British obviously made a decision to standardize, using BSA Shirley made rifles, rather than having H&H have to deal with variations that stemmed from receiving rifles made by several different manufacturers. I speculate that H&H lobbied for one consistent supplier. Some 1944-1945 BSA made rifles are also No.4 Mk. (T. LESS TELESCOPE), but that is because they were unfinished at the time the contact ended, or else they had been rejected.

Another sign to look for is a “T” marking, with serifs, on the left side of the body. Early conversions did not always have this marking and it has been reported that some had it added retroactively in service. Naturally one does not want to be fooled by such a marking that might have been added after the rifle left military service to increase the sale price.

Genuine Stevens-Savage sniper rifles are rare, usually in the very low serial number range. One comes across these unfinished conversions much more frequently. When the serial number is in the 13Cxxxx range, one is pretty much guaranteed that it is an unfinished conversion.

The (T. LESS TELESCOPE) rifles are the easiest to fake as sniper rifles, since much of the conversion work had already been done by H&H i.e. cheek rest added, battle sight removed and scope pads fitted. As a result the presence, or not, of a matching No.32 scope/bracket/No.8 scope case, scooe serial number on wrist of butt and possibly a “T” marking are all features that need to be examined very closely.

The Stevens-Savage sniper rifles were fitted with No.32 Mk. I scopes. If the rifle went through Factory Thorough Repair (F.T.R.) for example, it might well receive a newer model scope in which case the old scope number would be cancelled on the butt and a new scope number added. As well, the bracket would normally have the rifle serial number stamped into the left side. One could expect such a rifle to have been well used. If it had new wood fitted, that wood would not likely have all been Stevens-Savage wood, but rather could be from any of the suppliers. The front scope pad on a well used one would likely have several stake marks per front pad screw, indicating heavy usage. The Imperial War Museum has a Stevens-Savage L42A1, presumably with the L1A1 conversion of a No.32 Mk.3 scope. They could not tell me the serial number however as they had not bothered to record that when they catalogued the rifle! Also it was on display, so it was not easily accessible.

Popping on an orphaned scope and bracket makes it look just like a sniper rifle, which is great if the set-up is cheap, but that does not mean that it ever was a real sniper rifle. Spending a lot of money on this would not be recommended unless the rifle was carefully examined and vetted by a very knowledgeable person such as Roger Payne.

---

Colin, I have to disagree with pretty much everything you have said.

A No4 with the pads fitted is a "finished" conversion, not a partially converted, not an incomplete rifle, nor is it a rejected rifle in some way.

Once the pads have been fitted, there is no difference between an Enfield/ BSA/Maltby/Long Branch/Savage or Fazakerly - fitting the pads IS the essential part of the conversion.

Adding a missmatched No32 scope to a No4T rifle which has lost it's scope is absolutely no different than adding a No32 scope to a "less telescope" No4T - one is no more correct than the other.

Neither one is correct, and neither one is "faked".

Is a "less scope" rifle less correct than a rifle which has been re-barreled, restocked, or had a repro set of rings fitted to add a mismatched scope?

And specific to Savage No4MkI(T) and No4MKI*(T) rifles, they were converted to snipers before the "T" on the sidewall of the receiver became standardized. I would suggest that probably all of them were added later in life (service or otherwise).

Quote:

---

Popping on an orphaned scope and bracket makes it look just like a sniper rifle, which is great if the set-up is cheap, but that does not mean that it ever was a real sniper rifle. Spending a lot of money on this would not be recommended unless the rifle was carefully examined and vetted by a very knowledgeable person such as Roger Payne.

---

Were the Savage No4T rifles issued without scopes for use as sniping rifles in Rhodesia real sniping rifles?

Hi guys, thanks for your responses. The world of the No. 4 Mk1/Mk1* (T) is confusing to say the least. The ideal would of course, be an all matching numbers, in the transit case with all the bits and bobs that went with it. Talk about Holy Grail! Until that one appears for sale on my horizon, I'm looking for as close to it as possible. The rifle I have found is, in my inexperienced mind a least, a genuine Savage H&H conversion. The S51 appears where expected, the scope mount pads are there, but don't appear the have had their screws staked, the cheek riser is present and the rest of the rifle has all matching serial numbers. The wood, barrel etc. is in exceptional condition. This may point to the rifle never having been 'issued' and sent straight to stores. There is no scope serial number on the 'wrist' or a 'T' on the side of the body which, as you both mentioned, some of the early rifles didn't have the 'T'. It's the complete absence of a scope number stamp which leads me to believe this to be a 'Less Scope'. I imagine this affects the price as a Savage rifle which went on to be fitted 'at the H&H workshop' with a scope is a pretty rare beast as I understand. The 'Less Scope' savage rifles being more common would be less valuable. I'm very tempted, but don't want to pay a premium for a rifle that isn't what the seller believes it to be, that is a 'completed' H&H sniper rifle.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Lee Enfield

Were the Savage No4T rifles issued without scopes for use as sniping rifles in Rhodesia real sniping rifles?

---

Some more information on the Rhodesia sniping rifles would be really nice.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Daan Kemp

Some more information on the Rhodesia sniping rifles would be really nice.

---

Late member John R https://www.milsurps.com/member.php?u=1591 told me about seeing Long Branch No4Ts "in stores" in Rhodesia.

The info regarding Savage rifles was IIRC in "The British Sniper"

Currently for sale in the UK, 13C6087.

Genuine Savage Sniper?

https://mjlmilitaria.com/section-1-n...le-303-s-n087/

Anyone have knowedge of Savage sniper OC 31. Could have info of use to you

That number is familiar...was it posted here in the past?

1941 Mk.1, sn. 0C160, six groove barrel, matching throughout "less telescope" rifle.
1942 Mk.1*, sn. 13C2927, British '45 date five groove barrel, matching throughout w/original Savage birch but mismatch sn. forend , "less telescope" rifle.

I somehow missed this thread, so here goes:

0C1064 1941 Savage No. 4 Mk 1 (T)
Circle T, several Enfield proofs and a large P on right rear of body next to bolt channel
Marked TR and FTR on left side of socket. Rifle appears to have been suncorited during overhaul
No S, T or S51 markings
No scope number on wrist but there is evidence a previous number was sanded off
'45 dated barrel
Matching numbered magazine

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Bigwagon

I somehow missed this thread, so here goes:

0C1064 1941 Savage No. 4 Mk 1 (T)
Circle T, several Enfield proofs and a large P on right rear of body next to bolt channel
Marked TR and FTR on left side of socket. Rifle appears to have been suncorited during overhaul
No S, T or S51 markings
No scope number on wrist but there is evidence a previous number was sanded off
'45 dated barrel
Matching numbered magazine

---

Very nice and similar marking to my 0C1551