Whitaker Special's

My apologies for returning to a subject that has been covered before but I have been asked to publish the current number of surviving Whitaker Special's out of the 117 that Bert Whitaker built.

Subtracting any that have been rebuilt as No.4T's, (three that I'm aware of but I suspect around 6 or 7) the current number of survivors on my register is 38.

Incidentally I found one of the two rifles that Bert owned nestling in the NRA museum at Bisley, unbeknown to the current curator!

Anymore out there that I should know about?

Have you got this one Mick?

https://www.highwoodclassicarms.co.u...le/targetj.htm

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Strangely Brown

Subtracting any that have been rebuilt as No.4T's, (three that I'm aware of but I suspect around 6 or 7) the current number of survivors on my register is 38.

---

I wasn't aware that they could be converted back to 4Ts as I always understood that Bert's conversion involved machining off the butt socket?

On the one shown at "Highwoods"; I cannot see any remnants of the "T" scope mounts. Were they all from No4 T's or are some made from standard rifles?
Nice target rifle for that price though!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by desperatedan

I wasn't aware that they could be converted back to 4Ts as I always understood that Bert's conversion involved machining off the butt socket?

---

It did Dan; my assumption is that the butt sockets came from donor rifles.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Roy W

Have you got this one Mick?

https://www.highwoodclassicarms.co.u...le/targetj.htm

---

Thanks Roy I appear to have that one on the register already; looks a very nice example!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by 30Three

On the one shown at "Highwoods"; I cannot see any remnants of the "T" scope mounts. Were they all from No4 T's or are some made from standard rifles?
Nice target rifle for that price though!

---

They were a mix; I suspect an "ex sniper" was bound to raise more interest than a bog standard No.4 and talking to those who actually knew Bert Whitaker the image of a good "salesman" does comes across at times!

One of his rifles in the NRA museum belonged to Stuart Armour who was a famous Bisley shot and ex Royal Marine. Stuart gave a .303 (PF 405569) to Bert for conversion. The serial number is one in a block of numbers intended for the Admiralty (PF405513 - PF405712) so you have to wonder if Stuart Armour got it on the cheap from the military system!
There's a story about Stuart Armour shooting in the Imperial one year with his dutiful wife Barbara sat behind him, Armour fired his first shot and the target in the next lane came down and up again signalling a bull. There was restrained silence until Barbara's voice could be heard saying, you silly bugger!

DD, I've done a little refinishing work on one of the retro-converted rifles. A Faz butt socket had been brazed back on to the BSA Shirley body! Once suncorited it looked fine & functioned well, too. I'm presuming the locking lug recess/resistance shoulder had been re-heat treated, or at least hardness tested. Unfortunately I no longer have the serial number.

Thanks Roger. I did wonder how they'd get the strength back when re-attaching a butt socket. V. helpful.

Very interesting. I was about ask for some pics below the woodline, then the search function came through.
https://www.milsurps.com/showthread....l=1#post347595
Am I wrong, or does it look like the entire recoil is supported by just that rear lip of the inletting, behind the dovetail? How does that work? Fascinating.

I have a Whitaker Special # 064, located in Canada. Built on a T action.

A few years ago I got to fondle a complete canaian J-5550 rifle and a spare action.

Interesting concept.

However the notion of transferring the substantial .303 recoil from a VERY lightweight barreled action to the toothpick-like stock, via minuscule stubs at the rear of the receiver seemed a bit ambitious.

The Whitaker special as shown has a LOT more metal mass to absorb recoil, but it looks to have even LESS abutment area to transfer the recoil shove into the wood.

Furthermore, in a "rear-locking" action such as a No4, rumour has it that they flex and stretch on every shot; thus flogging the daylights out of the stock. Therefore, the BEST way to deal with this shoving and wobbling is as per millions of PROPER Lee Enfields; via the body ferrule / "socket".

it might be an interesting experiment to rig a No4 or No5 with an under-barrel hanger like the Ruger No1, as an aid to stabilizing the fore-end. Make it from square-section material and tinker with the method of fixing to the actual fore-end.

Another project tacked onto an already LONG list?