Your thoughts on this "No. 4 T"

[Steve762]

I have the opportunity to purchase this "No. 4 T" (no transit case or scope can etc) for $2,500 USD. The seller acquired it approx 15 years ago. The cheek piece, front hand guard and front band were missing and added over time. The barrel is very good but I forgot to note if it was 4 or 6 grove. While I am looking for a shooter "T" and not a collector grade 'T" I have concerns that this rifle may not be assembled with all original "T" parts and not worth the asking price. My concerns are as follows:

-Rifle looks blued. Were rifles blued in the repair/FTR process?
-Is the scope/mount reproduction. They look to new and not like original "T" optics I have seen.
-The front pad looks like it is to far forward.
-The font used for the scope serial number on the butt stock does not look period/FTR.
-The front hand guard looks to large/oversized.
-The cross wire in the scope is wavy.

Which "T" parts, if any, on this rifle are original.

All input appreciated, Thx

Information

Warning: This is a relatively older thread This discussion is older than 360 days. Some information contained in it may no longer be current.

[browningautorifle]

Personally, I see evidence of rebluing at the barrel ring and the left side flats. Inside of the left side too, a purple hue...like the bluing a civilian would do.

[smle addict]

Well, I will go out on a limb here and say most if not all the parts are most likely original "T" parts, although it appears to be a put-together.

You said you want a shooter, and looking at the pics provided, I doubt it would shoot good at all. The wavy scope cross hairs indicate the graticule is broken on one or both ends. That will never lend itself to accuracy. Also, it looks to be wearing a no 4 mk 2 forearm (cross screw at rear). That tells me it was never properly set up, and any play in this area equals poor quality.

As far as a collector piece, I would steer clear of it. I have no problem with mis-matched T's (I have a couple of mis-matched). I think someone got to that rifle with a hand stamp-set and made the items match. The relief cut on the mount with rifle serial number added is highly suspect. I have two FTR'd 1943 T's, and they are refinished in black suncorite paint.

By no means am I an expert: I like to shoot and collect enfields, and have learned much about these rifles over the last 30 + years. I have also been burned on several enfields that were matched/built in bubbas garage, and then passed as original (CYP/NIC no5's) Live and learn...

I would go with your gut feeling. If you are having doubts, pass on it. There are others out there that both shoot well and will increase in value.

I'm sure the experts will be along shorty to add more specifics.

Best of luck

[jonh172]

If it's a mk2 conversion then it should shoot really well considering that Dalglish bracket appears to be collimated to the rifle.
The wood is certainly oversized, be a good use to find out if it's a mk2.
Scope might need an overhaul, but looks like a good shooter.

[Roger Payne]

FWIW I would agree entirely with SMLE addict. I also agree that, whilst the receiver is likely genuine, it has been refinished at some point, or at the very least the finish has been 'touched up' as BAR mentions. The milled panel with the stamped rifle number is almost certainly bogus (the milled panels are more typical of the L42 era, & even then 'new' rifle serials were generally engraved into the milled box rather than stamped). The butt may be a genuine example (the S51 looks right), but if so it would be off a later rifle - probably a BSA 1945, in view of its manufacturer, with someone having stamped the early scope serial into it. The front guard looks quite odd. Could it be a poorly made after market replacement? Agree also about the wrong Mk2 fore end.

It would be nice to get more photo's of the rifle receiver with scope & bracket removed, as well as some of the bracket & scope dismounted from the rifle.

[CINDERS]

The front top fore wood has not been sanded down or finished by the armourer if a replacement, has anyone ever seen the ENGLAND stamp applied in the upside down on the wrist, the scope needs repairing straight away so that's going to cost a good few dollars, this rifle may have seen Indian service by the very nature of the "Ishy " screw, others may assist further it just seems a few things not quite there as #3 mentioned may be a cobbled together

[Peter Laidler]

I'll cut straight and diplomatically to the quick. It's about as straight as a corkscrew. But like I say, I could be wrong

[Gil Boyd]

As presented and solely by the photos, I have to agree with Peter, the AR 6594 etchings are IMHO probably the weak point, and although the bluing does raise issues, and were not present of the time, other things don't gel together as a package to ie bracket.

It does look very much like a bitza, and if it was offered I would probably have to decline it unless it was really well priced to be able to take a gamble and sort it out.

Last year I saw several butts sold on Ebay with S51 stamped on them, so unless someone has fallen over a box hidden in an old factory unit of H&H which has been excavated, I would have to assume someone has had a stamp or stamps made!!!
But heyho you asked for opinions and that is mine for what its worth

[Roger Payne]

These things are often remediable, & I would take it on, but the crucial point is that it would have to come at the right price......

And the finish of earlier 4T's was blued. I have a few rifles dating from 1941 to 1943 that still retain their original blued finish. Brunofixing is typical of 44 onwards & suncorite on very late & FTR'ed rifles.

[Gil Boyd]

Roger,
Have to say, not seen one that blued and clean around parts that by their very nature and placing take some stick.
Thanks for that
Gil