1943 BSA No. 4 Mk 1 (T) Less Telescope- low serial number.

[corco]

Do you think this is a real No 4 mk 1 (T) Less Telescope or is it a regular No 4 Mk 1 with a (T) stock and scope added to it? I am wondering if it is a very early No 4 mk 1 (T) Less Telescope that was set aside for later conversion?

The reason why I am suspicious is:

1) Because the scope number does not match what is stamped on the rear butt stock. Did they line out the old serial number and put a new one in if the scope was replaced for a FTR? If not then the scope was replaced before 1946. This may be the reason for the FTR stamp?

2) The scope pad screws are not staked so they don't turn. This was required after 1946.

3) Did Holland and Holland stamp the S on the front right of the receiver near the wood line on the partially converted rifles?

4) Did Holland and Holland stamp the buttstock handgrip with "S51" in the partially converted rifles?

5) It looks like the 4 digit serial number was added after the Suncorite finish was applied. Is this a common procedure?

6) From what I have seen the serial number is usually has a letter in front of it. Is this always true?

7) Additionally where the No. 4 Mark 1 is in the picture the rifles serial number is supposed to be there instead or in addtion to, correct?

8) The scope mount has a different serial number on it.

From the other post it states that a partially converted 1943 is not common -

Milsurps Knowledge Library - 1942 No.4 Mk1*(T) Savage Sniper Rifle (less scope)

"It is hypothesized that these rifles were placed on the side and which ever crate was on top that bunch of rifles were put into production during slow times. Near the end of the war this supply of rifles were partially converted by the addition of scope pads, modified rear sight, and cheek piece; but they were never paired with a scope or mount. Per the records over 3,400 rifles were partially converted at the end of the war mostly comprising of 1941-42 Savage Mk I and Mk I* and 1944-45 BSA Mk I (surprisingly a 1943 dated example has appeared recently!)"

Pictures at the following link:

1943 BSA No 4 Mk 1 T Less Telescope Photos by bsdncorco | Photobucket

Thank you for your input!

Corco

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.

[Ridolpho]

corco: This very rifle was discussed a few threads ago. Concensus was it's a genuine '43 T rifle. See the thread for details. I'd personally like to see a closeup of the second Enfield examiners stamp on the right rear (above the D7E stamp) as it looks like the stamp on my own '43.

Ridolpho

[Badger]

Old thread where this same piece was already discussed...

No.4 Mk1 (T) on GunBroker

Regards,
Doug

[corco]

Ahh so it is a bitzer made up from different parts. A picture of the butt stock removed from under the butt socket would reveal most likely a different serial number and also the serial number on the barrel under the front upper hand guard may also be different. Being that the pads are not staked BUT they appear to be installed very well is what makes this a difficult one. A picture of each of the points I made above would clear things up a bit.

Thank you for your replies.

[Peter Laidler]

Don't forget corco that every time your rifle went in and out of an Armourers shop, which they did huindreds of time in their service life, where amateurs like me and others would repair them and send them out again into service, they were 'bitzers' according to many people. But to the realistic pragmatists in the world, that's all part of the weapons rich history

[Brian Dick]

Was trying to put into words what Peter just said!

Just because it has replaced parts doesn't necessarily mean it was built in someone's garage post service.

[Peter Laidler]

I have a good example of a bitzer of my own Brian. I own the No4T that was used to test fire, very probably, every telescope that needed testing for 'fastness' following a repair to the erector or grat system. A slave in effect. It had a steel rod in place of the butt so that the recoil would be harsh, no handguards or anything else superflous. The bracket had been adapted to make swopping scopes easier. Rebuilt to spec for return to Ordnance when the workshop closed down.........

A TOTAL bitzer and not worth a light. Or a total bitzer with a known documented history - or what?

People ought to know that if a sniper came in with a butt that was too long, we fitted a shorter one that was in a big box of used/serviceable woodwork. Next bloke comes in wants a long butt, he gets the old one, re-numbered with tele number to suit an off he goes with a good excuse for a morning on the range. We don't waste stuff. It just gets used again

[Brian Dick]

I'd say your rifle is priceless with paperwork. I just had a call this morning from a bloke who just bought a No.4T off one of the online sales sites. He doesn't even have it yet and wants to completely restock it and refinish the metal. I told him that I'd be very careful about changing original woodwork, especially the forend! The metal I can do but not on the cheap. In other words, if it ain't broke don't fix it. Making it pretty could be more detrimental than practical.

[Simon]

Ah yes but folks think they looks real Purdy with unblemished wood and pimp shine on the metalwork

Personally I prefer the look of a rifle with a nice patina on the metalwork and genuine wear, tear and bruising on the woodwork. I guess its like a part of the rifles life story.

[CINDERS]

Personally I prefer the look of a rifle with a nice patina on the metalwork and genuine wear, tear and bruising on the woodwork. I guess its like a part of the rifles life story.

I agree like that show on Pimp my ride for cars to do it to a sniper T or any rifle that carries genuine usage and bumps and bruises from war time is what makes them valuable by doing it up erases that most important part "PATINA"
I reckon if I rocked up to a mil shoot at the club with my T all nice anda lookin'all a pretty & shiny having be reconditioned to look brand new, once they found that out it had been tricked up they would most probably all walk away shaking their heads.

But if it was original cond and genuine aged patina then that's another st.............