Building a No.4 Mk1 T clone, mk.1* or no *?

[jonh172]

I'm in the preliminary stages of building a mk1T and need a little info.

If this subject has been covered please let me know where to find it.

I want this rifle to be as "correct" as possible so, is it more correct to use a No.4mk1 or a No.4mk1* action?
Or does it depend on what MK scope I get?
Or does it just not matter at all?

Before anyone panics, I am NOT ruining anything original or collectable. I have a lead on both models with cut down, shot out barrels and a new barrel on the way for the build. I'm debating between a 1943 Longbranch no.4mk1* or a faintly marked No.4mk1.

I am just looking for authenticity.... as authentic as possible less the new barrel of course....

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.

[vintage hunter]

I want this rifle to be as "correct" as possible so, is it more correct to use a No.4mk1 or a No.4mk1* action?

Either one would be correct. Most? of the Savage and Long Branch conversions were Mk.1*'s.

[jonh172]

Either one would be correct. Most? of the Savage and Long Branch conversions were Mk.1*'s.

Thank you for the quick reply!

Now, which would be less of a shame to drill the holes in?

[CINDERS]

Guess it goes on who built the weapon originally

[Alan de Enfield]

By far, the majority of 4T's were BSA Mk1's (no *)
Very few Savage were used and the majority of those supplied for conversion never actually made it to full 4T status, ending up as "scopeless 4T" and stored away.

Peter Laidlers book will give you 'chapter & verse' on the 'why' and how many of each type were manufactured.

[jonh172]

By far, the majority of 4T's were BSA Mk1's (no *)
Very few Savage were used and the majority of those supplied for conversion never actually made it to full 4T status, ending up as "scopeless 4T" and stored away.

Peter Laidlers book will give you 'chapter & verse' on the 'why' and how many of each type were manufactured.

Excellent thank you! I'll snag the no *.

[Maxwell Smart]

Were any Fazakerley's converted?

[Peter Laidler]

Fazakerley......... er....., yes and no! Not according to the official records go - if there is such a thing - but it would appear from samples shown on this site that some early Fazakerley ASSEMBLED rifles using Enfield parts might have been converted at Enfield. Same goes for very early Maltby No4's. However, these rifles were a bit of a nightmare and could only be converted as individual rifles due to tolerancing issues

But once BSA got into full swing their production and tolerances were constant so H&H could production-line the whole conversion process

[tiriaq]

Personally, I would not use a respectable as-issued rifle for such a project. I do have a rifle that would be ideal for the purpose. Bought a stripped receiver from Numrich, years ago. '42 Long Branch. Assembled a rifle using decent parts, as they presented themselves. Nice looking rifle, good shooter. Haven't obtained the scope and mount to finish the project.

[jonh172]

Personally, I would not use a respectable as-issued rifle for such a project. I do have a rifle that would be ideal for the purpose. Bought a stripped receiver from Numrich, years ago. '42 Long Branch. Assembled a rifle using decent parts, as they presented themselves. Nice looking rifle, good shooter. Haven't obtained the scope and mount to finish the project.

I stated in my first post that I am not, I'm buying a sportered, cut down shot out barreled action.