No. 4 Mk.II "Sniper"

[trooper554877]

Is there something wrong with my eyes or is that scope bent down behind the rear mount?

they are painted on muff!
cheers
Ned
Woof Woof

[Richard in NY]

It's had a rather more professional refurb than most Indian rifles I've seen!

Peter Laidler wrote: "And that telescope certainly looks like it's been through a more careful workshop than the usual Indian Army instrument workshop judging from some of their work that I've seen"

Roger and Peter:

You gentlemen are known to all as experts on the No.4 sniper rifles and the No.32 scopes, so your opinion of this piece would be greatly appreciated.

Other than perhaps reflecting a nicer refurbishment than you would expect coming from India/RFI, is there anything that strikes you as "wrong"? In your opinion, is this a true and correct original rig? Or a fake?

The last time I posted photos of this sniper was back around 2001 on the old Gun & Knife Enfield Forum. I don't remember the responses I received other than that of our Aussie friend, "Vulch" who stated that the rifle could not possibly be "real". I don't remember the basis of his disapproval.

In my opinion, then and now, this is a real, authentic Indian sniper. Not something cobbled together by a collector or shooter here in the States or elsewhere. The purchase price close to 20 years ago was about $500, which if I recall correctly was about how much a nice No.32 scope and mount assembly sold for at that time. There wasn't much of a profit to be made if fakery was at play.

It goes without saying that I very much want this piece to be "real", but I do not believe I am engaging in unsupported, wishful thinking. Holding this rifle in hand, and trying my very best to be objective, and unswayed by my desires, I truly believe it's a good piece.

Do you agree or are you going to shatter my hopes and illusions?

Whether it's good news or bad, thanks for your help!

[Roger Payne]

Hi Richard,
The rifle looks good enough to me. The FR 1962 etc looks pretty typical of the rigs I've seen. I always like to have a look at rifle bodies without the scopes on so as to get a good view of the pads, but even so I suspect yours is right enough. It is a little atypical in that it doesn't appear to have the proverbial 'Ishy screw' & the general finish of both the rifle & scope are rather better than most. However I think it's real enough....

Won't be in a position to reply to any posts till after the weekend now as am off 'over there' again.

ATB to one & all.

[Peter Laidler]

There's not enough detail to tell from the photos except that it's been re-finished somewhere - but not India. But like Roger says, it looks original enough. And I'd rather have a Mk1/2 than a Mk1 any day

[Richard in NY]

There's not enough detail to tell from the photos except that it's been re-finished somewhere - but not India. But like Roger says, it looks original enough. And I'd rather have a Mk1/2 than a Mk1 any day

Peter:

Thanks for your opinion! When you say it's been refinished somewhere, do you mean by a private individual owner/hobbyist? Or by some nation/military force?

[Peter Laidler]

It looks exactly like it's been fine bead blasted and put through the phosphating tank. So it was very probably by some comnmercial outfit. If it was UK Military, we'd send it on through the paint bay then hard bake it but the only person in the US who can hard bake in sunkorite is BDL as I understand it