Enfield No4 GROOVED Rear Handguard

[Roger Payne]

I could well be wrong Stanforth, so jump on me if that is the case, but I suspect your No4 is stocked up in stained birch, not walnut.

[Parashooter]

The No.4 appears likely to have birch woodwork. Note heavy absorption of dark stain at end-grain area of grip and of forestock just ahead of butt socket. This would not be present with unstained wood (walnut).

[browningautorifle]

The No.4 appears likely to have birch woodwork.

I think so too, the grain says so.

[Brian Dick]

Thanks for the pics. It's birch, a bog standard Savage with character!

[Stanforth]

I stand corrected.

[Stanforth]

Thanks for the pics. It's birch, a bog standard Savage with character!

Anyone got an idea why it has the round cocking piece, similar to the No.1 MKIII?
You may also notice from my photo that my No.1 MK111 is the opposite having the flat cocking piece. No I haven't swapped them over.

[Roger Payne]

The round 'button' cocking pieces were standard on No4 Trials rifles & also on early run of production rifles. If yours is later production it must just have been fitted as a replacement at some point. With the SMLE, the slab sided cocking piece was approved (IIRC) mid way through WW1, so both types are quite commonly encountered.

Hope this helps.

[browningautorifle]

fitted as a replacement at some point.

Could it have just been at the bottom of the parts bin and was pulled out later? There would be no reason not to assemble it as it was still serviceable... How do we know it's later production, did I miss it or have we seen the serial number?

[Roger Payne]

My apologies. I suppose it could be a late rifle that went out with an early component part that just happened to be lying around at the time, but I was speaking in the generality of things. Perhaps I should have said 'If yours is a late rifle IT IS QUITE LIKELY THAT it was fitted as a replacement part', rather than 'must' have been.

[browningautorifle]

It would be nice to know what the number is though.