No. 4 "Singer" sights revisited

[Roger Payne]

It's a can of worms isn't it?!?

I suspect the only way a lot of these questions will ever get answered definitively is if more documentation turns up at some point in the future. But it doesn't stop us from musing does it........?

The early production Savage rifles in the UK would certainly have fitted the bill for conversion, & the fact that they were already equipped with Mk1 rear sights would have been useful. I had always just assumed that prior to the stipulation that H&H would only take BSA rifles, decided upon not long after they took over conversion from RSAF, rifles of all manufacturers would have been considered eligible for conversion, so long as they satisfied accuracy requirements (& were so converted). This stance fits in with the now generally accepted view that a few Fazakerley rifles were also converted, but doesn't explain the gaps in places, such as why do we not see BSA 42 & Maltby 42 conversions, but we do see Savage rifles dated both 41 & 42? Perhaps the explanation could be that the 42 BSA's & 42 Maltby's were all fitted with battle sights & at that stage the relaxation to permit them to be converted had not been passed? As mentioned above, both the 41 & 42 dated Savage rifles all came across the Atlantic already sporting Mk1 sights........got converted along with B41 & ROFM 41 rifles (& a few ROF (F) 41 rifles that were already put aside for this purpose (& which were possessed of Mk1 rear sights)).........

Just maybe we don't see 4 T's built on 42 dated UK produced No4's because they were all fitted with battle sights at this time..........plus, with the slow take off of 4T conversion, there was probably more than enough rifles from 41 production to go around...?????