Thought on this T ?

[ickmann]

From my limited knowledge, the No.4 Trials rifles were built from 1931 - 1933. If FTR'd, such as this one, would the FTR date be overstamped on the original date? this one is dated 1935 I had a lot of questions of the seller and asked for additional pics, but he would not answer my e-mails. First warning, I guess. Also it looks like it does not have a hinged front end piece, but the mag cut-off looks stamped..unsure from the pics. Also I do not believe that the extra sling swivel was added to the T's until after '44. Its a given that the scope is not as issued if it is a pre- H & H conversion.

British Enfield No4 MK T Sniper rifle : Bolt Action at GunBroker.com

What say you all?

thnx,
Ian

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.

[Peter Laidler]

A lot of them seem to have the last number of the date overstamped to reflect the completion date. The stencilling looks a bit too modern for me. We never use the term 'mount' it's always 'bracket'. Mount is a US term.

There's a thread going on this very forum about how original things are. If that rifle came through our workshop with a defective upper band (and the hinges used to rust out, believe me.....), guess what band would be fitted............? Yep, the first one in the box full on the shelf! And if the foresight protectors werre cracked after some clown tried to straighten them after they were bent, guess what protectors it went out with.......?

But some believe that Armourers sifted through boxes or trays of parts just to find the right maker and year. Anyway, those are my comments

[gsimmons]

Anyone notice the number on the top of the wrist doesn't match the scope number. All the other numbers look like they match.

[Roger Payne]

It's real enough. 1935's exist tho 31's seem to be commonest, followed by 33's. It's been through the mill with some parts replaced....indeed the forend & butt appear to be grubby beech (look at the grain carefully) rather than walnut. The scope is clearly a miss-match, but then again it's a genine Trials T with a genuine Mk3 scope, a genuine bracket, & genuine No8 Mk2 case. The stencilling on the chest is clearly spurious. As Peter says in the UK the 'mount' would be referred to as a bracket. Also our clever dickie has even stencilled what I take to be the cradle clamp serial numbers for good measure!

Just my 2c

ATB

[muffett.2008]

Photo's are inconclusive, would like more pics of relavant stamps and markings.

[ickmann]

Thnxs for all the comments. I was careful not use the word "original". I did read the thread and it makes perfect sense..to me at least." Genuine components" seems to be more fitting. I also agree that the stencilling has been put on at a later date and most likely by a previous civilian owner..not any military store keeper/armourer, of whom I do not put in the same category....Mr. Laidler .

I did have a bid on her, but I think I will sit this one out based on the non-responses from the seller.

Cheers.

Ian

[PrinzEugen]

Notwithstanding all the minor issues raised I think it looks absolutely great and I'd love to get my hands on one. I wouldn't have been too bothered about hearing from the vendor in some ways - buy the rifle not the story and all that... If it want for the $3,275 on the website then I reckon someone's done very well. I for one would love to get my hands on a trials sniper.

[Peter Laidler]

You've said what I was thinking at the time Herr Prinz.........

[Brian Dick]

It looks honest to me.

[jmoore]

The rifle itself is probably OK, as something that was in service until at least the mid to late fifties. As for the crate markings, not so much. Too bad somebody tried to "enhance" it. But the selling price probably reflects the results of the "extra effort".