No4 mk1 T ?

[ickmann]

Could be my eyes and the darks pics, but it seems that the fore end, where wood meets metal, is not right. Too much wood and the curve drops off too soon before the metal...does that make sense?

[muffett.2008]

I'm pleased you can't, 'cause neither can I, if he's referring to the large scratch crossing the vertical mark, it's the wrong format.
Two points, this area appears to have been linished, as can be seen by the burr marks at the very left edge of the photo, the area around the buttsocket that seems heavily stippled looks like it was created by heavy sand blasting.
I think a couple of better photo's showing a slightly larger area of both sides of the receiver and buttsocket may help. We are quite able to view and increase/decrease ourselves if we have photo's that are close enough not to bloom away on high magnification.

[BushyFromOz]

I was looking at it on a HD LCD screen and it seemes to have exacerbated the image a bit. On the machine im on now, it appears to be what you say it is, a scratch.

My bad

[spitfireblue]

I did the best I could.. sorry for the wait I work weekends.

[XL39E1]

I still would claim that the original serial number is 7190 as on the barrel and on the butt, and it has somehow gained the A&1 prefix at some point in some workshop or another!

[Peter Laidler]

On the evidence presented by XL39, I'd be inclined to agree

[spitfireblue]

As was mentioned earlier, it has been around a long time. Who knows?

[Roger Payne]

Likewise, I'd agree with Peter & XL39E1. Several of the 4T's that came in the batch I bought 15 years ago had been renumbered, & many of them had had their serial numbers overstamped at some point during a refurb.

[spitfireblue]

Was there an "Ownership" stamped into the metal other than British on your renumbered guns?
I have not near the experence with these that you folks have I am sure .. However , the guns I have seen that had reasonably fresh numbers on them (possibly renumbered) the metal had very obviously been cleaned up (no trace of old number) and in the case of the bolts , an area that had been ground away. Yes, a prefix possibly added but why?? I just find it hard to believe that all the numbers on this gun weren't there from its beginning with the exception of the "A1" since none of the metal seems to have been disturbed. Unfortunately the forend number just ahead of the 7190 has been brused and is of no help...What Fun!!! Thanks agian to all that participated!!

[Peter Laidler]

Spitfire, it'd take ages to explain how numbers can be recorded wrongly but believe me, I have seen it with my own eyes. Sten guns with the serial number as M-78 (the makers code for the magazine housing), No8 rifles as CR 390 (Ordnance part number) revolver YC258 as Y -6258 and even a No4T on all the paperwork as 132083 but after a recent overhaul, it is L-32058 - not even the same number! All it takes is some dozy arms storeman looking at the wrong or misstamped number to go whinging to the technical quartermaster and........... and........... There you have it