#4 trials "sniper"

[Surpmil]

Non-original parts:
1. bolt
2. trigger guard
3. safety lever
4. magazine
5. trigger
6. backsight (the plunger has been thinned significantly so as to clear the shallower recess. The trials rifles were all spring and ball - no plunger, and as this is not the original sight, but a regular No4 one, the plunger would not fit in it's normal state. The sight has been ground to match as well by the look of it.)
7. cutoff
8. foresight protector and probably foresight block.
9. barrel (probably a 1950s Fazakerly)
10. butt and forend.

The scope is a bit of a mystery I must say. I had about 30 No32 MkIs I picked up in the UK in 1986/87 in various states of disrepair and all had the usual markings on them. If those were the ones you refer to Warren, this ain't one of them. I polished a few that were smooth enough to do so and had them reblued by J.P. who passed on those spare brass eyeshades to you at the time. Anyone who saw one of those tubes would know immediately they had been reblued! Most were too pitted to polish and one would have to be pretty stupid to polish off the markings in an effort to get a smooth tube when the correct finish for a rebuild was phosphate and Suncorite! In the end, that is what most of them got, but that was after they went back to the UK. I certainly never polished the markings off any. Did someone else have a stash of No32s out here?

Polishing the tubes would thin the markings somewhat, especially on W. Watson tubes which had shallow markings, but to completely erase them you would have needed to remove a lot of material. That would show up with a vernier, if not just by eye.

I see no signs that this tube has been polished; look at the wear and colour on the bluing, it corresponds exactly to the colour and wear patterns you would expect and those on the rest of the tube.

There is a problem though: if it were an early tube that went unmarked for some reason, the fitting of the drum plates or covers would be better IMO: notice the misalignment of the drum plates or covers. It was noticeable on those scopes I had that the earlier scopes had better fitting and finishing than the later ones. You could also see just from that small sample, the slight differences in manufacture: KL for example had a particular style of knurling on the drums and solder-filled markings thereon. W. Watson beveled the knurled edges more and had rounded corners on the drum plates like these. HBMCo. had a finer convex knurl and sharper corners on the drums and plates etc. etc. Same with the locking segment covers and screws: minor differences in manufacture and screws used etc.

Notice the different diameter locating pins on the drum plates: someone has grafted on one of the drums from a spare. Certain makers used a thick pin and certain ones used thin pins: they didn't mix. Could just be a service repair of course.

The drum block or turret is too rough cast or finished to be REL, nor do the details of the casting correspond, so it must be a UK made tube. My recollection is that KL had similar rough castings. HBMCo. and W. Watson smoothed theirs, at least those I've seen.

Would a scope have been accepted for service without markings? Seems doubtful. It should at least have some sort of acceptance mark or stamp; normally the Broad Arrow.

Overall the rifle has been massaged: the wrong cut off, the beech butt with marking disc carefully inlet LOL. The lack of a cheekrest...yes, someone has gone to some trouble!

Pads are right IMO, unstaked just means left UK service early on if I remember my reading correctly.

The bracket is close to being as smooth as an early Rose Bros. (going from the vast sample of two I had), but the rear cap is obviously a replacement. The gaps around the screw heads suggest they may not be tapered or in tapered holes.

If it was an ex-Indian rifle you'd expect the Royal Cypher to be ground off and the various other abuses we're used to seeing.

What of the Case, No.8 markings? Anyone?

Probably just another sporterized No4(T) that was carefully "restored" to as close as original as the owner knew or could get.

The scope is a mystery though!

Bigduke, the RNWMP LEC is a nice one, but sadly a mismatching bolt. I saw it at a local gunshow last Sunday. Asking was 2.5G CAN.