#4 trials "sniper"

[boltaction]

I used to own that RNWMP carbine many years ago. It's a nice one, but I've advised the seller for the estate that it is likely not RNWMP. There is some variation, but for the most part, the Ross and Enfield Rifles/carbines owned by the RNWMP were stamped with an oval stamp, not a crescent shape. This one has a crescent shaped mark, which is not described in Phillips' book and was as far as I recall only used on the Winchesters, which were of course NWMP. The "Royal" designation was added after their time. There is no stippling around the edges of the stamp. The carbine has had its stock lightly sanded and a coat of varnish put on, and that was another issue with the stamp. The Canadian Forces' M&D stamp and the rack number are rather faint, but the RNWMP stamp is deeper and newer. Since the stamps, if correct, would have been applied around the same time, they should all be equally faint. There is a faint other mark visible. IMO, the carbine may well have been in the Mounted Police service, based on the number stamped on the butt, but it has been massaged; I believe the RNWMP stamp is a fake. Others may disagree, but there are a lot of MP fakes out there. It is a sweet little carbine, mismatch bolt but otherwise complete and in nice shape. I have three, so didn't want it back even with a lower price, but if I didn't have one, I would buy it as a carbine, not as an RNWMP item. I believe the seller is going to lower the price.

I thought I would include a few pictures of the LEC carbine including the buttstock for interest sake, so others can see what I am referring to. That stamp also has the appearance of being doublestruck. Nice little carbine though and would probably shoot very nicely.

The last three photos are of the RNWMP stamp on the butts of my Ross carbine and my LEC carbine. You can see that the stamp on the LEC is somewhat oval, while the one applied to the Ross is circular. Both are correct, and have a fine line of stippling around the edges which has not been accurately replicated on fake stamps. The LEC's stamps are faint because it too has been varnished at some point, but it can be seen that the RNWMP and M&D stamps are equally faint. Actually, the M&D stamp is a little deeper so shows up better. Must have been given a better whack with the hammer when being applied.

Attachment 42323Attachment 42335Attachment 42334Attachment 42333Attachment 42332Attachment 42331Attachment 42327Attachment 42324Attachment 42338Attachment 42336Attachment 42337

[boltaction]

I picked the rifle up this weekend, and have taken it apart. Here are some photos of everything.
The buttstock is definitely a replacement--no screws for pads, no serial number on the inner socket. The picture I took of its only mark didn't turn out, so will redo it, but it was an SZ.

The front wood is un-numbered, but does appear to be an original low cut one for a cut-off, or if it isn't, it was quite well done quite a long time ago as the edges are worn as smooth as the rest of the wood.

The front sight ears are just standard, and not marked at all, and as I stated in my original post, very blue compared to the metal finish on the wood.

The barrel is a replacement, but I am not certain about the date of it.

The receiver is a nice original 1931 with quite crisp markings on it, but not stamped with a T. The scope pads are original as well, with an Enfield proof on the top of the front one. The cutoff is an early pattern one not later stamped so may be a replacement. The rearsight looks correct to my eye, but utilizes a standard plunger underneath it, so not sure if that is right or not.

The bolt is a replacement--no number, solid bolt handle. The cocking piece is a correct button style but interestingly is an early Long Branch one from a Mk I.

The scope seems to be in an original mount, I think, but the scope itself is completely unmarked. I've included lots of pictures of it, so those who are more familiar with these than I am can comment.

Any questions, or anything anyone wants closer pictures of, let me know.

Thanks.

Ed

Attachment 42708Attachment 42709Attachment 42710Attachment 42711Attachment 42712Attachment 42713Attachment 42714Attachment 42715Attachment 42716Attachment 42717Attachment 42718Attachment 42719Attachment 42720Attachment 42721Attachment 42722Attachment 42723Attachment 42724Attachment 42725Attachment 42726Attachment 42727Attachment 42728Attachment 42729Attachment 42730Attachment 42731Attachment 42732Attachment 42733Attachment 42734Attachment 42735Attachment 42736Attachment 42737Attachment 42738Attachment 42739Attachment 42740Attachment 42741Attachment 42742Attachment 42743Attachment 42744Attachment 42745Attachment 42746Attachment 42747Attachment 42748Attachment 42749Attachment 42750Attachment 42751Attachment 42752Attachment 42753Attachment 42754Attachment 42755Attachment 42756Attachment 42757

[boltaction]

of the trigger guard.

Attachment 42759Attachment 42758

[Roger Payne]

Thanks Bolt Action. It is a genuine 31 Trials T alright, but it has been extensively through the mill & pretty much all of the parts on it are replacements - many from Fazackerly, including the barrel & trigger guard. Having said that, the most important bit - the body with the pads on - is correct. Well loved, but correct! The rear sight is a Singer made (SM = Singer Manufacturing) replacement I'm afraid. You can see where the plunger has been messed about with a bit in order to make it fit; a common problem encountered when trying to restore one of these rifles. The F56 on your barrel is the place & date of manufacture.

Enjoy it!

ATB.

[boltaction]

Thanks for the information, Roger. What do you make of the scope? I don't think I'm going to do anything too much with the rifle, aside from maybe getting a replacement cheekpiece and putting it on the butt so that the height is correct for shooting. I'm happy to have an original trials #4, although I probably paid too much for it. Hard to know I guess when some of the replacement parts were put on, but not a biggie. I'm going to get it checked out for headspacing and such, and then see how it shoots.

Cheers

Ed

[Roger Payne]

Thx BA. I must confess I'm less sure about the scope. It's clearly a run of production item that has either lost its markings or for some other reason was not marked. I know from previous comments in this thread that both Surpmil & Warren are aware of a history of some unmarked scopes turning up in Canada some years ago & I really can't comment on this, but in my experience it is far more likely that the scope is a standard Mk1 that has been skimmed rather than something very rare or 'experimental' that was never marked. If so, I'd admit it doesn't look to have been done recently, but depending on the storage conditions, something done 30 years ago can soon become difficult to tell from something done 70 years ago. You could get hold of a micrometer & drop it across the tube. Oh I also forgot to mention that the bracket is also a genuine (refinished) Rose Brothers example & you can indeed still see the 'JG' examiner's mark on the central 'strut'. The rear top cradle clamp is, IMHO, a 'home made' replacement, or at least, a very heavily worked over piece from another bracket. Note due to the heavy filing or linishing that there is some encroachment into the tapers for the cradle screws. Even so, you have a pretty rare rifle. Maybe some fellow forummers North of the parallel can comment on the scope?

ATB

[Peter Laidler]

My honest opinion of the scope, looking at the file marks across it is that, yep........, the markings been filed clean by a butcher as a quick micrometer check will show! You can occasionally see the original serial number of the scope on the OG lens housing or scratched into the stop-down shutter of the erector cell

[boltaction]

Thanks Peter:
Presumably that would have been done because the scope was being "liberated" out of service on a dark and stormy night? Maybe one of the scopes someone else (was it Warren?) was referring to which were allegedly removed from sniper T's being sent for destruction? Does anyone have the correct micrometer measurements for a Mk I scope so I can compare?

Thx

Ed

[Peter Laidler]

The outside diameter of the No32 tube is an easy one to remember. Exactly 1"

Interesting question as to why the number has been obliterated. I never understand why one would obliterate a serial number because it's just a sure-fire way of saying that I have got some stolen property! And anyone stealing a telescope 'in service' would really be taking a HUGE chance because the telescope, being serially numbered to the rifle AND of itself AND being a what we call WOCS (War Office Controlled Stores) item is highly controlled and all that goes with it. Loose one and the proverbial would hit the fan before you could.......... anyway! Then there would follow a what we call a Board of Enquiry as the start of the Army judicial process. To learn about that, something that I experienced at first hand, read the article about the Centurion Tank titled 'Revenge, extracted in full'

But, that being said, we did have a scope and bracket appear in our Armourers shop one day, found on the 600 yard firing point, presumably left by the snipers the day or week before. Only some judicious book cooking can cover a loss like that and if the long serving Quartermaster would cook the books to cover such a loss, then......... Anyway, I never came across one!

[Surpmil]

The rear "cradle cap" (isn't that a childhood disease? ;-) is a replacement.

File marks on the tube are obvious as Peter pointed out, sad but true. From those beveled screws on the "cover, segment, locking, cell, erector" or words to that effect, and the rough casting I would bet this was a KL scope, before it met the mill bastard, so to speak. The knurling on the drums is right for them, despite the lack of solder in the numbers.

The 1956 Faz barrel probably came from the same rifle that donated the trigger guard and sear. Could be one of those UF56 rifles that were sold by Parker Hale in the 1960s. Quite a few of them seem to have turned up out here. The sale mark is not normally seen on Mk2s AFAIK.

The Long Branch MkI cocking piece is worth a few bucks now.

Forend looks right and UK production(?) Handguards are LB obviously, the rear one at least.

The fitting of the pads looks a tad rougher than other trials "T"s with lower serial numbers: file marks on the top of the front pad, slightly off-center threaded hole in front pad.

The marks made by the shell mill cutter on the front pad are interesting. The mating surface on the front pad needs to have its edges carefully dressed to remove the burrs that have developed around the outside edge.

The edges of the receiver underneath look rougher and less well dressed than one normally sees on trials No4s also.

The setting pointer on the elevation drum is a nasty bodge compared to most others.

I can't be as sure as I thought I was in my previous post about the originality of one of the drums to the scope. Could be either way.