Opinions on this No4, TR marked

[Lee Enfield]

'43 BSA's were originally blued.

Brunofixing does not appear to have started until 1944.

The "S" is only present on guns which did not need to have a new MkI/I rear sight fitted.

If your rifle had a new butt stock fitted it would not have an S51, nor likely the other numbers.

Your rifle looks legit to me.

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.

[Gil Boyd]

I am no expert.............but the scope pad screws are missing the engineers strikes at each screw head cutting. and this alone would have made me look even closer at the engineering used to fit the pads, and also the letters like TR and their consistency etc.
Also with no S on the RHS of the action would also have made me look closer.

The S51 and the number stamp on the woodwork should be there, and even if the butt was replaced, you would have expected the engineer doing the replacing to re stamp it, if in fact the rifle was being correctly attributed to sniper work and passed by H&H for that purpose matched with the scope.

If you got it for the right money, and it shoots well, crack on, it would need closer examination to prove one way or the other, but I am sure there are others on here that will correct me.

[Alan de Enfield]

[QUOTE=Gil9713;268103
............The S51 and the number stamp on the woodwork should be there, and even if the butt was replaced, you would have expected the engineer doing the replacing to re stamp it, ...............
.[/QUOTE]

No doubt it would have originally had the relevant markings on the Butt - however - if it was replaced 'in the field' by an amourer (maybe the Sniper it was issued to had long, or short, arms and needed a different sized Butt) I doubt the armourer would have gone to the trouble to 'fake' the S51 marking

[Ridolpho]

smle addict: I'm far from an expert but, for what it's worth, the fit of the front pad to the body seems a bit on the sloppy side. Having reviewed very bit of info on the forum reagrding T's, the ones Roger, Peter, et al verify usually have beautifully fit pads. A '43 fake that they analyzed for me a while back had a similar poorly fitting front pad which I found came off rather easily exposing, believe it or not, Maltby FTR markings beneath and certainly no machined flat. You may not wish to attempt to remove yours but, as Roger suggests, look hard for evidence of the machining. As to the D6E mark, my current '43 has it on the right side, above the 7E examiners mark and to find it I had to use a little solvent to remove a bit of the thick black paint- it was virtually invisible previously. I hope the experts support your rifles veracity- I think these old well used and rough looking ones are the best.

Ridolpho