Help with a Number 4T

[john Brandon]

Going back to the rifle itself , is it the real deal as in the receiver/body ? any thoughts or is someone forging the inspectors stamps? ( post 1, top row of pics, picture No2 going from left to right)

I'd like to know that too

[Peter Laidler]

But fitting a telescope don't make a rifle more or less accurate. It is already an accurate rifle by definition......., that's why they were deemed suitable to fit a telescopic sight to them.

When I said that in my opinion that it was a pup, I meant as a No4T - as shown and discussed. It can still be a VERY accurate bog standard No4.

Now see where it shoots with the new pad screwed firmly to the body and soft soldered (and please, NOT silver soldered as suggested by Cinders.....) and the graticle optically centred to the mechanical axis of the telescope tube and with bracket correctly fitted to the body.

That's the acid test........... But I think that I've said enough now

[Ridolpho]

Further to bigduke's comment or question, this rifle does appear to have the D6E examiners mark in the most typical position. I don't think I've ever run into a thread on the forum where a rifle with this mark has been deemed of questionable origin by the panel of experts. The two fakes I've suffered through had some S's and TR's, etc on them but lacked that seemingly all important mark. Has anyone out there run into this examiners mark convincingly faked? The other most convincing attribute (as described by Peter L., Dr. Payne, etc), the incredibly well done H&H installation of the front pad, is certainly not evident on the rifle in this post (although the original pad may have simply been removed at some point). As always, posts on "T"'s attract a lot of interest.

Ridolpho (proud owner of two genuine T's, I think).

[john Brandon]

Sorry Peter, I think some wires are crossed, forgive me if I'm wrong......

But fitting a telescope don't make a rifle more or less accurate.

But I shot that grouping on the attached picture with a scope, so at least it's "on"

Now see where it shoots with the new pad screwed firmly to the body

Again, the grouping was shot with the "different" pad fitted, to my mind, it's working
At the end of the day, I'm as pleased as punch, as I feel I have a rifle that looks the dog's doo dahs, and thanks to the advice given on here, it seems to shoot pretty good too.

I suppose when funds permit, an original scope will be on my Christmas list

Thanks again for the concise advice given by all, especially the in depth review by you Peter. I only made Tiffy in REME, but not an Armourer

[jmoore]

Going back to the rifle itself , is it the real deal as in the receiver/body ? any thoughts or is someone forging the inspectors stamps? ( post 1, top row of pics, picture No2 going from left to right)

Further to bigduke's comment or question, this rifle does appear to have the D6E examiners mark in the most typical position.

Yah, but look at those examiners' marks closely...I suspect we've a new worry.

[Badger]

To get a real good close-up look at some images.....

After you click on images to ENLARGE them, you may find they automatically size smaller in your browser's window making them harder to view. The auto sizing is your browser's way of keeping images entirely within the screen size you have set. Move your mouse pointer to the bottom center of the pic and you will see an options panel appear. There will be a small square box next to the large X, which will have a pointer arrow sticking out of it. If it's illuminated, it means the pic you're viewing can be enlarged, so click on this box and the pic will EXPAND and open to its normal size. You can then grab the pic with your mouse (hold down left mouse button) and move it around to look more closely at various parts of the photo.

Hope that helps people who didn't realize you could do that with pics ...

Regards,
Doug

[john Brandon]

I took some shots with my micro camera. They are not very good, but at least they'll give you an idea, so the debate goes on

Hope they help

[Roger Payne]

John, I don't know if you are likely to be able to make the motorcycle museum arms fair this Sunday, but if you could & were to be able to bring the rifle I'll give you my opinion FWIW. The $64,000 question is really whether it is a genuine T rifle that has been badly rebuilt or an out & out fake. I am not yet convinced one way or the other but think it may well be a real T that has been totally stripped 'naked' & then (poorly) rebuilt. Both pads are fakes, the woodwork including the cheekpiece is replacement. The S51 is clearly bogus & our tyro first stamped it the wrong way across the butt, sanded it out (but not fully) & then restamped it at least pointing the right way! You really want to take the barrelled action out of the wood, take the front pad off (if you've not already soldered the better replacement in position), & let us have more photo's, including the front lower face of the receiver to see if it possesses breeching up marks.

Cheers.

R.

[john Brandon]

I'll strip it at the weekend and take some more photos

[Ridolpho]

jmoore: I've made a quick comparison of the photos of the examiners marks on this rifle with my collection of similar images I've saved from many threads. I must say they look pretty typical at first glance. Can you say what you see that is making you suspicious? I'll understand if you don't wish to elaborate as this gets well into the realm of educating potential fake builders. Thanks.

Ridolpho