No. 4 T Sniper. Opinions please

[mdarnell19]

So another question, I posted this on gunboards and a few members have stated that the mag and mount were numbered post war because mags were not numbered during WWII. Is this true?

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.

[Lee Enfield]

So another question, I posted this on gunboards and a few members have stated that the mag and mount were numbered post war because mags were not numbered during WWII. Is this true?

Long Branch No4 T snipers appear to have had the Rings (partially at least) numbered right from "day 1".

My understanding is that the instruction to number the rings of British No4 T rifles was issued in 1946 or '47, but the British "List of Changes" and contract instructions are well known for issuing retroactive instructions.

My belief, based on observation and limited experience is that by mid- 1944 H&H was numbering rings (on their own hook) and the ACI/List of Changes instruction to do so was issued retroactively post war.

Does anyone (Roger/Lance/Rob ??) Have a late MkII, MkII/I or Mk3 scope in its original bracket which is not numbered?

As to the magazines, most (but not all) No4T mags (which appear to be original to the gun) which I've observed are numbered - but again, this is a replaceable part.

[Alan de Enfield]

As to the magazines, most (but not all) No4T mags (which appear to be original to the gun) which I've observed are numbered - but again, this is a replaceable part.

I have not see as many 4T's as other folk, but I guess that all of them have lost their magazines over the years - I have never seen one with a numbered magazine.

Looking at the OP's pictures I would question the possibility of an armourer doing such a poor job of alignment, and, using 2 or 3 different sized / font number punches.

I have no doubt that the rifle is all correct, but I have reservations about the originality of the magazine.