Help Identify this Number 4 Mk. 2

[davidwrankin]

About 15 years ago, I had to sell an Enfield (don't even remember if it was a Mk. 1 or a No. 4 now) that my mother had gotten me (bills to pay, etc.), and I was telling number one son this year that I'd like another if I could find one that wasn't pulling a king's ransom. Before asking me, and not knowing anything about RTI's reputation, he had a "A condition" No. 4 Mk. 1 headed to the local gunstore.

I got it in, and RTI had a few things wrong. They said that the guns were WW2 surplus No 4 Mk 1s that were shipped to Ethiopia. However, I had a No 4 Mk 2 (confirmed when I pulled the trigger guard with the trigger attached). As you can see from the pictures, the gun looks like it has had most marking stripped. The "No 4 Mk 2" looks almost handmade. The one stamp I trust the most is the barrel stamp, and as the picture shows, it says "1953". Definitely not WW2 surplus.

Obviously someone reconditioned it enough to re-stamp the serial number onto the magazine. All the serial numbers still on the gun match (including the bolt). I also cleaned a ton of copper and powder out of the barrel, so it's been shot a bunch. The wood is Savage marked. I don't think it's a Khyber Pass clone; if it were I would think it'd have more marks of lower quality.

I have headspaced the bolt, and a SAAMI Field (.072) gauge won't let the bolt close. The barrel has no bulges, signs of cracking or stress, etc. The barrel looks clean and grooving is very good (the bullet throat and barrel end are both a bit deeper than I'd like, but not worn out by any stretch). I'm going to fasten it to a shooting rest and rope-fire a couple of Remington rounds to test it out before putting my head near the bolt.

I have a theory about the origin, but before I pose my uninformed ideas, I'll pose the following questions to the forum:
1> Where do you think this gun came from?
2> Is there a reason to not fire this gun, based on the pictures and evidence above, or the answer to 1 above?

(Sorry to not have pictures of the bolt, but it looks bog-standard, and the serial number matches the "font" and layout of the other serial numbers.)

Attachment 110202Attachment 110203Attachment 110204Attachment 110205Attachment 110206Attachment 110207Attachment 110208Attachment 110209Attachment 110211Attachment 110212Attachment 110213Attachment 110214Attachment 110215

This is the remains of the butt stock mark, but I need to get some tracing paper and charcoal and see if I can trace it:
Attachment 110210

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.

[Alan de Enfield]

It certainly has had an interesting history and appears to have parts from all the major manufacturers

The barrel was fitted in 1953 by BSA
The action looks to be a Fazakerley
It has Savage (USA) parts
And some other metal parts made by Metal Box Ltd (London)

There have been 100's of posts about these RTI rifles and the vast majority are 'not very complimentary' varying from unsafe, to major parts missing to way, way overpriced for what they are.
Yours doesn't look 'too bad'

[GeeRam]

And some other metal parts made by Metal Box Ltd (London)

My late mother used to work there.

[30Three]

You might want to unblock the gas release hole, as seen in the first photo. Could this be an FTR to mk2 spec trigger? The side of the receiver appears to have been machined to remove markings at the front lefthand side.

[SpikeDD]

It has all the looks of a post war BSA FTR. It wouldn't have been a Mk.2, but rather a Mk.1/2 or 1/3. Someone other than the arsenal put those marks on it. In photo 3, you can see the remnants of the electro penciled " F.T.R. 19...53 most likely. These are signature BSA FTR markings.

[Maxwell Smart]

BSA FTR

[davidwrankin]

Thanks for the replies. Sorry about not replying sooner, been fighting a stomach virus (fortunately NOT the beer-named virus...) for the last few days.

You might want to unblock the gas release hole, as seen in the first photo.

Sorry, pictures are from a week or two back, wasn't done cleaning it then. It's open now. Thanks for the warning.

BSA FTR

Could this be an FTR to mk2 spec trigger? The side of the receiver appears to have been machined to remove markings at the front lefthand side.

It has all the looks of a post war BSA FTR. It wouldn't have been a Mk.2, but rather a Mk.1/2 or 1/3. Someone other than the arsenal put those marks on it. In photo 3, you can see the remnants of the electro penciled " F.T.R. 19...53 most likely. These are signature BSA FTR markings.

I thought I had a clear picture of the right side of the receiver, but I didn't put it in (no remains of interesting markings, basically blank). It's got the push-button bolt release, so it's not a 1/3.

Is there an easy way to identify the difference between a Mk 1/2 receiver and a Mk 2 receiver? Looking closer, picture 4 has a decent shot at the left side of the trigger pin and picture 9 has a picture of the right side of the trigger pin. As you can see, it's been re-blacked, so it's hard to tell what materials are involved. If I can do an easy test (that's not too destructive on the finish) to determine materials, I don't mind doing so.

Can we trust the serial number to be a factory number? So far, I'm only seeing 2 manufacturers who used Axxxx as a standalone range. One is the POF for their parts guns, but Axxxx appears to be a 1952 range, so that doesn't seem to fit. If Axxxx is a BSA Shirley number, then that would point to my rifle as being an early Shirley Mk.1 that was then converted (probably in 53) to a 1/2.

Still leaves how the markings got stripped (and the gun re-blacked) and how the rifle got to Ethiopia a mystery. I'm leaning towards a Pakistan -> India -> Ethiopia path myself, but did India ever strip No. 4 markings and then not come back and remark them themselves?

Can we learn anything from the "No. 4 Mk 2" label? It looks hand-lettered to me, but if it matches some other known agents' stamps, that would be interesting.

Thanks,
David

[Surpmil]

To answer directly: I can't see any reason it wouldn't be safe to shoot from what you have told and shown us.

There may be stamps on the rear face of the action that would tell us conclusively who made the receiver ("body" in British parlance.) Speaking of terminology, is "bog-standard" a phrase used down KY way; I always thought that was another British term?

I don't ever remember seeing the Mk2 designation stamped into the receiver wall like that but, maybe others here have?

I thought at first that the SN was probably changed, but I think I can see traces of two "8"s there just to the left of the stamps, so probably just a case of electro-pencilled markings being over-struck to make them more durable, as was done in service at times.

If the original SN is A1848 that suggests a very early receiver. There are some folks here who could say more about that.

The fact that it was found in good enough condition for conversion in 195_ suggests it didn't have too hard a war.

[davidwrankin]

Speaking of terminology, is "bog-standard" a phrase used down KY way; I always thought that was another British term?

I am Kentucky born and bred, but I have loved British TV shows since I was old enough to find Mystery on PBS myself. (Last of the Summer Wine is getting copied from legal Region 2 DVDs to my media server as we speak.) I accidentally catch myself using British English slang and spelling without meaning to.

Milady was also from Eastern Kentucky, they occasionally kept older English sayings going (and she was also a British TV junkie, more than I am), so might have picked it up from her too.

Back to the gun. I decided that, rather than post more pictures, I'd throw together a quick YouTube tear-down and video of every marking still on the gun. I've posted it at , and we'll see if I can embed it:



The video makes it a lot clearer that someone went to a lot of effort to clear off all the obvious armory markings. Hopefully what is left is enough to hazard a guess, at least.

I have to admit, No. 1 Son's RTI purchase has been interesting, at the very least. I still think he overpaid for the condition this gun was in (and the amount of crap (literal and figurative) I cleaned off it....), but trying to solve this mystery has been fun.

It also inspired me to order a "pigsticker", Aussie stripper clips, and WW1/WW2 surplus ammo pouches to make up a collection.

[Giove]

In my opinion the S.N. was changed in India. I have an Indian sniper with a S.N. replaced completely similar to this.

Tha stamp on the butt-stock (508 in the circle) identifies an Indian depot.