Savage No.4 (t)

[Alan de Enfield]

There are folks with much more experience than I, but for me there are a couple of alarm bells :

1) Rebarreled - when and by whom ?
2) Regulated by Fultons. (Fultons have 'built' No4Ts to order).
3) Peter Laidler has previously said a No3 bolt head would not have been accepted on a 4T by a military armourer.

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.

[Micheal Doyne]

Attachment 112374Attachment 112375Attachment 112376Attachment 112377Attachment 112378

[Micheal Doyne]

There are folks with much more experience than I, but for me there are a couple of alarm bells :

1) Rebarreled - when and by whom ?
2) Regulated by Fultons. (Fultons have 'built' No4Ts to order).
3) Peter Laidler has previously said a No3 bolt head would not have been accepted on a 4T by a military armourer.

1) Rebarreled - when and by whom (assumed to be if it is a re barrel by fultons at regulation)
2) yes I am concered about that
3) Yes, agreed not at conversion, but might one not have been fitted in service later? or is that a definate out of service job, if so likely by Fulton agian

[Alan de Enfield]

1) Rebarreled - when and by whom (assumed to be if it is a re barrel by fultons at regulation)
2) yes I am concered about that
3) Yes, agreed not at conversion, but might one not have been fitted in service later? or is that a definate out of service job, if so likely by Fulton agian

Maybe Roger can have a more experienced input ?

Another slight 'worry' would be that the scope mount screws have not been staked.

The serial number, however, is within the range of several other known Savage No4T's, so it could be 'pukka'.

[Micheal Doyne]

Maybe Roger can have a more experienced input ?

Another slight 'worry' would be that the scope mount screws have not been staked.

The serial number, however, is within the range of several other known Savage No4T's, so it could be 'pukka'.

There do seem to be a lot of small negatives.

From handling it, and hearing some of its plausible but un evidenced history from someone I know, I do think it is a t, however I would very much welcome thoughts from others.

My issue is it the price I have seen a number of Ts without chests, tins at but there are a number of small negatives. The biggest to me is I can only justify this purchase of it is a rifle I could, if push came to shove sell for £4-4.5K, my concern is small negatives, the unmatched scope, and maybe mount as well out of service fettling by fultons make that tricky.
The other issue is my key interest is the accuracy of the platform at the time and this one has been improved, admittedly I can square that be telling my self this showed the platforms potential...

Finally is that a “t” completion stamp on the back of the recover behind the sight bridge above the wrist to the right of the bolt track... and if so does that help or hinder... it isn’t really exactly on the right of the left side wall of the reciver as I would expect... l

[GeeRam]

My issue is it the price I have seen a number of Ts without chests, tins at but there are a number of small negatives. The biggest to me is I can only justify this purchase of it is a rifle I could, if push came to shove sell for £4-4.5K, my concern is small negatives, the unmatched scope, and maybe mount as well out of service fettling by fultons make that tricky.

I agree, even if it is as likely was a pukka Savage T, its no longer in the top price bracket for a rare Savage T.........its in great shooter price bracket as that is what it now is, but not top collector price.
I would have thought £3.5k price range to 3.75k tops would be the likely price range......??

[Micheal Doyne]

I agree, even if it is as likely was a pukka Savage T, its no longer in the top price bracket for a rare Savage T.........its in great shooter price bracket as that is what it now is, but not top collector price.
I would have thought £3.5k price range to 3.75k tops would be the likely price range......??

Interesting would you put a top shooter plus scope at £3.5, I was rather assuming top shooter was about £1000 so with scope, and pads I was assuming £2,500.

[GeeRam]

Interesting would you put a top shooter plus scope at £3.5, I was rather assuming top shooter was about £1000 so with scope, and pads I was assuming £2,500.

Repro/replica 4T are now in the £2-2.5k range if sold by a dealer, and a un-messed with miss-matched real 4T without any accessories is in the £3.5-4k range now if its an OK shooter, so this is in realty somewhere between the two. For someone that wants good shooter but not a replica, this is ideal, especially if they want something to compete with. Its worth more than £2.5k IMHO, and is certainly worth £3k......but how much more than £3k depends as ever on how much someone wants exactly what this is.

---------- Post added at 09:51 AM ---------- Previous post was at 09:43 AM ----------

It's a real No4MkI(T) which has been centre bedded - that's likely the source of the Fulton's markings.

In it's previous life, it was a target rifle, probably Service Rifle "A"

On early guns pads were NOT staked.

I think this is most likely what happened.
Post war it lost its scope and bracket, and ended up at Fulton's and was modded for Service Rifle comps (surely it would be Service Rifle B though if centre bedded and regulated by Fultons as SR A would be stock military spec...?) It probably was fitted with a PH aperture sight as well?
Someone has then later acquired a bracket and scope and removed the PH sights and refitted the scope.

[Lee Enfield]

Maybe Roger can have a more experienced input ?

Another slight 'worry' would be that the scope mount screws have not been staked.

The serial number, however, is within the range of several other known Savage No4T's, so it could be 'pukka'.

It's a real No4MkI(T) which has been centre bedded - that's likely the source of the Fulton's markings.

In it's previous life, it was a target rifle, probably Service Rifle "A"

On early guns pads were NOT staked.

...snip...
Finally is that a “t” completion stamp on the back of the recover behind the sight bridge above the wrist to the right of the bolt track... and if so does that help or hinder... it isn’t really exactly on the right of the left side wall of the reciver as I would expect... l

No that is a standard inspectors marking which is found on all? Savage No4 rifles.

I would like to see better pictures of the rings, but I think they are set of RogerP's.

There are folks with much more experience than I, but for me there are a couple of alarm bells :

1) Rebarreled - when and by whom ?
2) Regulated by Fultons. (Fultons have 'built' No4Ts to order).
3) Peter Laidler has previously said a No3 bolt head would not have been accepted on a 4T by a military armourer.

Bolt heads were/are commonly refitted (especially by handloaders) and the number marked on the bolt head means very little - if you measure a few you will quickly see that...

[Micheal Doyne]

It's a real No4MkI(T) which has been centre bedded - that's likely the source of the Fulton's markings.

In it's previous life, it was a target rifle, probably Service Rifle "A"

On early guns pads were NOT staked.


No that is a standard inspectors marking which is found on all? Savage No4 rifles.

I would like to see better pictures of the rings, but I think they are Roger's.

that is very interesting regarding the t there being normal for a savage, I have not see that mentioned before.

I also think it is one of Roger's early mounts, here is the photo that made me think it was....

Attachment 112408