No.4 T questions

[31pickemup]

Oh thanks Peter and to everyone else that chimmed in. I was getting worried that I might have gotten burned on this deal. After I bought the gun a gentleman told me he heard some people talking that were also bidding on the rifle that the receiver was a replacement. Apparently they didnt know anything about BSA not having the model number stamped on the left side of the receiver (Which I didnt know either). The bolt matches as well so I wasn't sure what the hell they were talking about. Also guys was I wrong on the scope mount being postwar? Is it correct? I read somewhere that the numbers should be stamped more towards the center of the mount. ? Also was BSA a common builder of these sniper rifles? Thanks for all the help guys can't wait to get the books so I don't have to ask all these questions!

[Beerhunter]

Oops and double oops. I have just looked at my BSA and it DOES have No.4 MkI over the serial number on the receiver. It so incredibly light I must have missed it. If I was you I'd take another look.

[Peter Laidler]

Come a bit closer 31 and I'll let you into another secret that is wildly misunderstood. As Armourers, we'd see loads of No4T's that didn't have the rifle number on the bracket. It didn't need it because everything was cross referenced on the scope tin, the rifle and sometimes on the rifle chest - and certainly on the Technical Quartermasters paperwork. The bit that wasn't cross referenced was the scout regiment telescope number but that didn't really matter (well, it did if you happened to loose it!). The ONLY time that there could ever be ANY confusion was at Field workshops, when there would/might be a reason to remove the telescope from the bracket. And then, if you weren't VERY careful, or had a few similarly stripped rifles on your bench or under your wing, then there was a slight chance of the brackets becoming mixed up. And this spelt danger (plus a lot of work).

So under these circumstances, Armourers would mark the bracket with the rifle number when he'd removed the telescope. It was suggested that it was stamped after you'd removed the telescope from the bracket so that you didn't shock or break anything. Fair enough, but it'd take some BIG shock to damage one of these telescopes. After all, after any repair, they're fired from the Enfield rest with the recoil force set to hard and that usually shakes them up! Some Armourers would number an unnumbered bracket as a matter of course, others like me didn't bother unless the telescope was being removed.

The long and short of this is that if your bracket is numbered, all well and good but if it isn't, to me it would indicate that the telescope hasn't been removed in the past. But this isn't always the case because yu dn't know who's had it in the past, after it left our service and capable little hands.

Don't forget now, get out onto the ranges and give it a good blasting.

[31pickemup]

Peter I took a closer look at my receiver and there is a S on one side and a T on another. I cant see the NO.4 mk1 on the receiver. Is it possible when this went in for rebuild the coating on the receiver covered it up? I think i might see something but its really really really faint and under the coating. Im not sure tho. If you look at it it looks totally bare. Im sure this isnt a century arms build but I dont understand this either.

[PrinzEugen]

It will be there - if it's been refinished/heavily finished etc then frequently it won't be visible (hunt through pics of bsa 4ts online - on many you won't see it). Either way I wouldn't worry about it.

[Roger Payne]

Looks a nice genuine rifle. There are often very faint designation marks electric pencilled into the receiver side-wall, but they are often not noticeable or lost to view after one or two FTR's. The butt may well be a swap off another rifle, but the rest of the woodwork looks genuine to the rifle. Most 45 dated T's I've come across that are unadulterated have got JC marked woodwork on them. (Just as most 44's seem to have SL wood). If you want to know for sure if the butt is a replacement then just unscrew the stock bolt & read the rifle serial stamped into the very front 'lip' that fits into the butt socket (as advised above).....you'll soon see. All in all it looks nice though, & no, I'm sure it's not a latter day throw-together.

Enjoy, you have a piece of history............

ATB

[31pickemup]

Roger the front wood is JC stamped. The rear is stamped SL right behind the trigger guard. Guess it was swapped out. Bummer. Too bad I can't fix that. Ok started to pull it apart. Barrel is stamped with original serial number. Anybody have the opposite gun as me with a JC buttstock and SL front stock that wants to trade butts? LOL

[Peter Laidler]

Hey, 31, you've got a good original No4T rifle and already you're staring to sound like one of those searching for the correct year parts for this and spring for this that and the other. It doesn't happen like that once the rifles get into service, believe me, I've been there and done it once or twice.................................. In fact, and I know it's only me but there may be others, but I start to have the most serious doubts about the a) person and b)the rifle, when I'm told about genuine untouched, original, factory fresh, never left Ordnance etc etc rifles. It don't happen like that! We don't make this stuff to keep in Ordnance stockpiles and when we do dispose of stuff we usually dispose of the older stuff and keep the best stuff back. Just go and buy an ex Army lorry or LandRover at the Government auctions. Matching tyres and alternators.............................

[31pickemup]

Peter your right. I'm just going to enjoy this piece. I actually dont mind the rear buttstock being a swapped out. Whats bugs me is the gloss finish on the rear vs. the satin finish of the front. Kinda makes it look weird. Guess the artist in me gets the better of me sometimes.

[rayg]

A little acetone on a rag will dull the gloss finish, a lot will remove it. It's not original finish anyway. Ray