No 4 Mk I Trials Rifle, A0754(T)

[martin08]

She is assuredly rebuilt after sniper conversion, far from original fitted parts - beech stock, Savage bands, Long Branch rear sight, (waisted?) front sight protector, no magazine. But a Trials Rifle with cut-off and button cocking knob, nonetheless.

Some pics, and any comments/info are appreciated. Thanks for looking.

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.

[Roger Payne]

As you say Martin, she's most definitely the real thing - & like most other Enfields she's well travelled. During her time she's picked up a fair few replacement parts, but it's all part of her story. Any Trials rifle is a nice find - I hope you have the enjoyment of owning her for many years to come.

[browningautorifle]

Yes, the front sight is "Waisted". If anyone wants to know what that is, just look at that one. Very nice...

[martin08]

Thank you for the confirmation and compliments.

While researching the identification of this gun, I recognized that Milsurps.com has the most comprehensive survey available for the No 4 Mk I Trials Rifles, at roughly five dozen specimens on record, with the physical characteristics compiled. Of course, Badger's Knowledge Library Sniper evaluation is quite elaborate as well.

https://www.milsurps.com/showthread.php?t=50282

https://www.milsurps.com/content.php...united-kingdom

But, as these rifles seldom surface, there is really precious little information for a fellow to read about the trials, themselves. The who, what, where, when, etc. on the design changes and features which were accepted, modified or rejected. Perhaps this is where a good reference publication would be recommended. But if anyone wishes to share some of the chronology of events of the trials, it is more than welcome here in this thread.

[Surpmil]

The bolt is a replacement as you may know. A pity to have lost the butt as that would have had the scope numbers probably. Some enthusiastic soul may have thought since it had those nasty holes in it (cheekrest removed as often happened?) he would replace the butt with one that "matched" the forened better. See if you can trace it back through its previous owners and find out. Worth a try IMO. Some people even keep scopes off rifles they sell...

[Peter Laidler]

Cheek rests weren't fitted to the first rifles. That was an afterthought.

[martin08]

Yes, the bolt handle font is not the same as the butt socket or barrel.

The previous owner bought this in its present configuration, when a small collection was turned in to a local retailer. So, no retrieval of previous parts would be possible.

Excepting the mark on the underside of the buttstock, there are no other marks in the wood.

[jmoore]

How about the trigger guard? Enfield marked? !933s and trigger guard loops don't often go together.


Curious about the "non-T" rear sight as well. Photo ot three of it's various faces would be good.

[martin08]

Here are the markings on the trigger guard, rear sight and bolt head.

[Surpmil]

Cheek rests weren't fitted to the first rifles. That was an afterthought.

I know Peter, but being a beech butt it can't be the original and the vast majority of the trials conversions got cheekrests later did they not?