4T Questions - is there concensus on the answers ?

[Alan de Enfield]

I'm looking at a 1943 BSA 4T with an "AV" serial number and a No32 Mk1 scope. Scope number is not on the butt.
It comes in a colour Blue 4T transit box, (was apparently a RAF issue 4T), sling, scope adjusting tool, scope tin, spotting scope & spotting scope case
Price is 'acceptable'

Its been in the same hands for the last 10 years, and belonged to a friend of his for 10 years before that, so, it should pre-date all of the 4T shenanigans that have been going on with 4Ts.

Questions -
what markings would a 1943 4T DEFINATELY have ?
what markings MAY it have ?
any hints or tips to recognise problems / questionable areas.

Never thought I'd be in a position to own a 4T so whilst I've read the 100s of postings on them (puts the fear of God into you !!!!) I've never really absorbed the information.

Basically - looking for the idiots guide to buying a 4T

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.

[rgg_7]

Hi Alan....quess I'll go first. The "AV" is the correct prefix for a 1943 BSA Shirley No4 enfield. This would make it a very late 1943 assembled rifle. If you could post some pictures it would be most helpful in this assessment. Also the scope number and the bracket number. Bracket number should match the the rifle serial number. This rifle would be so close to the 1944's some will point out it should have these markings. I generally look at the details for authenticity....shape of the pads, screws, cheekpiece shape and stock acceptance symbols. You most likely won't find the "TR" and "s" markings on a 1943 however they may be present. Never seen a "Blue" transit chest however it could be a repaint like the desert tan CNo7 chests as an example. Post a picture or 2..there are many valued opinions delivered here.

[jmoore]

Oooh, a '43! Not so nearly nailed down as either '44s and later, nor as "undefined" as '42s. If late '43 I should think it ought to have most of the "regular" receiver markings.

Stock parts are too easily replaced to be sure of anything there, so don't sweat it unless it looks "improved". No number is fine esp. if no S51 underneath, but then it should have other "later" rifle indicators.

HOPEFULLY, if it's got no mid-swivel, there will be NO rifle S/N on the scope bracket. If swivel, then a number's fine.

If there's no numbers on either the wrist or bracket, well, I shouldn't worry at this point if the price is reasonable enough. Just make sure the appropriate markings are on the receiver proper .

Yes?

[Alan de Enfield]

Thats what I sort of remembered,
a 43 could 'go either way' - it might have T / TR or it might not.

Getting pics Monday (hopefully)

keep up the answers guys.
Thanks

[Badger]

A few links to older threads with discussion about early No.4(T)'s and also some 1943's.

A genuine No.4 Mk1 that is not marked T or TR?

Did the early enfield MK4#1*T snipers have the extra sling attachment?

Regards,
Badger

[bigduke6]

Alan,

Regarding your quote,


" Its been in the same hands for the last 10 years, and belonged to a friend of his for 10 years before that, so, it should pre-date all of the 4T shenanigans that have been going on with 4Ts."



Just remember Forgery has been around since the Romans were knocking out greek sculptures as originals.


At least you wont have the choice like the bloke below.



Genuine of forgery? Eight versions of the Mona Lisa make a puzzle for the art lover. This famous painting has constantly figured in questions of forgery, but it is only the tip of a gigantic iceburg. Its estimated that 40% of the worlds art is fake.

[Alan de Enfield]

Alan,

Regarding your quote,


" Its been in the same hands for the last 10 years, and belonged to a friend of his for 10 years before that, so, it should pre-date all of the 4T shenanigans that have been going on with 4Ts."



Just remember Forgery has been around since the Romans were knocking out greek sculptures as originals.


.

So true, but my point was that (say) 20 years ago the 4T had a value of how much ? £100 ?? more ? less ?
Not a lot anyway, so I question if anyone would have had the incentive to 'mess about with it'

[bigduke6]

Point taken Alan,

Just throwing some light humour your way, to take your mind off the deal, as no doubt you will be scouring the forum for any info and your palms are probably sweating at the thought of handing over the wad of cash.

Talking of cash think the value twenty years ago was a lot more, my first SMLE i had was on my shotgun Cert (a .410) and the days before the mag restrictions, i was 17 and nearly cost me more than a weeks wage, think it was around £60-£70

If you know of the owner, then dont think you can go wrong but if not, buy the rifle not the story, remember the Long Lee i was returning at Newark? will PM you on that one.

[Surpmil]

Alan,
Regarding your quote,
" Its been in the same hands for the last 10 years, and belonged to a friend of his for 10 years before that, so, it should pre-date all of the 4T shenanigans that have been going on with 4Ts."

Just remember Forgery has been around since the Romans were knocking out greek sculptures as originals....Its estimated that 40% of the worlds art is fake.

And probably half of it is at least as good as the originals! Han van Meegeren and his Rembrandts for example. Joseph Duveen's biography is a good short course in the utter falsity of the art dealer's world and the grasping rafinatti who populate a good part of it....

Getting back to No4(T)s though, I did have a 1943 AK5--- No4(T) and it had original TR stamps and the T stamp was there as well. Butt was replaced and it had not-so-lovely green paint from a trip through BW(S).

[Alan de Enfield]

I'm H.A.P.P.Y
Well here are the first batch of photos. I've said I'll have it so just waiting the Police issuing my variation.

It comes with a letter from our good friend Peter Laidler who examined it a few years ago and pronounced it 'kosher'.
Peter comments that the 34 BW C is 34th Base Workshops at catterick and that is was 'overhauled' in August 1968 and that the S51 Butt markings may have been removed at that time.

There is only a couple of questionable parts (that I can see) and that is :
1) that it has an "F" (Fazakerly ?) rear sight which has the aperture milled off but does not have the bottom of the sight milled to allow removal of the bolt.
2) No S51 on the Butt (but see Peters comment above)

More pics are on the way :