No 4T new to my family

[BurtonP]

Hi all. Today I got to take apart and do a thorough search of the stamps on this 1944 BSA No 4T that a family member bought. I'm convinced it is legit, or at least it satisfies the checklists posted on this site. It has a scope matched to the rifle and most of the accessories in the travel chest, so is really a sweet rifle.




One thing I was surprised by was the variety of parts from different manufacturers. It had Longbranch, Savage and Maltby parts that I noticed in a quick perusal.

More concerning was that it had a few issues with the bedding:
-The down pressure of the barrel at the nosecap was weak.
-The trigger guard had a small seesaw action.
-I could see light between the forestock and wrist.

Am I right in thinking that these all might indicate that the forestock isn't original?
I don't think it matters one bit to my family member, but I'd appreciate suggestions about how or when this might have occurred.

Cheers,
Burton

[Lee Enfield]

Hello Burton, I won't comment on your rifle right now.
I will however comment on the 'collectors checklists" you refer to.

Unfortunately, they are garbage for 2 main reasons:
1. They reflect only BSA /H&H rifles from 1944 thru 1946.
2. The fakers, people trying to "correct" their rifles and others have used them to fake markings.
This has resulted in completely correct rifles being marked with totally incorrect markings.

[BurtonP]

Thanks, and yes I was aware of some of this when I was asked to look at it. I will say that for exactly this reason I was relieved that it was a 1944 BSA rifle.

[Atticus Thraxx]

I can’t speak to the specifics of the question and Lee Enfields comment trumps all on this, but if this rifle truly is a mish mash of parts and it’s collectibility or historical importance is compromised, they may have a unique opportunity to work it into an acceptable target rifle without fear of doing a ‘ bubba”. I sigh when I look at my all matching (T) because it’s not even close to the most accurate No.4 I have. Can’t really touch it though, all matching.?

[Bindi2]

The armourers did not match makers when they repaired rifles the next part in the bin was used. Also parts were moved around to keep production going. There was many small outside work shops making parts as well. Making a rifle match may well be a BUBBA job.

[Steve H. in N.Y.]

Has the front trigger guard screw/swivel been replaced by a Parker-Hale item?

[BurtonP]

Has the front trigger guard screw/swivel been replaced by a Parker-Hale item?

It has, yes.

[BurtonP]

Other pics of the pads etc.

[Roger Payne]

Have replied to your pm.

The bracket is an old one of mine - from one of the earlier batches of probably 20+ years ago.

[CINDERS]

The front pad placement had me intrigued so I looked at the pic of my T's one and your one is set back allot more than mine as I am not sure if there was a standard placement for the mounting system.
I know my rifle & scope & mount are legit as they are listed in Peter L & Ian S book on the T being involved in front pad trials hence why mine has multiple stakings.
Have you taken the top woods off to see if there are the rifles serial No. penciled there as it was important that the stock remained with the rifle when the conversion happened at H&H hence they ensured the furniture stayed with the weapon.

There should be about 5 lb's of down force on the front bedding near the muzzle think its the last couple of inches, there could have been shrinkage of the stock with it rocking on the collar at the trigger guard front screw mine did the same but the draws were smashed to a pulp which have been repaired by a master stock maker Ken Davis in Perth.
There is also a stamping on the flats that should be present as well as one under the wrist my rifle is also a 1944 M37C.