savage No4T less telescope rifle markings?

[flying pig]

Hey guys I'm looking at a less telescope 4T. The rifle doesn't appear to have the T or TR marks. I also can't see where the pad screws have been staked? Should I run and hide?

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.

[jmoore]

Probably the real deal as a first, mostly "shot in the dark" guess. Dark metal finish? Rather than the usual Savage phosphate?

If it's real, then it's also best left without a scope! Survived all this length of time without one...

[flying pig]

Yes it was quite dark looked to be a finished rifle just not wearting its scope. I missed the boat already though, oh well.

Also said it was rebarreled in '56, and had been bedded at some point. Finish looked really clean, if it had been re barreled it must have been re finished too

[jmoore]

Just as well that you misssed that one with a rebarrel and especially a "bedding job". No telling the dramas you missed. But rebarreling certainly doesn't require refinishing. The texture of the finish is about as important as the color. The scopeless Savages I've seen have been fairly distinctive in appearance.

[flying pig]

Thanks a bunch for the info. I'll keep searching until I find the right one that sits right with me.

[Brian Dick]

Savage rifles weren't phosphated, (Parkerized). They were Dulite blued with the receivers sand blasted first which gives the appearance of a light grey phosphate. The "TR" mark won't be present because they weren't selected for accuracy at BSA and the finish "T" won't be present because it was never completed with the addition of a telescope.

[flying pig]

Brian are there other ways to tell one that has been faked (but done properly) to one that is legit?

[enfield303t]

Saw that rifle on CGN, wasn't worth what he was asking, if it had been original as issued it would have been a good buy.

[Brian Dick]

I have to quote Peter Laidler that when you get it in your hands "you just know". That's hard to explain but an original will just "feel" and "look" right. There are very few folks around, (me included), that could do a proper job of building one up that was not distinguishable from an original.

[Surpmil]

For $1200. I thought it was a fair price. A newish No4 barrel is worth a good $150. now and a ball burnished PH barrel must be over $200. So if 1950s No4 Mk2s in newish condition are worth $1200.* then a Savage No4 MkI(T) certainly is IMO, original barrel or not.

Someone else obviously thought so too.

* Not IMO, but enough people seem to think so!