No.4 receiver/action quality (faux sniper build)

[amadeus76]

So I have my faux Remingtion 1903a4 for vintage competetion and now I'm wanting to get a No.4 Mk I (T) for another option. I know this is sacriledge, but I'm considering getting another stock No. 4 for conversion and having someone knowledgeable do the work. For my a4 I found a good reclaimed receiver and had a smith build it for me and am very happy with the result (5rd cloverleaf groups at 100yds). I wanted to do the same thing for the No.4 (T), but I'm finding that sporter No.4's have gotten rediculously expensive and more often than not compare in cost to a non-sporter No.4, and actions are near impossible to find. So with that in mind, I'm starting to look at getting another stock No.4 and having that converted by a competent smith who can add the stock riser, tap the mounts, set the proper barrel pressure, and probably install a new barrel. So with that in mind, my question is, is there much difference in action quality between Savage, Longbranch, British, and Pakistani manufacture?

Other questions... Is there a good source for quality reproduction mounts and No. 32 scopes and mounts?

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.

[tiriaq]

Too bad you're on the wrong side of the razor wire. Lots of sported No. 4s here, at reasonable prices. Prices for as-issued ones have gone through the roof.
As far as quality goes, as a Canadian, I'm partial to Long Branch. But assuming comparable condition any make will do the job for you.
Are you planning on having a NOS barrel fitted or a commercial? If you are going to make up a repro sniper, not point in bothering if the barrel isn't crisp.
No idea where you could get the mounts, but some LB Ts were set up with Lyman Alaskan scopes (32TP). I'd personally prefer an original Alaskan to a repro 32.
I set up an 03A4 lookalike using a badly sported A3 with a number of holes already drilled crooked in the receiver. Installed a Weaver 330. I am amazed at how well that little scope works.

[Ridolpho]

amadeus: I have a repro built on a '42 Savage Mk I*. The "craftsman" that installed the pads must have been trained by Homer Simpson. Any original or repro bracket mounted on them is brutally non-collimated with the bore and it took me a horribly long time to bodge an aftermarket bracket to attain reasonable alignment. If you go through with this you definitely want to hand your gunsmith the bracket you'll be using and make sure he's familiar with the method of installation of the pads. I have a repro MK I scope on mine and it now shoots very well (as good as my real ones) but, at the end of the day, it remains a bit of a piece of junk. The donor rifle was in mint condition and should not have been butchered in this way.

Ridolpho

[henry r]

From everything I've heard dr Roger Payne on this forum does by far the best bracket. He recomends pads from fultons of bisley.

Brian dick has a lot of good feedback for setting up lee enfields correctly, so would be my first call (I'm guessing you are in the us)

[bigduke6]

set the proper barrel pressure

not with you on barrel pressure ???

Considering were you are I'd sit it out and wait for a real one to come up, seems to be a lot more 4T's over there than anywhere.

[Roger Payne]

Many thanks Henry. After a lengthy period without No32 brackets I have just received a quote for the work that I am probably going to go with. It still means a delay of several months I suspect, but I should hopefully have some more before the year is out. Of course, I can't compete in price with the Pacific Rim copies, & I don't know if this will be soon enough for Amadeus76, but that's the current situation.

ATB

[amadeus76]

not with you on barrel pressure ???

Considering were you are I'd sit it out and wait for a real one to come up, seems to be a lot more 4T's over there than anywhere.

My mistake. I'm thinking of how the 1903 is set up. The No. 4 seems to be more free floated. I guess it would be easier to say accurized and be done with it. As for getting a real one... I'm looking for a rifle that will see a pretty fair amount of use and if I had a real one, I wouldn't want to subject it the that.

---------- Post added at 07:48 AM ---------- Previous post was at 07:46 AM ----------

Many thanks Henry. After a lengthy period without No32 brackets I have just received a quote for the work that I am probably going to go with. It still means a delay of several months I suspect, but I should hopefully have some more before the year is out. Of course, I can't compete in price with the Pacific Rim copies, & I don't know if this will be soon enough for Amadeus76, but that's the current situation.

ATB

Right now I'm looking at options and trying to figure out what the pric point will be . I'm getting ready to deploy and so in all likelihood wouldn't really get down to having this done till I get back next year.

[philb]

I did mine on a 1943 long branch No4, pad etc bought of a friend, and work done by fultons of bisley, shot sub moa groups easy

[Peter Laidler]

Before you go any further down this route Amadeus, you ought to read Ridolpho's thread (thread 3) and admire that magnificent motorcycle while you're there....., and then read it again several times. Then rear and re-read the article I wrote a couple of years ago about fitting mounts to a look-a-like sniper rifle. And then read that MANY times and digest it. Because it is VERY simple to miscalculate and suddenly realise that a couple of .001" error fitting-up here equates to a lot of .001"s at 700 yards. And you make sure that you fit one designated front pad and one designated rear pad and one designated bracket and one designated telescope to one designated rifle. All VERY accurately optically and mechanically aligned for elevation and azimuth before you drill any holes etc.

This principle doesn't just apply to No4's but to all telescope and fittings