Transitional No.4 T?

[Lance]

Markings on early-mid war snipers has been non-standard but just picked this girl up that seems like it was set up in the transition.

As you can see it has the inspector stamp on the rear of the receiver and the "TR" but lacks the "T" and the "S" stamp. The butt is original matching the rifle as was paired with a '43 Kershaw Mk I s/n 7975 (unfortunately missing, anyone have her?).

The pads have been staked, so it was through someone after mid-late '44. One would thick it was an incomplete rifle that was later paired with a scope, but why a '43 Mk I scope and why the missing "S" stamp? Maybe it is an incomplete that was finished later? Opinions?

The rifle as a whole is pretty much original with a "rare" SM43 marked rear sight, matching bolt and forend, unmodified trigger guard. Purchased it with a mismatched original mount and a mismatched '44 Watson Mk I.

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]

Nice find Lance. To be honest, I think she's what I would expect from a mid (ish) 1943 conversion. The rear sight, although a SM43, which is what you would expect, could be a replacement which by chance was made by Singer in the same year as the rifle. This would explain the lack of the 'S' on the cut-off block. However, the markings were not religiously applied as per Peter's book until later 1943 anyway, so we'll probably never know for sure one way or the other - the rifle could just as easily have left the BSA factory wearing that rearsight. Most of my 1941 to early/mid 1943 rifles have lacked the sidewall 'T', & those that I've had that possessed one I suspect may have had it added after the event by a judicious armourer. So, the lack of the sidewall 'T' on an earlier converted rifle does NOT necessarily mean it was a 'less telescope' rifle, & I'd lay odds yours went out with its contemporaneous Mk1 scope when it left H&H at the time. Incidentally, I think after writing the 4T book, Peter came across some documentation that suggests that the previously supposed attribution of 'KL' to Kershaw is not so, but is in fact 'Kodak Ltd', so your rifle originally bore a scope made by the camera people!

She's nice. I'd definitely give her house room!

[Seaforth72]

Sadly I have neither come across rifle 38913 to match your bracket) yet nor scope 7975 (to match your rifle). Always looking though!

[Giove]

This 1943 BSA, instead, has the letter "T" on the action.

[tr63]

When was the T on the left side of the receiver added on the rifle ? I have a 1943 No. 4 T that is correct less the T .

[Surpmil]

Very nice example; can anyone date it more precisely than the year? I ask because it's interesting (to me at least) that a MkI scope possibly made a year or even two earlier was only being fitted to a rifle in 1943!

[Hal O'Peridol]

trying again

This is my 1943 dated No4MkI(T).





It does not have the sniper T nor the S.

It came as a complete set, Oddly scope is a Mk3.

[Roger Payne]

Nice looking rifle Hal. Is there a previous scope number to the Mk3 stamped into the butt, by any chance?

[Hal O'Peridol]

Roger, I'll take time this weekend to do a full photo lineup with my better camera. There is no previous number on the buttstock, however I have never removed the stock from the socket to check the number on there. Any particular areas of iterest that you would like photos of?

[Roger Payne]

Many thanks. I was just curious about whether your rifle had been rescoped with the Mk3 after being previously fitted with a Mk1 or 2, 'from the factory. Of course, it could be a less telescope rifle as an alternative. But as you say, it would be a good idea to check that the butt is original to your rifle to start off with.

ATB.