-
It's a can of worms isn't it?!?
I suspect the only way a lot of these questions will ever get answered definitively is if more documentation turns up at some point in the future. But it doesn't stop us from musing does it........?
The early production Savage rifles in the UK would certainly have fitted the bill for conversion, & the fact that they were already equipped with Mk1 rear sights would have been useful. I had always just assumed that prior to the stipulation that H&H would only take BSA rifles, decided upon not long after they took over conversion from RSAF, rifles of all manufacturers would have been considered eligible for conversion, so long as they satisfied accuracy requirements (& were so converted). This stance fits in with the now generally accepted view that a few Fazakerley rifles were also converted, but doesn't explain the gaps in places, such as why do we not see BSA 42 & Maltby 42 conversions, but we do see Savage rifles dated both 41 & 42? Perhaps the explanation could be that the 42 BSA's & 42 Maltby's were all fitted with battle sights & at that stage the relaxation to permit them to be converted had not been passed? As mentioned above, both the 41 & 42 dated Savage rifles all came across the Atlantic already sporting Mk1 sights........got converted along with B41 & ROFM 41 rifles (& a few ROF (F) 41 rifles that were already put aside for this purpose (& which were possessed of Mk1 rear sights)).........
Just maybe we don't see 4 T's built on 42 dated UK produced No4's because they were all fitted with battle sights at this time..........plus, with the slow take off of 4T conversion, there was probably more than enough rifles from 41 production to go around...?????
-
The Following 3 Members Say Thank You to Roger Payne For This Useful Post:
-
01-11-2021 10:11 AM
# ADS
Friends and Sponsors
-
Legacy Member
1942
It's a can of worms isn't it?!?
I suspect the only way a lot of these questions will ever get answered definitively is if more documentation turns up at some point in the future. But it doesn't stop us from musing does it........?
The early production Savage rifles in the UK would certainly have fitted the bill for conversion, & the fact that they were already equipped with Mk1 rear sights would have been useful. I had always just assumed that prior to the stipulation that H&H would only take BSA rifles, decided upon not long after they took over conversion from RSAF, rifles of all manufacturers would have been considered eligible for conversion, so long as they satisfied accuracy requirements (& were so converted). This stance fits in with the now generally accepted view that a few Fazakerley rifles were also converted, but doesn't explain the gaps in places, such as why do we not see BSA 42 & Maltby 42 conversions, but we do see Savage rifles dated both 41 & 42? Perhaps the explanation could be that the 42 BSA's & 42 Maltby's were all fitted with battle sights & at that stage the relaxation to permit them to be converted had not been passed? As mentioned above, both the 41 & 42 dated Savage rifles all came across the Atlantic already sporting Mk1 sights........got converted along with B41 & ROFM 41 rifles (& a few ROF (F) 41 rifles that were already put aside for this purpose (& which were possessed of Mk1 rear sights)).........
Just maybe we don't see 4 T's built on 42 dated UK produced No4's because they were all fitted with battle sights at this time..........plus, with the slow take off of 4T conversion, there was probably more than enough rifles from 41 production to go around...?????
Here's at least one 1942-dated, British-production #4T a friend picked up recently.
-
Thank You to husk For This Useful Post:
-
-
Front pad area has never been milled & there's no signs of old solder, finish under the areas the pads would cover is same as elsewhere............
I wouldn't want to pee on your friend's cornflakes Husk, but I don't think that's a real one.
What I should have said above, is that to date, I have yet to see a 4T built on a UK produced rifle dated 1942. There may be a few out there, but I've yet to see one.
Last edited by Roger Payne; 01-11-2021 at 12:51 PM.
Reason: grammatical clarification
-
The Following 2 Members Say Thank You to Roger Payne For This Useful Post:
-
Legacy Member
Interesting, I’ll pass that on.
-
-
Advisory Panel
Front pad area has never been milled & there's no signs of old solder, finish under the areas the pads would cover is same as elsewhere............
I wouldn't want to pee on your friend's cornflakes Husk, but I don't think that's a real one.
What I should have said above, is that to date, I have yet to see a 4T built on a
UK produced rifle dated 1942. There may be a few out there, but I've yet to see one.
"Diplomacy; the art of a telling a person to go hell in such a manner that he asks for directions".
Someone had a go and gave up: note the little wear spots where a no doubt repro front pad sat for while while Bubba pondered his next steps. Stripped off No4(T)s don't look like the holes were drilled last week.
“There are invisible rulers who control the destinies of millions. It is not generally realized to what extent the words and actions of our most influential public men are dictated by shrewd persons operating behind the scenes.”
Edward Bernays, 1928
Much changes, much remains the same.
-
Thank You to Surpmil For This Useful Post:
-
Advisory Panel
I agree with Roger and Rob on this one. It looks like it's stocked in Savage birch too.
-
The Following 2 Members Say Thank You to Brian Dick For This Useful Post:
-
Legacy Member
I think the P in a circle may be the ROF Poole variants Alan, although I'm not certain of this. Again, not certain, but have always assumed that these Poole made examples were post WW2 mfr. Long Branch also made some Mk1 rear sights during WW2. I've only ever seena handful of
POF made No4's, but from what I recall of them the rear sights were unmarked, or at least the sight leaves were. However, they were all very nicely made.
I have been hunting around to determine which marking is which for Poole and PoF, and found an old 2010 review of the PoF Rifles by "Claven"
https://www.milsurps.com/content.php...-(POF)-in-1961)
Most parts are proofed with either a circle with a "P" inside it, or with a capital letter "P" with the year of manufacture of the part underneath (e.g. P over 61).
I am therefore working on the idea that the P without a circle is the Poole production. I'd certainly be interested in any views or evidence either way.
Question : Is a "P" (no circle and no date) Poole ?
Mine are not the best, but they are not too bad. I can think of lots of Enfields I'd rather have but instead of constantly striving for more, sometimes it's good to be satisfied with what one has...
-
Thank You to Alan de Enfield For This Useful Post:
-
You might well be correct Alan..........I suppose what would help is someone chiming in who has definitive knowledge of POF & ROF (P) marking practices, at least in respect of No4 rear sight leaves.
I have a load of stripped rear sight leaves somewhere. I'll try & find them & have a look at what is in there.
-
Thank You to Roger Payne For This Useful Post:
-
Legacy Member
P-in-a-circle was certainly used on Poole bayonets.
-
-
Advisory Panel
Up front, I do not know. P in a circle does have the same type of inspectors stamps as the No.5 & 7 bayonets from Poole. The regular P also has multiple inspector marks, but of a different type. Second, they also made No. 5 sights. POF did not make the No.5 but like RFI might have made sights for them for spares?
-
The Following 2 Members Say Thank You to Lance For This Useful Post: