Savage No 4 Mk1 T

[Buccaneer]

This rifle appears to be 1942 dated and is a Mk1 not a Mk1* The scope has obviously been refinished as it has obviously gone through the wars at some point as the surface is badly pitted. The numbers appear to match though I think that the bolt has been replaced at some point, the cocking piece is a Long Branch piece. The only piece that is not serial numbered is the magazine, a .22 "harmonized" rear sight was fitted but I have now replaced it with the correct but Fazakerley made 1300 yard sight minus the battle aperture. I can find very little information about Savage made No4 T rifles and I would appreciate any additional information.

[Peter Laidler]

Talking of which, if anyone is a Savage sniper fiend, anyone know anything about or the whereabouts of Savage sniper OC 31

The red painted clicke sprin g retaining screws are a tad fanciful as red painted indicates not to be undone by the user. In this case, he'd be going some, even with a leatherman, because the screws are further secured with 10BA screws. Shows that an amateur has got at the scope.

[Roy W]

Interesting method of staking the screws

[Roger Payne]

It would be nice to have a couple of views of the bolt guide way to see the ends of the front pad screws, but from what I can see it looks like it's probably a genuine T, although it has been 'enhanced' somewhat, at least IMHO.

Self evidently, the scope is most severely pitted & has been refinished over this.
The scope bracket is a reproduction, though not one of mine.
The butt rifle & scope serial number markings have been applied after the event. I suspect the rifle serial on the forend was done at the same time - note the number stamps used on the woodwork are 'not a full deck' - the 0 is larger than the other stamps. And whilst it is dangerous to say never or always with Enfields, the Savage rifles that I have seen or owned & whose butts I've had a good look at, showed a practice of just marking the final four digits of the serial number on the tenon. In other words 13C2096 would just be marked 2096. (I've just checked my two remaining Savage rifles, a 0C & a 14C & they accord). All the same the wood does appear to be Savage birch.

I'm guessing it doesn't have the S51 on the underside of the butt?

Yes, a few pix of the bolt guide way with pad screw holes, & perhaps another shot of the front pad with the grease wiped away would be nice....

[Lee Enfield]

It would be nice to have a couple of views of the bolt guide way to see the ends of the front pad screws, but from what I can see it looks like it's probably a genuine T, although it has been 'enhanced' somewhat, at least IMHO.

Self evidently, the scope is most severely pitted & has been refinished over this.
The scope bracket is a reproduction, though not one of mine.
The butt rifle & scope serial number markings have been applied after the event. I suspect the rifle serial on the forend was done at the same time - note the number stamps used on the woodwork are 'not a full deck' - the 0 is larger than the other stamps. And whilst it is dangerous to say never or always with Enfields, the Savage rifles that I have seen or owned & whose butts I've had a good look at, showed a practice of just marking the final four digits of the serial number on the tenon. In other words 13C2096 would just be marked 2096. (I've just checked my two remaining Savage rifles, a 0C & a 14C & they accord). All the same the wood does appear to be Savage birch.

I'm guessing it doesn't have the S51 on the underside of the butt?

Yes, a few pix of the bolt guide way with pad screw holes, & perhaps another shot of the front pad with the grease wiped away would be nice....

The "pitting" on (only) the left side of the rings bothered me enough to take a close look at the scope rings.

I pulled out several repros and real rings from my accumulation of junque.

I'm pretty sure the rings on this Savage are Chinese/Indian repops that have been manipulated - look at the mold lines.

[Roger Payne]

Agreed. And I think the attempt to make the bracket look aged, with either pitting or tiny air bubbles in the casting surface, has been done with a punch. There is the suggestion of 'lips' round the 'craters' if you look carefully.....

[Bindi2]

Roger
I think you are right

[Roger Payne]

You couldn't put that in writing to my wife, could you?

[Bindi2]

Roger
I could but will it work

[Buccaneer]

It would be nice to have a couple of views of the bolt guide way to see the ends of the front pad screws, but from what I can see it looks like it's probably a genuine T, although it has been 'enhanced' somewhat, at least IMHO.

Hi Roger additional pictures as requested, the "grease" around the front pad is in fact paint so it cant be wiped off.