Savage with No 32 Setup

[Brian Dick]

Could be Rob. I'd guess that the unfinished Savage rifles weren't necessarily early or even mid-war production. I've seen a few unfinished Mk.1* conversions that sported British walnut forends and British five groove barrels dated '45. From what I've learned, those parts were changed at H&H during conversion because some forends were unsatisfactory and the rifles had 2 groove barrels from the factory which were not to sniper conversion spec. They were never completed either and didn't sport the selection TR or finish T stamps. To throw a wrench into the mix, I'm finishing up a restoration for a client in Texas that was a sporterized 1942 Savage No.4Mk.1T that was issued and used. Unfortunately, it had no original wood that I know of. At least he didn't send it except for the original cheek piece. He sent all nos Savage wood for the restoration. It has the small late or post war F.T.R. stamped under the serial number on the left side of the butt socket and a TR which was added by an Armourer at the RSAF most likely during FTR. It also has a five groove '45 date barrel which I'd guess is original as converted at H&H because I've seen them before as I mentioned. I reckon it could be its second barrel if it had a six-groove barrel from the factory. I don't think too many of the early Savage six groove barrels were used into 1942 production but could be wrong since it is a Mk.1 and not a Mk.1*. It's sn. 0C36xx. My original Savage No.4Mk.1T is 0C160, sports its original Savage six groove barrel and saw little or no use in service.

[hopdevil]

I got the stock off and it's original! Got a real Savage setup by H&H....

[Roger Payne]

Nice. Really pleased for you.

[Alan de Enfield]

I got the stock off and it's original! Got a real Savage setup by H&H....

You took the butt off without removing the forend.

[Surpmil]

You took the butt off without removing the forend.

Wasn't that required only on the No.1 Rifle?

[Roger Payne]

Yes, ok on a No4. You can do it on a No1 as well so long as it is fitted with one of the late Indian forends with the No4 style keeper plate & No4 pattern stock bolt. But otherwise a definite no no!

[hopdevil]

So, to summarize I have a correct Savage No4 Mk1 (early) that was semi converted by H&H? Meaning, a Scope and bracket was not paired. We know this because it would be stamped "T" on the receiver if fully converted? "TR" was never stamped on the Savage Rifles?

[Lee Enfield]

So, to summarize I have a correct Savage No4 Mk1 (early) that was semi converted by H&H? Meaning, a Scope and bracket was not paired. We know this because it would be stamped "T" on the receiver if fully converted? "TR" was never stamped on the Savage Rifles?

Your rifle was "fully converted". The part that included Jigs was the attachment of the base pads to the receiver.

"T" on the receiver is not universal. On a 1941/1942 Savage No4T the presence or lack of a "T" on the receiver is meaningless.

The "proper" markings really only show up in 1944-1946 production. Too many rifles have been "f'd" with by people trying to "correct" markings.

On your rifle the lack of a scope serial number on the butt stock is the key.

I take it your rifle is a Savage 6 groove barrel?

[Alan de Enfield]

Wasn't that required only on the No.1 Rifle?

Yes it was, but as the bolt is the same thread / size for the No1 and the No4, and folks have a habit of stripping down their rifles and replacing parts, I always work on the 'worse case' scenario that the bolt may have been replaced by a No1 bolt.

There was an instruction given to Armourers to cut off the square end of the No1 bolts, but as usual (from the numbers of non cut bolts) it seems the message didn't get received by all stations.

I always suggest, that irrespective of rifle No, it is 'safer' to disassemble the rifle forend first.

[Surpmil]

Yes it was, but as the bolt is the same thread / size for the No1 and the No4, and folks have a habit of stripping down their rifles and replacing parts, I always work on the 'worse case' scenario that the bolt may have been replaced by a No1 bolt.

There was an instruction given to Armourers to cut off the square end of the No1 bolts, but as usual (from the numbers of non cut bolts) it seems the message didn't get received by all stations.

I always suggest, that irrespective of rifle No, it is 'safer' to disassemble the rifle forend first.

Well, I expect that if a No.1 buttstock bolt was used on a No4 the nose would press into the cross-strap of the forend enough to deform it and certainly enough to push the forend against the draws making it well nigh impossible to get off.

So removing the butt first would seem prudent to me. There is no notch in the cross-strap of the No.4 forend after all.

Occasionally one sees No.4 cross-straps were the bolt has managed to at least mark the cross-strap, though I'm guessing the threads were at least designed to be short enough to prevent that when using the bolt made for the No.4?