Gunboards Forums banner
1 - 20 of 34 Posts

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
1,373 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 · (Edited)
Just a little fun with the title gents. I'm going to need you to all calm down and focus, I need your help. Please evaluate the following rifle I believe it is something but not what I originally thought, I thought it was a sniper and I had never seen nor heard of a Lee-Enfield Sniper so I thought it was a "T". I now think, sorry I now hope (to save face), it is at least a "less scope".

Backstory: I was auctioning about one Saturday, minding my own business, and I clicked on this custom stock Lee-Enfield and thought wait a minute!. I quickly grabbed my book and found "T"'s in the rear and thought I never saw one and I thought I had just found one. Well, I know better now but nonetheless I played let's spin the wheel a couple times and won. Good thing I didn't know that actual "T's" go for $6K+. Upon receipt of said rifle I knew I likely did not have a "T". I begged Disaster Dog to tell me it was a "T", he refused! LOL . So I read and look around and find the "less scope" version and think maybe just maybe.

Seriously I had about 22 ish minutes (I think it was) to determine if I'm a player or walking away. I rolled the dice and think I need you experts to tell me what it is exactly. I'm into it for about the cost of 2 No 4 Mk 1's (ymmv).

Here are the photos. I'm not scared of what it is but want to know what it definitely is. If I was into it $1500+ I may keep head in the sand, but that is definitely not the case.
 

Attachments

·
Silver Bullet Member
Joined
·
3,824 Posts
I think you are good to go. Savage, I believe, did not stamp the T. Also, I don't think they put the S51 (Holland and Holland) stamp on their snipers. That cheek rest was not fitted by a bubba. That was done by somebody who knew what he was doing...i.e. armorer along with the scope pads. I am going to stick my neck out and say HELL YEAH!!!!. I have a scopeless T I purchased years ago for a couple of hundred buck because I knew what it was. If I am wrong I am sure I will get bit#$ch slapped a bit but that is OK. I have been told I am numb from the shoulders up.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
236 Posts
You did good. As Dallased stated (and as you found out) it is a genuine rifle, less telescope. At that price, I think that is what the market is on these rifles. There is one for sale here locally in southern california, and they are asking $2000. And it's been sitting for a while. I offered $1500, but the consigner is convinced its priced too cheap as is. Same argument; "a fully equipped T brings about 6K!" Sure, but a scopeless rifle is just that; a scopeless rifle. And yours is correct in NOT being fitted with a scope. A few examples were, but those are hard to find. The majority of these went to South Africa, and then made their way to the US.

Just as an example: I bought one in 1992 and paid $450 for it. In 2000, I sold it for $800. Currently, they bring between $1200 and $1700, depending on condition. Those prices are lifted directly from the on-line auction sales.

I'd be happy to own it, especially if you are inferring you got if for less than $1500!
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
1,373 Posts
Discussion Starter · #5 ·
I think you are good to go. Savage, I believe, did not stamp the T. Also, I don't think they put the S51 (Holland and Holland) stamp on their snipers. That cheek rest was not fitted by a bubba. That was done by somebody who knew what he was doing...i.e. armorer along with the scope pads. I am going to stick my neck out and say HELL YEAH!!!!. I have a scopeless T I purchased years ago for a couple of hundred buck because I knew what it was. If I am wrong I am sure I will get bit#$ch slapped a bit but that is OK. I have been told I am numb from the shoulders up.
I'm not going to lie and I left this out. One of the major factors in me going for it with this rifle was that cheek rest. 1. I saw the slotted screws, 2. It appeared to be put on there by someone that definitely knew what they were doing, 3. The finish although not matching appeared to be legit and the wear made me believe it's been on the rifle awhile, 4. The scope mounts appeared to be put on by a professional. These were factors in my pulling the trigger on this thing.

MAN, do I hope others agree. I definitely have hope since you both have stated it is a "less scope".
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
1,373 Posts
Discussion Starter · #6 ·
You did good. As Dallased stated (and as you found out) it is a genuine rifle, less telescope. At that price, I think that is what the market is on these rifles. There is one for sale here locally in southern california, and they are asking $2000. And it's been sitting for a while. I offered $1500, but the consigner is convinced its priced too cheap as is. Same argument; "a fully equipped T brings about 6K!" Sure, but a scopeless rifle is just that; a scopeless rifle. And yours is correct in NOT being fitted with a scope. A few examples were, but those are hard to find. The majority of these went to South Africa, and then made their way to the US.

Just as an example: I bought one in 1992 and paid $450 for it. In 2000, I sold it for $800. Currently, they bring between $1200 and $1700, depending on condition. Those prices are lifted directly from the on-line auction sales.

I'd be happy to own it, especially if you are inferring you got if for less than $1500!
I am all in around $1225 give or take a loaded mag or two worth of ammo.

As stated above I hope others agree and I'm not in the red on this thing. Very excited to hear what others say.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,218 Posts
I think you are good to go. Savage, I believe, did not stamp the T. Also, I don't think they put the S51 (Holland and Holland) stamp on their snipers. That cheek rest was not fitted by a bubba. That was done by somebody who knew what he was doing...i.e. armorer along with the scope pads.

Savage did NOT convert any rifles to 'T' (no, not even T-less scope).
In the early days of producing 4T's the rifles from any manufacturer were used by Enfield and then H&H, but as the consistency of manufacture of all but BSA were found to be 'wanting' the T's used were primarily BSA manufacture (with a small number of Maltby, and early Savage Mk1).
Long Branch had their own 4T programme using their own Long Branch Rifles.

The 'death' for the Savage 4T was that the barrels were inconsistent not within specification, (The barrel specification was for a 5-groove barrel), the front sights were not to specification the bodies were dimensionally also out of specification and mounting the scope mounts made more difficult. It was decided that the cost of replacing the barrel with a BSA one, additional work needed on the bodies meant that the Savage No4's were not economically viable for conversion to 4T's.
That is probably why there are a lot of No-Scope Savage rifles about, they were left 'on the shelf' for use in emergency but in the end, BSA production was such that they could keep H&H supplied with enough rifles.
The 'scope-less' savages just sat there until sold off as surplus.

The only 3 companies that did the conversions were :

Holland & Holland (23,177 rifles)
RSAF Enfield (1,403 rifles)
Long Branch (1,141 rifles)

Total 25,721 No4 T
 

·
Silver Bullet Member
Joined
·
3,824 Posts
Savage did NOT convert any rifles to 'T' (no, not even T-less scope).
In the early days of producing 4T's the rifles from any manufacturer were used by Enfield and then H&H, but as the consistency of manufacture of all but BSA were found to be 'wanting' the T's used were primarily BSA manufacture (with a small number of Maltby, and early Savage Mk1).
Long Branch had their own 4T programme using their own Long Branch Rifles.

The 'death' for the Savage 4T was that the barrels were inconsistent not within specification, (The barrel specification was for a 5-groove barrel), the front sights were not to specification the bodies were dimensionally also out of specification and mounting the scope mounts made more difficult. It was decided that the cost of replacing the barrel with a BSA one, additional work needed on the bodies meant that the Savage No4's were not economically viable for conversion to 4T's.
That is probably why there are a lot of No-Scope Savage rifles about, they were left 'on the shelf' for use in emergency but in the end, BSA production was such that they could keep H&H supplied with enough rifles.
The 'scope-less' savages just sat there until sold off as surplus.

The only 3 companies that did the conversions were :

Holland & Holland (23,177 rifles)
RSAF Enfield (1,403 rifles)
Long Branch (1,141 rifles)

Total 25,721 No4 T
Ah yes, but scopeless Savage snipers did in fact exist and are a bit hard to find. Of course, I think that possibly it had a bit to do with the British snobbery when it came to rifles. Some of the finest rifle barrels were made by Savage so, although not surprised, I am a bit suspect that the Brits turned their noses up at the Savage barrels. The Brits are also the folks who make light of the American contribution to the two world wars. Now, Alan will be sending me to the nordy step. ;)
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
174 Posts
I also have a Savage No.4 Mk1* and it does have the S51 stamp under the stock. It also, like your rifle, has an Enfield 5-groove barrel installed in 1945 as indicated by the stamp "E/45" in your image.

I had quite an interesting discussion about this on milsurps.com about 10 years ago.

Lots if v'good information about Enfields available on milsurps.com.

gsthreeeight
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,113 Posts
All of the "scopeless" Savage Ts I have seen were partially converted by H&H and had the S51 marking on the buttstock, but lacked the "T" on the receiver wall that indicated a Telescope had been fitted. I have an early Savage T converted by Enfield that lacks all of the typical H&H markings because it was built before that program existed, but the serial number is much lower than the rifle in the OP. It is actually one of the first 1,000 rifles built by Savage in 1941.
 

·
Copper Bullet member
Joined
·
764 Posts
Nice rifle. This reminds me of the No4Mk1*T that I had for a while back in the 1990s. I was young and dumb. I probably paid about $100 for it, but some yahoo had butchered it. The forend was "sporterized", the barrel shortened, and the cheek rest was "improved"; they had filed the front slope of the cheek rest down into the stock itself. I foolishly sold it for about what I paid. Damn you Bubba! :)
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,218 Posts
Ah yes, but scopeless Savage snipers did in fact exist and are a bit hard to find.
I was not doubting the fact that Scopeless Savages exist (in fact I made the point that they do). My point was in response to your statement that Savage did not mark them T or S51 as those markings were put on by H&H NOT the rifle manufacturer.

The T was to show that H&H had fitted the scope, and the S%! was H&H wartime code marked to show it was them that had done the conversion work.
 

·
Silver Bullet Member
Joined
·
3,824 Posts
As usual, I stand corrected. But what would it be if I were not to only get something half right? On the other hand, again, I learned something. The hard way but at least I learned it.
 
  • Like
Reactions: timmct

·
Silver Bullet member
Joined
·
5,618 Posts
Ah yes, but scopeless Savage snipers did in fact exist and are a bit hard to find. Of course, I think that possibly it had a bit to do with the British snobbery when it came to rifles. Some of the finest rifle barrels were made by Savage so, although not surprised, I am a bit suspect that the Brits turned their noses up at the Savage barrels. The Brits are also the folks who make light of the American contribution to the two world wars. Now, Alan will be sending me to the nordy step. ;)
British 'snobbery', as you call it, never entered into the equation. GB was desperate for sniping rifles, indeed, rifles of ANY kind. However, like ALL contracts for precision items, if they didn't meet the specifications then they were not up to snuff. Period. Your end of post comment is just too hackneyed and old hat that it doesn't merit any response.
 

·
Silver Bullet Member
Joined
·
3,824 Posts
Your end of post comment is just too hackneyed and old hat that it doesn't merit any response.

If it does not warrant a response, then why did you bother to respond? That sentence goes back a while ago when Alan brought up the subject of "sending to the nordy step". So..........mind your own business. IF it is not worth a comment, why comment? I sometimes get sick and damn tired of the "holier than thou" horsefeathers that gets passed down. This is the second time that you have jumped ugly at me for making a less than glorious comment about England. Now you have a good day as you and I are not compatible personalities obviously.
 
  • Like
Reactions: alarmingman

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
1,373 Posts
Discussion Starter · #17 ·
BREAKING NEWS.... OP IS BLIND AS A BAT!!! Story at 11!

So I for whatever reason DID NOT SEE THIS... SMH (as the young kids with good eyes say)

Saw these markings but paid no attention
Wood Musical instrument Wood stain Varnish Hardwood

took photo of this because not sure if something was scrubbed here
Wood Wood stain Gas Tints and shades Hardwood



...then I FIND THIS!!! Damn, I'm blind (not really it's a figure of speech). Sorry DD, you asked me months back if it had the S51 and ONLY today did I see this, unreal!
Brown Table Amber Rectangle Wood
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
2,783 Posts
Most of the scopeless Savage guns have 1945 dated 5 grove barrels.

No one seems to know why.

I seem to recall two or three serial number ranges, with the 14C and 15C being the last ones.

It is a rare variant, but then there are so many rare variants with English rifles. Look at No 4 rifles alone:

1) No 4 1933 prototypes (~2500, made, 1403 converted to No 2)
2) No 4 1931-33 Snipers (1403 made)
3) No4 MK I Fazakerley rifles using No 1 MK VI actions. Pretty rare, only seen 3 in all the years of collecting.
4) No4 Turk. kind of rare
5) No4 Longbranch Thai marked
6) No 4 Indian grenade launcher set up (with Indian grenade launcher and No9 sight)
7) No 4 Savage scopeless T
8) L39A1
9) L42A1 conversion
10) Pre L39 CONV marked
11) Envoy
12) Enforcer
13) 1970 Palma Envoy (70 made, Fulton regulated)
14) PH T4 (419 made)
15) Fulton regulated LBS 7.62 conversion
16) South African marked No4 (not so rare but 4 variations (Sav, MK I, MKII, navy marked)
17) L59A1 drill rifle
18) 1941 marked early feature No 4 Maltby
19) 1941 Longbranch, early features
20) Greek marked Longbranch
21) RCMP marked Longbranch
22) No 4 Target gun, regulated for Bisley (lots of variations in that category, all uncommon)
23) NZ marked
24) No4 China theater marked (training rifle on buttstock, mostly Longbranch)
25) No 4 T with full kit
26) Canadian LB No4 T (couple of variations in scopes and set up)
27) Irish contract (ok not rare but interesting)
28) RAF drill pattern (vertical hole in barrel)
29) Indian police pattern (marking removed RFI marked, 1963 to 1977)
30) Pakistan made No 4
31) Maltby WWII (not post war marked)
32) Fazakerley WWII (not post war rebuild)
33) BSA WWII (not post war rebuild)
35) Fazakerley 1956~57 FTR new made rifle
36) Savage pre Lendlease rifle (lacking US property marking, very rare)
37) BSA 1958/59 contract rebuild
38) No7 MK I
39) No 7 Canadian
40) No 9
41) Savage No4 MK I action (Not MK I*)
42) Longbranch No4 MK I action (not MK I*)

well, there are more but that is a start off my head of the many variations. So the Savage No 4 t scopeless rifles are rare, but there are so many rare variations and that is only considering the No4 action based designs.
 

·
Gold Bullet member
Joined
·
12,302 Posts
Bob:

Congrats on finding a scarce rifle in very nice condition at a good price! (y)

Now you need to find one of the appropriate transit chests:



 
1 - 20 of 34 Posts
Top