Enfield-Rifles.com Homepage
Forum Home Forum Home > Enfields > Enfield Rifles
  New Posts New Posts RSS Feed - No.4 Mk.I* T
  FAQ FAQ  Forum Search   Events   Register Register  Login Login

No.4 Mk.I* T

 Post Reply Post Reply Page  <1234>
Author
Message
Honkytonk View Drop Down
Senior Member
Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: December 30 2017
Location: Brandon Mb
Status: Offline
Points: 3665
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Honkytonk Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: May 16 2021 at 4:17pm
I've kinda followed the thread a bit. If it wasn't tuned by Holland and Holland, isn't just a really nice stock No4 with a scope mounted on it? No offense intended... just learning about British No4 T's myself!
Back to Top
Sponsored Links


Back to Top
jhonelver View Drop Down
Groupie
Groupie
Avatar

Joined: February 15 2021
Location: Netherlands
Status: Offline
Points: 86
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote jhonelver Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: May 16 2021 at 10:54pm
Originally posted by Honkytonk Honkytonk wrote:

I've kinda followed the thread a bit. If it wasn't tuned by Holland and Holland, isn't just a really nice stock No4 with a scope mounted on it? No offense intended... just learning about British No4 T's myself!

Well, you can say that but.

Holland & holland was not the only one that modified rifle for the british army.

Despite that. It aint fair to say that only british No.4 T rifles are original and any other country that makes that modification themselfs is considerd just an "nice no.4 with scope".

So no i disagree with you.
Back to Top
Goosic View Drop Down
Senior Member
Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: September 12 2017
Location: Phoenix Arizona
Status: Online
Points: 5630
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Goosic Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: May 17 2021 at 6:22am
jhonelver. Definitely no offense intended here as well.

 The  No4Mk1"Telescopic Rifle"was only deemed a telescopic rifle,"AFTER" it passed  a strict and certain criteria set forth and issued by the British Ministry of Defense,which included having Holland and Holland doing the telescopic conversions. 

The Canadian No4Mk1* with the REL scope assembly was met with much scrutiny by the British MOD because, as stated earlier, it was not done by H&H. After much more scrutiny, the British MOD,"Allowed" the REL scope conversions into the field of battle but, only being issued to the Canadian Forces.

Anything done to a No4Mk1 to make it resemble a H&H conversion was just that, "A Resemblance Thereof."

One Captain Peter Laidler gives you a very indepth and detail oriented instruction plan on how to fit up your stock No4Mk1 to not only resemble the H&H converted telescopic rifle but to actually shoot almost as accurately as a H&H converted telescopic rifle as defined by the British Ministry of Defense. 

The fact however is jhonelver.
 You have a rifle, just like myself and many others that, were not converted to the,"Telescopic Rifle" standard set forth by the British Ministry of Defense and then turned over to the infamous Holland & Holland facility to carry out the procedures. Therefore, they will always remain a very nice looking resemblance, replication, and facsimile of the originals.
Back to Top
jhonelver View Drop Down
Groupie
Groupie
Avatar

Joined: February 15 2021
Location: Netherlands
Status: Offline
Points: 86
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote jhonelver Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: May 17 2021 at 9:50am
Originally posted by Goosic Goosic wrote:

jhonelver. Definitely no offense intended here as well.

 The  No4Mk1"Telescopic Rifle"was only deemed a telescopic rifle,"AFTER" it passed  a strict and certain criteria set forth and issued by the British Ministry of Defense,which included having Holland and Holland doing the telescopic conversions. 

The Canadian No4Mk1* with the REL scope assembly was met with much scrutiny by the British MOD because, as stated earlier, it was not done by H&H. After much more scrutiny, the British MOD,"Allowed" the REL scope conversions into the field of battle but, only being issued to the Canadian Forces.

Anything done to a No4Mk1 to make it resemble a H&H conversion was just that, "A Resemblance Thereof."

One Captain Peter Laidler gives you a very indepth and detail oriented instruction plan on how to fit up your stock No4Mk1 to not only resemble the H&H converted telescopic rifle but to actually shoot almost as accurately as a H&H converted telescopic rifle as defined by the British Ministry of Defense. 

The fact however is jhonelver.
 You have a rifle, just like myself and many others that, were not converted to the,"Telescopic Rifle" standard set forth by the British Ministry of Defense and then turned over to the infamous Holland & Holland facility to carry out the procedures. Therefore, they will always remain a very nice looking resemblance, replication, and facsimile of the originals.


I will disagree with you on that one.

Because it aint a No.4 Mk.I T and it was not build to resemble that rifle.

The Dutch were given these rifles and did their own checks. the rifles had to meet their standards, and were converted to their version of a scoped rifle they needed.
So yes it is correct and original.


For example.

Almost all European countries used the FN FAL.
All countries had their own modifications. even countries that did not manufacture that rifle.
these modified rifle were for European armies and are all considered original.
then why can't we say that if that was done with an Lee Enfield?

With original i mean it was done for or by an particular military for their purposed use.
so not any changes made after that or changes made to resemble such rifles.

factory original is how it left the factory.
(military) original is how and in what configuration/modification was used by any military army.

No4. T rifles are not factory original because the rifles were first manufactured then testen for accuracy and the best were shipped of to H&H for modifying it to T configuration.

so in that case it is the same in my opinion.


Back to Top
Goosic View Drop Down
Senior Member
Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: September 12 2017
Location: Phoenix Arizona
Status: Online
Points: 5630
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (1) Thanks(1)   Quote Goosic Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: May 17 2021 at 10:32am
Let me play Devils Advocate for a moment here.
I originally bought a barreled action only. It is a Savage made No4Mk1*. I purchased a reproduction H&H scope assembly and followed the process of installing it correctly by Mr. Laidler. I then researched every known stamp and proper location of said stamps by H&H and placed them accordingly.  I had at the time an exact copy of a H&H converted No4Mk1*T of which only 2500 originals were produced.  I just recently found and bought an original unissued 7.62mm Canadian Arsenal made contoured No4 barrel.  More research was done and I discovered that Enfield produced the L8 series project.  I followed the steps involved and rebarrelled my No4Mk1* to the Enfield specifications and now have an exact copy of a L8A5T which included the exact style of elctro stenciling over the original No4Mk1* stamp to indicate the conversion by Enfield themselves.
Question: Is it an actual sniper rifle?
It shoots as accurately if not better than an original T rifle converted by H&H and just as capable of holding a 1 - 1.5 MOA as any Enfield converted No4 to the 7.62mm but was completely refurbished and recalibrate by myself. The rifle you acquired was scoped by the Dutch military. Question: Does that make it an actual sniper rifle according to the British Ministry of Defense standards of how a No4Mk1 was to be configured?
Remember that the Canadian Arsenal/Long Branch No4Mk1* were converted to a Telescopic Rifle using the REL C scope assembly but was never officially adopted by the British Government. The MOD was the definitive at the time as to what their definition of a sniper rifle was to be and if made by any other source of manufacturing, it was just a facsimile and would remain as such.
I personally, am very interested in learning more about your newly acquired specimen and look forward to any and all information you  offer as to how it was configured including all the different stamps there may be...
Back to Top
britrifles View Drop Down
Senior Member
Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: February 03 2018
Location: Atlanta, GA
Status: Offline
Points: 3110
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote britrifles Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: May 17 2021 at 10:41am
While the rifle would not be a British Pattern No. 4 Mk I(T), it may well be a genuine Dutch No. 4 Sniper Rifle, as they designated it.  The markings should tell the tale. 


Back to Top
Goosic View Drop Down
Senior Member
Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: September 12 2017
Location: Phoenix Arizona
Status: Online
Points: 5630
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Goosic Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: May 17 2021 at 10:45am
You mentioned the FN FAL.
I once owned a G3 with the older style flip up sights. Actually a CETME version to be more precise. It was fiddled with to accept the FN FAL select fire carrier group. It was further fiddled with to accept the M80A1 scope assembly.  At the range, you be hard pressed to distinguish it from an actual FN. The baseline here is that it was and still is a facsimile of an actual FN sniper rifle...
Back to Top
Goosic View Drop Down
Senior Member
Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: September 12 2017
Location: Phoenix Arizona
Status: Online
Points: 5630
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Goosic Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: May 17 2021 at 10:53am
Originally posted by britrifles britrifles wrote:

While the rifle would not be a British Pattern No. 4 Mk I(T), it may well be a genuine Dutch No. 4 Sniper Rifle, as they designated it.  The markings should tell the tale. 


britrifles used the word,"Pattern."
That is the key to distinguish an original from others that were manufactured by other countries. Granted your was produced by the Dutch Military it would still be considered a,"Patterned/facsimile" of the original.
Back to Top
Zed View Drop Down
Special Member
Special Member
Avatar
Donating Member

Joined: May 01 2012
Location: France
Status: Offline
Points: 4322
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (1) Thanks(1)   Quote Zed Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: May 17 2021 at 11:33am
If I understand this correctly. The rifle in question is not being sold as a No4Mk1T. 
The rifle is a Dutch Army Sniper rifle; built by Dutch Armourer's using a standard No4Mk1 and using locally made scope and mount.

So for a Dutch collector; that would obviously be a very nice rifle to have. In fact it would be a nice rifle to have in any Enfield collection, due to it's rarity. 
However the value is difficult to gauge because of it's rarity (if proven to be original Dutch conversion).
It's nice to be important, but it's more important to be nice!
Back to Top
jhonelver View Drop Down
Groupie
Groupie
Avatar

Joined: February 15 2021
Location: Netherlands
Status: Offline
Points: 86
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote jhonelver Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: May 17 2021 at 11:35am
Goosic,

you are make 2 mistakes.

first, the british do not decide what is, or is not a sniper rifle (for other countries).

Dutch sniper rifles do not have to comply to British Ministry of Defense standards.
the british do not decide the standards for other countries.

that suggestion in itself is insulting.

secondly.

you changing a rifle, with guidance of a book you are making a fake repro. and are part of the problem of fake (sniper) rifles etc.

german rifles can't be sold as original anymore because of fake stamps, markings and modification done after the rifles left the army to up value and sell them for more then they are worth.

Keep the rifles as they were, or tell what you have done.

But the bottom line is.

The Dutch can decide themselfs what a sniper rifle is. the army can build one or let a company build one for them. that is an original Dutch Sniper Rifle. maybe based of a british one. maybe used the same things. yes.

i wont and can't say it is an british no.4 T
But i can and will say it is an Dutch No.4 sniper. because it is. (well i don't know for sure yet because i am still researching it) but for the sake of this argument i can if it is.

So stop using British standards for rifles and modifications done for other countries and armies. because they don't and won't comply with the british standard.



Back to Top
jhonelver View Drop Down
Groupie
Groupie
Avatar

Joined: February 15 2021
Location: Netherlands
Status: Offline
Points: 86
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote jhonelver Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: May 17 2021 at 11:41am
Originally posted by Zed Zed wrote:

If I understand this correctly. The rifle in question is not being sold as a No4Mk1T. 
The rifle is a Dutch Army Sniper rifle; built by Dutch Armourer's using a standard No4Mk1 and using locally made scope and mount.

So for a Dutch collector; that would obviously be a very nice rifle to have. In fact it would be a nice rifle to have in any Enfield collection, due to it's rarity. 
However the value is difficult to gauge because of it's rarity (if proven to be original Dutch conversion).

Yes, thank you.

someone who understands.

The rifle is sold as a Dutch military Lee Enfield with Dutch army scope.
only were made. these were the first Dutch produced army scopes ever.

it is hard proving the rifle was modified by the Dutch armourers. i am still working on that.
But the scope is original 1951 Dutch AI scope produced in Delft. which is the part i want to have as an collector.

The problem with the rifle is that the Dutch didn't stamp the ones they used.

Israel for example gave all their service rifles an stamp, so we can identify Israƫli service rifles.

But the Dutch are really keen on documentation and matching numbers rifles. so they would have kept an an document with the serial numbers of the rifles. they are stil doing that today.

but finding a list of 600 lee enfields that were modified to sniper rifle in 1951. well that document is playing hide and seek right now.Shocked






Back to Top
Goosic View Drop Down
Senior Member
Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: September 12 2017
Location: Phoenix Arizona
Status: Online
Points: 5630
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (1) Thanks(1)   Quote Goosic Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: May 17 2021 at 12:15pm
jhonelver:
You are correct when you say that the BMOD does not decide what is or is not a sniper rifle as made by other countries. However.  If the rifle in question was a No4Mk1 or its variants and scoped in a similar fashion to facsimile an original No4Mk1 T, then those who refurbished and converted the rifles did no different than what I did, and that was to make a copy of the original. 

"The retort that I am the problem by making a fake would only come into play if I were to attempt to deceive the public and sell the rifle as an original unaltered weapon for monetary gain. The rifle is mine until I pass on and then is passed down to my daughters with explicit instructions that if we're to be sold, it is to be sold as a Reproduction and Copy thereof in the seller description along with a parts list of the reproduction items and where they were purchased from."

The guidance I procured was not from a book but from the Chief Master Armourer Peter Laidler himself, who worked for the British Ministry of Defense and as outlined in detailed format to conform to MOD standards. 

To tell me to stop using British standards in regards to the Enfield rifle and the fact that this site is about "Everything Lee-Enfield" would not be applicable here and as such, I can voice my opinions as I see fit as long as it does not contain course or vulgar language. I stated originally that I was NOT attempting to be offensive and that I was just making a correlation to a comment Honkytonk had made. 
You obviously have taken offense.
 Remember however. Your rifle, was in fact, originally manufactured under strict conditions set forth by the British Ministry of Defense. AFTER which, the Dutch military tinkered with it and added all their bells and whistles to it and then called it there own. Exactly no different then what I did...


Back to Top
jhonelver View Drop Down
Groupie
Groupie
Avatar

Joined: February 15 2021
Location: Netherlands
Status: Offline
Points: 86
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote jhonelver Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: May 17 2021 at 12:47pm
Originally posted by Goosic Goosic wrote:

jhonelver:
You are correct when you say that the BMOD does not decide what is or is not a sniper rifle as made by other countries. However.  If the rifle in question was a No4Mk1 or its variants and scoped in a similar fashion to facsimile an original No4Mk1 T, then those who refurbished and converted the rifles did no different than what I did, and that was to make a copy of the original. 

"The retort that I am the problem by making a fake would only come into play if I were to attempt to deceive the public and sell the rifle as an original unaltered weapon for monetary gain. The rifle is mine until I pass on and then is passed down to my daughters with explicit instructions that if we're to be sold, it is to be sold as a Reproduction and Copy thereof in the seller description along with a parts list of the reproduction items and where they were purchased from."

The guidance I procured was not from a book but from the Chief Master Armourer Peter Laidler himself, who worked for the British Ministry of Defense and as outlined in detailed format to conform to MOD standards. 

To tell me to stop using British standards in regards to the Enfield rifle and the fact that this site is about "Everything Lee-Enfield" would not be applicable here and as such, I can voice my opinions as I see fit as long as it does not contain course or vulgar language. I stated originally that I was NOT attempting to be offensive and that I was just making a correlation to a comment Honkytonk had made. 
You obviously have taken offense.
 Remember however. Your rifle, was in fact, originally manufactured under strict conditions set forth by the British Ministry of Defense. AFTER which, the Dutch military tinkered with it and added all their bells and whistles to it and then called it there own. Exactly no different then what I did...

Well i took offense because i get a lot of reaction to this rifle saying it al all wrong and it is not a british no.4 T and it is not in accordance with British standards.

All i want is people to understand that there are other standards, and modifications done by other countries armorers. and that those rifles are original military rifles in the correct configuration those countries/armies needed them to be.

The british standards you are talking about are the back bone of the lee enfield and the british modifications. but they cannot be applied to for other countries.

and what you are saying about you modifications.

The Dutch Lee Enfield is an original Dutch military rifle.
Your rifle is an resemblance/repro of an british military rifle.

There is your difference. both dutch military and you tinkered with an lee enfield. only one of them saw military action in that particular configuration and the other is done by someone qualified. but will not make it an original military rifle.

That is my point.


sorry if i got annoyed a bit. hope you forgive me for that.
Back to Top
Goosic View Drop Down
Senior Member
Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: September 12 2017
Location: Phoenix Arizona
Status: Online
Points: 5630
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Goosic Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: May 17 2021 at 12:57pm
You do not need any forgiveness from me. You have an opinion such as myself. 
One very small point of contention that does need correction though.
I did attend a gunsmithing course many decades ago under the guidance of a very well know North American Master Gunsmith and then did apprenticeship work under him as well. In my own opinion, that makes me just as qualified as anyone else to refurbish and rebrand a rifle as I see fit...
Back to Top
jhonelver View Drop Down
Groupie
Groupie
Avatar

Joined: February 15 2021
Location: Netherlands
Status: Offline
Points: 86
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote jhonelver Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: May 17 2021 at 1:16pm
Originally posted by Goosic Goosic wrote:

You do not need any forgiveness from me. You have an opinion such as myself. 
One very small point of contention that does need correction though.
I did attend a gunsmithing course many decades ago under the guidance of a very well know North American Master Gunsmith and then did apprenticeship work under him as well. In my own opinion, that makes me just as qualified as anyone else to refurbish and rebrand a rifle as I see fit...

well, i did not know that, and i do not judge your capabilities or your work.
you are probably better at gunsmithing then i am. (i am stil learning).







Back to Top
Honkytonk View Drop Down
Senior Member
Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: December 30 2017
Location: Brandon Mb
Status: Offline
Points: 3665
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (1) Thanks(1)   Quote Honkytonk Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: May 17 2021 at 5:29pm
I think I now understand a bit more on the LE No4 (T) sniper rifle. It is specific to British standards. As a Canadian, as Goosic mentioned, our version was accepted as such (but issued only to Canadians). Other countries that received No4's during, and obviously after WW2, worked these rifles to their own countries standards to produce a "Sniper" rifle using the Lee Enfield No4 platform. Thus, in a sense, it is a Lee Enfield sniper rifle. And I suspect highly treasured by individuals from the countries that received and converted these No4's.
Back to Top
 Post Reply Post Reply Page  <1234>
  Share Topic   

Forum Jump Forum Permissions View Drop Down

Forum Software by Web Wiz Forums® version 12.01
Copyright ©2001-2018 Web Wiz Ltd.