Help finding some repair parts

[Hecklerusp45]

I need some parts for two rifles, one is a No.4 Mk 1* made by Savage. The previous owner wanted to adjust the point of impact, so he added metal to the front sight. He also ground the front sight thinner. I would like to put an original Savage front sight back on. So.... where can I find them and do they come in different heights? The mag that came in the rifle is in excellent condition, just like the rifle, but does not have the Savage S mark on it. Where can I get a Savage mag? I also have a 1903A3 made by Remington. The front sight blade received the same treatment as the Savage. Where should I look for a replacement and do they come in different heights? The 1903A3 is also missing its forward sling swivel. The band and screw is there, but the swivel is gone. Again, where should I look for a replacement? Again, I am needing:
1. Savage No. 4 Mk1* front sight
2. Savage mag.
3. Remington 1903a3 front sight blade
4. Remington 1903a3 forward swivel.

Any help will be appreciated

[JB White]

Yes, the sights are different sizes and should be numbered. All the sights will fit onto the No4, the SMLE, the Pattern 14, the Bren gun etc etc but the numbers will be off. There are two different styles for the No4 depending on the sight base.One requires a solid base while the other requires a split base. Your Savage should have a solid base without the locking screw.
Look atop the base of the blade and you should find a number represented in thousandths of an inch. For instance 0.35 or -0.15 etc. Try Liberty Tree for parts.

Keep in mind the rifle has had a service life so some parts may no longer match. IIT might still be correct aside from the buggered sight blade.

[Hecklerusp45]

Thanks for the reply. I am attaching a photo. Can you read it? Is that a .030 or 0.30?48144

[Merc]

Check on ebay

[Merc]

Found a few parts:

https://www.ebay.com/sch/i.html?_from=R40&_nkw=Enfield+No4+Mk1*&_sacat=0&_pgn=1

https://www.ebay.com/itm/1903-A3-REMINGTON-R-1903a3-sling-swivel-with-bolt-Springfield-vintage-part/143710673940?_trkparms=aid%3D111001%26algo%3DREC.S EED%26ao%3D1%26asc%3D20160811114145%26meid%3Daab6c ead4d234a6cad5a58bedbe0c779%26pid%3D100667%26rk%3D 2%26rkt%3D5%26mehot%3Dnone%26sd%3D324282179894%26i tm%3D143710673940%26pmt%3D0%26noa%3D1%26pg%3D23345 24&_trksid=p2334524.c100667.m2042

[JB White]

My typo. Sorry about that.

Your sight probably reads .030. Thinking 0.000 but knowing they only used 3 digits I used 0.00 when I replied.

[Hecklerusp45]

Thanks for all the replies, they are helpful. What does the .030 mean? Is it the height of the sight in inches or what?

[Merc]

All Savage magazines will have the rifle’s serial number stamped on it.

[JB White]

Thanks for all the replies, they are helpful. What does the .030 mean? Is it the height of the sight in inches or what?

Its the height of the blade base above the dovetail in inch scale.

[Merc]

Here’s a sight blade.

https://www.ebay.com/itm/1903-A3-SPRINGFIELD-FRONT-SIGHT-REMINGTON-WITH-BLADE-MARKED-E/193453622402?hash=item2d0abc0482:g:7f0AAOSwq39ZqI4 k

[JB White]

All Savage magazines will have the rifle’s serial number stamped on it.

I've had some thoughts about that but I'm nowhere near my references to double check. Trying to determine whether or not Savage was an exception to the rule of the time.

Serial numbered magazines came into vogue during No5 rifle production very late in the War. Then the decision was made to extend the practice on to other rifles. Those rifles already in the field which were unnumbered were to be marked upon being returned for service, or upon entering storage at depot. This only applied to rifles remaining in British service and there was no mass recall for the sake of markings.

As I said above, I'm unsure from memory whether or not Savage marked their production. They did have a lot of exceptions in regard to straying from pattern when it came to output.

[Merc]

The magazine on my Savage No. 4 is marked with my rifle’s serial number. The Savage magazine that’s currently for sale on eBay is also marked with a rifle’s serial number. I mentioned it to make him aware that Savage did stamp the rifle’s serial numbers on their magazines. If it’s important to him to not have mixed serial numbers, and it’s possible that not all were marked, then he’ll know to keep looking for a Savage magazine that doesn’t have serial numbers. What about Savage replacement magazines? They wouldn’t have serial numbers, right? Finding one might be difficult.

Edit: My No. 4 was missing a few minor external parts when I bought it several years ago. I found everything I needed on eBay or from dealers in the US, but I noticed several UK dealers who were selling large quantities of various unused NOS Lee Enfield parts that I didn’t need on eBay. Maybe they’re still around. A continuing search on eBay can be done for anything and be notified when something desirable gets posted.

[Sunray]

Go to Marstar, not E-Bay. (Marstar doesn't fund the people who want to take your firearms away from you. E-Bay does that.) Front sight blades are $7.50Cdn.($5.70USD) each. No idea if there are border issues. Kind of doubt it, but I don't know for sure.
https://marstar.ca/product-category/firearm-parts-and-accessories/
However, finding Savage made parts will likely be an issue. None made since 1944.
Remington made '03A3 parts shouldn't be too difficult. Only other maker was Smith-Corona. All remaining parts, etc, were sent to Long Branch when the Contract ended.
Keep in mind that putting in original manufacturer parts does not make the thing "all original". It's still a rebuild.
Please reduce the size of your pictures.

[Hecklerusp45]

Thanks for the advice, I will check marstar.

[Sunray]

Sarco would be another place to look at. www.sarcoinc.com
All the remaining Savage parts and rifles were sent to Long Branch when the Savage contract ended. That should have been up a line. snicker.

[Hal O'Peridol]

Savage did not number magazines at the factory.

If your looking for Savage specific parts, also check Apex Gun Parts. They ended up with a vast quantity of the parts from Springfield Sporters.

https://www.apexgunparts.com/

[JB White]

Savage did not number magazines at the factory.

If your looking for Savage specific parts, also check Apex Gun Parts. They ended up with a vast quantity of the parts from Springfield Sporters.

https://www.apexgunparts.com/

I strongly suspected as much but second guessed about the numbering. Thank you for the clarification.

It's starting to feel like I'll never get home. Always something else to do when I'm on the verge of completion.
I'm supposed to be a RETIRED carpenter!

[lyman]

Sarco would be another place to look at. www.sarcoinc.com
All the remaining Savage parts and rifles were sent to Long Branch when the Savage contract ended. That should have been up a line. snicker.

Sarco and Numrich would be last on the list,


Apex, as Hal mentioned,

ebay, (esp ebay UK), I've bought stuff from off Ebay.co.uk or whatever the English web address is, shipped to Va cheaper that I could buy here in the US

[Merc]

https://www.ebay.com/itm/ENFIELD-NO-4-MAGAZINE-SAVAGE-MARKED/154077932394?hash=item23dfc2ab6a:g:6JMAAOSwnzNfVmS z

Here’s a Savage mag without the S/N. I checked with the seller.

So, I’ve seen several Savage mags that had the rifle S/Ns stamped on them. They’re always the same. XXC over XXXX and they are always stamped in the middle of the base. Who would have done it?

[Hal O'Peridol]

Usually the Brits or S Africans, especially when the rifle went through an FTR or upgrade to No4Mk1/3

[Merc]

Thanks for the information. It’s interesting that the rebuilders made an effort to keep some of the original parts on the rifle.

[Sunray]

They didn't care if anything was 'original' or not. What happened is the parts were determined to be OK as is. No changing or fixing stuff that doesn't need it.
No weapons tech, then or now, cares who made what part. It's a case of fixing what needs fixing and get the thing out the door.

[Merc]

They didn't care if anything was 'original' or not. What happened is the parts were determined to be OK as is. No changing or fixing stuff that doesn't need it.
No weapons tech, then or now, cares who made what part. It's a case of fixing what needs fixing and get the thing out the door.

So, you’re saying the reason to stamp the S/N on a part was to show that it passed inspection and should be kept with the rifle?

[JB White]

Its marked to show it was fitted to that rifle.

[Merc]

Its marked to show it was fitted to that rifle.

That’s what I thought and was the reason I initially thought it was a factory mark.

The bolt handle is the only other Savage part that I’ve seen with the rifle’s S/N stamped on it. Was that a factory or rebuilder mark since the bolt was also a part that required fitting?

[JB White]

Originally a factory stamping. If a bolt was replaced, it was then fitted and gauged prior to being numbered to the rifle. Same goes with any replacement part. All fitted/regulated to the rifle it is being attached to. That includes the SMLE nosecap. An improperly fitted nosecap can break the forewood during bayonet usage. (broken stocks were the reason behind the extra band on the MkV trials rifles)
If it didn't gauge to spec, another part was selected from the bin.
You can say ,numbered replacement part, or refitted, matched etc., but don't say the words 'force matched' around anybody in the Enfield world. Nothing was ever forced to work. Not unless Bubba did it out in his tool shed.

Besides, the term force matched is a fairly recent Americanism. From about the time folks started spelling bullets as boolits. Think back 30 years ago. Neither term existed in the collector community. Back in the days when people knew how to spell, had a larger vocabulary, and were articulate in their speech. ;)

[Merc]

JB, Good info as usual. I compare the No. 4 Mk 1* to the 03A3. Both were made around the same time and both were simplified to meet the demand of a higher rate of production. The 10 round mag made the No. 4 the beast of the battlefield.

[The Armourer]

There has recently been some too-ing and fro-ing correspondence about the sights used on the No4 rifles. Maybe it’s time to open up a few little previously unknown or certainly not fully understood points.

Let’s take the foresights first. For the No4 rifle, there were 4 distinct TYPES of foresight blade. The very FIRST was, naturally enough, designated the
BLADE, foresight. It came in eight sizes, from -.030”, -.015, 0, +.015”, +.030”, +.045”, +.060” and +.075”. These sizes (and I’m sure you all know this by heart…..) indicate the tip of the blade height below or above 1” of the exact centerline of the bore while the blade size ‘0’ is exactly 1” above the centre line of the bore ……, phew! Now for another misunderstood point. All of the actual BLADE heights are the same of approx .140” but it’s the .38” wide blade BASE (or stool) height that differs to make up the sizes. I know that some of you will say that this isn’t correct because ……… I know this and that’s because some of the commercial companies, including Parker Hale made their own variants including thinner widths, blow-up tyres and wind-up windows etc. BUT I’m talking about the Ministry of Supply/Army issue blades

This blade was followed by a later blade style so as a result, the first original blade was redesignated the BLADE, foresight, Mk1. The Mk1 blade is easily identifiable by having a SOLID base. This is because it was retained firmly in position, gripped by the split BLOCK, band, foresight. The split foresight block is closed, to grip the solid blade, by a reverse headed screwdriver. It is the REAR of the Mk1 blade that we ought to be aware of now, where the undercut/inward sloping blade part meets up with the block, which then slopes outwards towards the base of the block. So, the side elevation of the blade forms a side-on ‘V’ shape.

This rearwards and upwards sloping base could and did allow a line of reflected light to shine straight back into the shooters eye. Maybe not on the manicured ranges at Bisley but it certainly did in the bleak sunshine of Tunisia and Italy from where the complaints came

The next foresight blade was introduced as a result of efforts to cheapen the cost of the No4 rifle in 1941. This time, instead of using a split block, band, foresight and the reverse headed 4BAscrew, the block, band was left solid. But in accordance with good engineering practice and to maintain the required friction to hold the blade secure within the block band foresight, the BLADE base was manufactured with a split block. This split block blade was called the BLADE, foresight, Mk1*

The sizes remained the same as did the zeroing procedure, as did the side-on ‘V’ side elevation of the rear of the blade. It’s just that the block was easier and cheaper to manufacture. The new slot made very little difference to the cost of the blades because a), they were manufactured ‘biscuit-block (some call it chocolate block) fashion anyway and b), the addition of a simple slitting saw operation along the base was an almost academic addition and c), the original blades were still being produced anyway!

So there you have the earliest Mk1and Mk1* blades.

Now here is where we get a little more complicated. The Mk2 blade…………. The Mk2 blade was very similar to the Mk1 blade with its 8 sizes and its solid block base only this time, where the undercut/outward sloping blade part meets the base part, the base extends rearwards a small amount, then the BASE takes on an undercut inward sloping angle too. This immediately solved the reflected light problem because now, both the blade and the base reflected downwards. This blade was introduced as the BLADE, foresight, Mk2

If things were simple, the next blade would be designated the Mk2* but we don’t do simple…., we do complicated! So, the next blade became the BLADE, foresight, Mk3. As you might expect, the Mk3 blade was identical to the double undercut Mk2 but this time came with a split base to use in the solid block band foresight.

The earlier Mk1 and Mk1* blades were thereafter, obsolescent. Obsolescent but not obsolete so there are thousands of thousands still in service……………

THE No5 RIFLE
If you have a No5 rifle, then a similar situation arose there too but the situation was even more dire as the reflected line of shine certainly DID cause problems. So while the No5 blades were all split blocks, the;
Mk1 split block blade for the No5 equates to the Mk1* blade for a No4 rifle
and the
Mk 2 split block blade for the No5 equates to the Mk3 blade for a No4 rifle.
There were different part numbers for the blades indicating that there were subtle differences between the No4 and No5 types. Quite what the differences between the blades were on paper didn’t manifest its way to us as young Armourers in Malaya! We used split block ‘double undercut’ blades on every No5 we zeroed of course, but they all came from the same tubs, regardless of whether it was a No4 or 5 blade. They all looked the same to us and we treated them the same too!

But back to No4 rifles and the BLOCK band, foresight. Are you in for the long haul? Soon after the large late 40’s FTR programmes, it was established at Fazakerley that a large percentage of fully refurbished rifles were impossible to zero due to them shooting too high. Fazakerley sought to obtain a relaxation in order to use the +.090” and +.105” STEN gun foresight blades but already there were problems relating to the final inspection standards that I won’t go into. But the same problems were apparent outside the factories and Base Workshops, in service too so while the factories, FTR programme contractors and the large REME Base workshops were NOT permitted to use the higher Sten foresight blades, a relaxation was sought that they could be used at unit level (both high sizes) and Field workshop level (just the .090 size). But this was palliative and not a cure by any means. The answer was that where a rifle was perfect in every other way, then a Mk2 BLOCK Band foresight was available.

The ‘new’ BLOCK, band, foresight was .030” taller, at .490” than the original Mk1 block band, at .460” tall. This immediately, but invisibly, allowed for a further 2 increases in blade height (……. think about it!). The new blocks can be identified by the figure 1H for the Mk1 split block or a 2H for the Mk2 solid block, marked on the rear sloping surface. But even these didn’t last long because they only allowed for a further two ‘invisible’ increases of foresight. The problem was more acute than that with thousands otherwise perfect No4 rifles stacking up in Ordnance depots unable to be zeroed So in an act of almost desperation in January 1954, two FURTHER foresight block bands blocks were introduced. These blocks were heightened by a further .030” to .520”. So we have the original block band height of .460”, the 1949 increased height to .490” then the 1954 block band with a height of .520”. At a stroke, we now have a block band foresight that allows the highest blade ( the .075”…., don’t forget that anything higher was for the Sten gun) to be, in effect .135”……… which is 1.135” above the centre line of the bore

So now we have a total of SIX BLOCK, band foresights.
The Mk1 and Mk2 original, the
Mk1H and 2H modified both .030” higher than the original, and the
Mk1 and 2 SECOND modified, now .060” higher than the original!
You’re not quite believing this are you? But help was at hand. The second block was pure duplication so was declared obsolescent. So that after 1954, only the first, original blocks and the third pattern, .060” taller were available from Ordnance stores. While the second pattern was obsolescent, you HAD to have the original, lower block of course in order to cater for those rifles firing LOW!

Jeeeees, we had to learn, know and put into practice all of this rubbish! The most astute of you will now be looking at your ‘original, untouched since the factory’ rifles to see if it has the higher foresight block band fitted. Only a post 1949 made rifle will have a block marked 1H or 2H and only a post 1954 made rifle will have a block marked 1 or 2 on the rear surface as original. Before that, they were bare!

But there’s a little more……………. Our acceptable zeroing standards state after zeroing, the blade of the foresight will overhang or be level with the edge of the foresight block. If the edge is inboard of the edge of the block, then it indicates that something is wrong with the rifle. BUT, it was discovered that while the UK made foresight blade bases were .38” wide, due to a tolerance error, the Canadian bases were .43” wide. Without going into the technicalities, a rifle fitted with a Canadian .43” wide base could fail the zeroing criteria unnecessarily. So these Canadian .43” wide blades were all declared obsolete and withdrawn.

There, a little bit about a previously unknown feature of the No4 rifle! Not a lot of people know that!

[Hal O'Peridol]

Found another place where some of the SS parts ended up.

Century Arms.

https://www.centuryarms.com/surplus-corner/parts-accessories

Slow as molasses on shipping though. I did buy their last original No7 trainer bolt head though. It was 30 bucks. Wish I had found that site sooner.