Price check on minty milsurp #2

I had a Savage one the same except it had the grooved rear hand guard that I paid $800 for about a year ago! and a 1944 LB one like your other without the grooved hand guard that I paid about $450 for 5 years ago.

BTW, the brass butt plate is not correct for this rifle as it would have come from the factory with a Zinc one! Bolt head also does not seem to have the Savage /US flaming bomb proof!
 
mkrnel said:
I had a Savage one the same except it had the grooved rear hand guard that I paid $800 for about a year ago! and a 1944 LB one like your other without the grooved hand guard that I paid about $450 for 5 years ago.

BTW, the brass butt plate is not correct for this rifle as it would have come from the factory with a Zinc one! Bolt head also does not seem to have the Savage /US flaming bomb proof!
Click to expand...

What he said- buttplate screws look turned recently, but the brass buttplate looks like a very good fit to the stock.Very skeptical that it is new and unused. And the wood does not look like typical Savage wood. A very nice Savage made No 4 otherwise, but would need to know more of the backstory to verify. Any provenance?
 
I always have my doubts about the new un-issued claims. That being said. If the insides look as good as the pictures it is good for $500. Looks almost like a new park job
 
OP contacted me and after discussions, it is indeed all original Savage except for the butt plate, as most know, savage did not use brass butt plates during WW2 manufacture. The butt plate is dated 1957 and my thinking on this rifle is that as it was in arsenal storage it went through post war inspection and at that time was brought up to the current post war spec. which was to have all rifles in service re-fitted with brass butt plates. He has access to a NOS zinc butt plate that he may replace the brass one to bring back to original condition.

Also the bolt head and all the stock is Savage S marked.
 
All well and fine; but my thoughts are, once he's proven less than truthful...all bets are off IMO.
Don't have knowledge of the rifle or the seller. So I've no dog in this fight.
But it's like balancing your chequebook, "Oh, it's out 15 cents. Better look closer, because it might be out more..."
If you caught an untruth, maybe you'd better look again. There might be more untruth's...
Just my opinion of course. Nice looking rifle though.
 
Savage used a different form of milling of the grooves inside the forestock, only way to verify would be to remove the forestock and look inside. Everybody else used a milling bit which leaves a trough-like channel, flat , straight sided and round ends. Savage used a Dado-type cutter and the trench looks deep in the middle but tapers up at either end.
 
OP is not that knowledgeable about milsurp rifles, I had him remove the buttplate over the phone to confirm, he never knew about the brass buttplate issue.
 
An unissued, unfired, Savage is a possibility, but not likely. As mentioned, the butt plate is wrong and doesn't fit either. I'd want to see the barrel and proof of good head space, as well. Plus the bolt handle has more wear that the rest of the receiver. Means it's been played with a lot. And the stock has been re-finish at the very least.
In any case, Savage No. 4's tend to bring more money Stateside than they do here. It's an NIH thing. Values on the assorted auction sites vary widely. There was one that Bubba got a hold of(aftermarket scope mounts and cheek rest) in 2012 that sold for $500US. Another without all that sold for $180US. Love these Canadian based auction sites selling stuff to foreigners.
 
I tend to agree with the uncertainty of unissued - but a nice looking No4 for sure. Has anyone seen what beat-up No4's sell for these days? So even if it's been played with, easily $500, and more. Looks great... yummy.
 
mkrnel said:
OP contacted me and after discussions, it is indeed all original Savage except for the butt plate, as most know, savage did not use brass butt plates during WW2 manufacture. The butt plate is dated 1957 and my thinking on this rifle is that as it was in arsenal storage it went through post war inspection and at that time was brought up to the current post war spec. which was to have all rifles in service re-fitted with brass butt plates. He has access to a NOS zinc butt plate that he may replace the brass one to bring back to original condition.

Also the bolt head and all the stock is Savage S marked.
Click to expand...

There could be a number of reasons a butt plate was changed on a rifle but I'm not sure they would change an alloy plate to brass just to bring them up to spec. What spec?
 
HarryD said:
There could be a number of reasons a butt plate was changed on a rifle but I'm not sure they would change an alloy plate to brass just to bring them up to spec. What spec?
Click to expand...
The Pattern Spec. as housed in the Pattern collection and recorded in the spec. provided to all manufacturers.

During the war the British, Savage and some Commonwealth factories had been authorised to switch from the prescribed Pattern standard brass butt plate (a limited supply controlled strategic resource) for the zinc alloy and other metal butt plates for the remainder of the war years, when the war was over and brass and copper was again in abundant supply they switched back to brass for all new production and was standard practice to switch other metal plates to brass during overhaul or armourer inspection of rifles.

Savage got out of making Lee Enfield rifles during the war and Longbranch did not switch back to brass but moved to an all steel butt plate.
 
mkrnel said:
The Pattern Spec. as housed in the Pattern collection and recorded in the spec. provided to all manufacturers.

During the war the British, Savage and some Commonwealth factories had been authorised to switch from the prescribed Pattern standard brass butt plate (a limited supply controlled strategic resource) for the zinc alloy and other metal butt plates for the remainder of the war years, when the war was over and brass and copper was again in abundant supply they switched back to brass for all new production and was standard practice to switch other metal plates to brass during overhaul or armourer inspection of rifles.

Savage got out of making Lee Enfield rifles during the war and Longbranch did not switch back to brass but moved to an all steel butt plate.
Click to expand...

Sounds quite interesting. Hard to see the sense in it really.

What's a good source for this information? Is it in the Loc's?
 
My main concern with the rifle is the stock. Its finish is to smooth as are the rounded edges that should be sharp. Look at the mated edges between the fore end and the upper hand guards. They are rounded into each other. That would be a red flag for me.

$500 plus would be fair though IMHO.

It may have been put into another stock or someone wanted to dress it up.

That being said, it is a lovely rifle.

I had one that came to me in a cardboard box, with the manufacturing tag and full of grease. It looked unissued as well. The stock finish was similar to the OP's but all of the leading edges were sharp.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom