Group 1 — Singular Agreements
Of thirteen singular agreements between Sinaiticus and Bezae in John 4, ten of the thirteen occur in the passage covered by my study of Bezae’s layering in John 4:1-42. In the table below, I have replaced Fee’s apparatus with the data in my study, which covers more Greek witnesses, fewer Latin witnesses, no Syriac witnesses, Origen, and a selection of early Christian writers in Latin (Beuron abbreviations): 
|4:9||D S* e a b d||– ου γαρ συγχρωνται ιουδαιοι σαμαριταις c: S[D] + ου γαρ συνχρωνται ιουδαιοι σαμαρειταις|
|4:11||D S a b d e ff ||– ουν post ποθεν|
|4:14||Cy D S* a b d ff c||ο δε πινων <- ως δ’αν πιη c: S[Ca] ος δ αν πιη|
|4:17||D S e b d r ff c Her/y||εχεις <- εχω|
|4:24||D S* d ff Her/y||– αυτον c: S[Ca] + αυτον|
|4:24||Hil D S* a d r Her/n||προσκυνειν δει <- δει προσκυνειν c: S[Ca] δει προσκυνιν|
|4:27||D S* d r||εν <- επι (_ τουτω) c: S[Ca] επι|
|4:27||D S 1654 a b d r ff ||+ αυτω (ειπεν _)|
|4:38||(no retroversion)||απεσταλκα <- απεστειλα|
|4:42||D S* b d r Her-y||σην μαρτυριαν <- σην λαλιαν c: S[Ca] λαλιαν|
Group 2 — Sparsely-Attested Agreements
Fee mentions seven additional variants with relatively sparse Greek support, five of which are attested in John 4:1-42. Four involve an explicit agreement between Bezae and Sinaiticus: 
|4:1||P66 D S Θ 1 35 565 1010 1241 1293 e a b d r ff c||ιησους <- κυριος|
|4:14||Hil D S 33 213 397 1010 1071 1241 1242 1293 2561 a b d||+ εγω (_ δωσω)|
|4:17||D S C L 597 1241 2786 d r||ανδρα ουκ εχω <- ουκ εχω ανδρα|
|4:25||(no retroversion)||αναγγελλει <- αναγγελει c: S[Ca] αναγγελει|
Fee plausibly suggests that Bezae and Sinaiticus share a common tradition at the following variant in 4:42, where both readings have a genitive nuance after the verb ακουω, despite the explicit difference in their readings: 
|αυτοι γαρ ακηκοαμεν||P66 P75 A B C W Byz pl|
|αυτου γαρ ακηκοαμεν = (?) αυτοι γαρ ακηκοαμεν παρ’ αυτου||D a = (?) S Π2 565 λ φ pc|
 G. D. Fee, “Codex Sinaiticus in the Gospel of John: A Contribution to Methodology in Establishing Textual Relationships,” New Testament Studies 15 (1968) 23–44 at 32.
 My data erroneously reads S q r c for S e a b d ff.
 The witness of 1654 shows that this is no longer a “singular” S-D agreement.
 Fee, “Sinaiticus,” 32.
 Fee, “Sinaiticus,” 33.