Great War Webley Revolvers (Mks VI, V & VI)

[Khaki]

Tony,

Thank you for the information on the .455/.45 ammuntion.

Should I again find the text book reference to the British Army using .45 ammuntion in converted Mk.V1's I shall gladly post it.

LF

I too have seen that reference and will make a point of trying to find it,

khaki

[Lancashire Fusilier]

MikB,

I have actually recently seen a Colt 1911 specifically made and chambered to take the .455 bullet, so I know that part is correct, I also think that a Webley Automatic pistol was also made in .455.

It is unlikely that there was any wide scale conversion by the British Army of the Mk.V1 to .45, and that it not what I said, and it may have been carried out on a limited basis. Again, should I find the written reference I shall gladly post it.

I just do not think it is correct to state that each and every conversion of a Webley Mk.V1 to .45 automatically took place in the USA.

LF

[Lancashire Fusilier]

Khaki,

May thanks for the post, hopefully, one or both of us will find the reference.

LF

[Retlaw]

Sorry, but that is utter rubbish. The British did not convert any .455 inch Webley revolvers to take the .45 ACP cartridge. The conversions were all done in the U.S. to make the weapon more appealing to American shooters, given the availability of .45 ACP ammo.

.455 inch Mark VI ammunition remained in production until about 1943 for the British military and Kynoch continued making it for export to places like Pakistan and other Commonwealth countries until around 1970.

In the UK converted Webleys are by far the oddity. Virtually all are still in .455 inch calibre.

Regards

TonyE

I had a Mk VI Webly near 60 years ago, and shot loads of .45 ACP thro it, no convesrion was made, I had two very thin spring steel clips that held 3 .45 ACP cartridges each, just dropped in the cylinder like a speed loader, when that was used, the head space was ok for the ACP, but some of the empties were difficult to get out of the clip, due to a slight bulge in the case, they were not much use for reloading.

Retlaw

[4thGordons]

FWIW I agree with TonyE. I have never heard of British conversions of the MkVI to .45ACP whereas such conversions were/are indeed common in the US Market.

Skennerton's "British Small Arms of WWII" 1988 contains a list of a large number of types on charge (inc. obsolete early weapons) and those purchased early in WWII (including many from the US and many US types) when there was a chronic shortage of handguns (1940/41.) Although it lists several .45 cal weapons it makes no mention of any official coontracts for conversions nor conversions on charge at the time. With respect to the .45 weapons imported fromt the US the list notes they were painted and stencilled to clearly distinguish their calibre as US .45. This did include some .45 Colt revolvers using moon clips but no mention is made anywhere that I could see of conversion of MkVIs. (pp24-30)

Whilst not defintitive proof obviously, this is strongly suggestive to me that Tony's response to the unequivocal claim that "Many Mk.V1's (sic) were also converted by the British Army to take the more available U.S. .45 cartridge" may be justified -- if not humble. I am not sure this is a matter of "point of view" or interpretation so much as (insofar as is possible) the establishment of a "fact" which was what was being claimed. I am 100% certain that should some primary evidence (documentary/photographic etc) be produced to support the claim of "many" official conversions by the British Army then TonyE would be the first to eat humble pie (with me now close behind I suppose!). I would respectfully suggest that "recalling reading something" is unlikely to meet this standard.

That said - here is my 1918 example

Cheers,

Chris

EDIT: Blimey - I am a bit slow I swear non of this was there when I started! The only conversion for .45 use in the US was very simple (and therefore common) and this was milling a few millimeters off the back of the cylinder to allow for the moon clips Retlaw mentioned

Edited 24 January , 2012 by 4thGordons

[truthergw]

Sheer curiosity here. What is the little round thingumajig, in its own little box beside the ammunition. The weapon with the converting clip does not have it.

[4thGordons]

MikB,

I have actually recently seen a Colt 1911 specifically made and chambered to take the .455 bullet, so I know that part is correct, I also think that a Webley Automatic pistol was also made in .455.

The Pistol, Self-Loading Webley and Scott 0.455 MkI was introduced (IIRC in 1915 for the Royal Navy)but I think this is a semi-rimmed round with a jacketed bullet of slightly larger dimensions and a more powerful charge -- according to Hogg and Weeks (Mil Small Arms of the 20th Century) "...caused the sudden destruction of a number of revolvers in World War I before the difference was appreciated" (p1:35)

My interest is much more in rifles but does this mean there were two 0.455 rounds in service a semi-rimmed auto round (with a bullet of 0.456" or 11.6mm) and the lead bulleted revolver cartridge of 0.441 (11.2mm)bullet diameter?

Chris

[Lancashire Fusilier]

Truthergw,

That is a small brass Oiler Bottle, fitted to the screw off lid is a spoon type fitting for placing the oil into/onto the revolver parts.

LF.

[truthergw]

Truthergw,

That is a small brass Oiler Bottle, fitted to the screw off lid is a spoon type fitting for placing the oil into/onto the revolver parts.

LF.

Thank you.

[Lancashire Fusilier]

4th Gordons,

Nice Webley Mk.V1, can you post a photograph of the uniform jacket it is sitting on ? looks interesting.

LF.

[Simon127]

My Webley Mk III which I understand to be late nineteenth century manufacture says - if I remember rightly - on the deactivation certificate that the calibre is .45 rather than .455. I never really thought too much about it as it's a deactivated example. It's a private purchase type with Webley and Sons name along the top of the barrel. Would add some pictures but my shots are well beyond 100k.

S

4th Gordons: Love the way you photograph your pieces. Gives them a real feel with them laid out with other items like that.

[Deerhunter]

Tony E, LF,

To be honest, I sense that the major issue here is the use of the term "utter rubbish" in reference to LF's comment. Whatever the accuracy of a held opinion, there are probably more diplomatic ways of expressing disagreement with a statement ventured out of historical interest.

In short, come on - a bit of decorum, please.

[4thGordons]

4th Gordons,

Nice Webley Mk.V1, can you post a photograph of the uniform jacket it is sitting on ? looks interesting.

LF.

I don't recall which of my jackets it was -- I think probably just a 1922 pattern Service Dress Jacket, nothing special unfortunately. While I have some nice Highland doublets, and a couple of good US sets, a decent Service Dress jacket has remained out of my reach.

Simon127 - thanks.

Chris

[TonyE]

Chris - yes, there were indeed two different types of .455 inch ammunition in British service in both WWI and II. The self loading round was used in the Webley semi-auto pistol adopted in 1912 by the Royal Navy and with some differences to the sights, in very limited numbers by the Royal Horse Artillery. It was also used in the Colt Government Model ordered by the RFC and later RAF in 1917 (which was the commercial version of the Model 1911)

The .455 inch Mark II revolver round was used in Webley, Colt, Smith & Wesson and Spanish Old Pattern revolvers in WWI. The attached picture shows the difference between the rounds. I am not sure that the Self Loading round will actually chamber in a Webley revolver so I cannot confirm or deny the claim by Hogg that they caused damage to revolvers. Although I have great respect for Hogg as a writer on artillery, his musings on small arms are deeply suspect. The proof pressure for the revolver is 6.5 tons/sq, in whilst that for the SL round is not shown in the records. I cannot remember the pressure my example was proofed for.

I will attach a picture of the S.L. packet label with the "NOT FOR REVOLVERS" overstamp in the next post.

Deerhunter - I did actually say that I was sorry that I thought LF's reply was utter rubbish. Your point about decorum is taken, but I still say that it has no bearing on reality.

Regards

TonyE

[Retlaw]

Chris

EDIT: Blimey - I am a bit slow I swear non of this was there when I started! The only conversion for .45 use in the US was very simple (and therefore common) and this was milling a few millimeters off the back of the cylinder to allow for the moon clips Retlaw mentioned

There was no milling or machining done to my old Webly, it wold fire both .455 or .45 ACP

Retlaw

[TonyE]

Here is the Self-Loading label.

[TonyE]

Walter - I do not believe that it would be possible to use .45 ACP with half-moon clips in a standard .455 inch cylinder. The resulting thickness would simply be too great. Are you sure that your cylinder had not been skimmed?

Cheers

TonyE

[4thGordons]

Chris - yea, there were indeed two different types of .455 inch ammunition in British service in both WWI and II. The self loading round was used in the Webley semi-auto pistol adopted in 1912 by the Royal Navy and with some differences to the sights, in very limited numbers by the Royal Horse Artillery. It was also used in the Colt Government Model ordered by the RFC and later RAF in 1917 (which was the commercial version of the Model 1911)

The .455 inch Mark II revolver round was used in Webley, Colt, Smith & Wesson and Spanish Old Pattern revolvers in WWI. The attached picture shows the difference between the rounds. I am not sure that the Self Loading round will actually chamber in a Webley revolver so I cannot confirm or deny the claim by Hogg that they caused damage to revolvers. Although I have great respect for Hogg as a writer on artillery, his musings on small arms are deeply suspect. The proof pressure for the revolver is 6.5 tons/sq, in whilst that for the SL round is not shown in the records. I cannot remember the pressure my example was proofed for.

I will attach a picture of the S.L. packet label with the "NOT FOR REVOLVERS" overstamp in the next post.

Regards

TonyE

Thanks Tony - See! now this is why I (mostly) stick to rifles - far too complicated!

Have I also seen mention of .455 Eley? and the conversion of .455 Colt revolvers to ".45 Long Colt" on the civilian market in the US these I take it are yet more variations?

Chris

[Lancashire Fusilier]

On page 116 of William Chipchase Dowell's authoritative book on Webleys " The Webley Story " he states :-

" Standard cylinders for Webley Government revolvers are chambered for the rimmed cartridge. The rims do not fit in recesses in the chambers but rest on the rear face of the cylinder; a maximum clearance of .052" is allowed between the rear face of the cylinder and the front face of the shield. - Standard cylinders were modified for use with the Smith & Wesson clips and .45 A.C.P. cartridges. The modification entailed shortening the overall length of the cylinder by the removal of 1/16th " of metal from the rear face. " Since the book was first published in 1962, and was probably actually written well before that date, this clearly dates the use of .45 ammuntion in Webley Mk.V1's as being at the very least in the 1950's, and long before the common and incorrect theory that Webley Mk.V1's were only altered in the 70's & 80's by the Americans, specifically for the American market.

LF.

[TonyE]

Ah, Americans, bless them! On the one hand they called the rimmed .455 Webley revolver round (our Mark II) the ".455 ELEY" when it was a S & W or a Colt revolver, but when they made the Colt Government Model (aka 1911) in .455 Self-Loading for the RFC they stamped the bottom of the magazines ".455 ELEY"!

The .455 inch S&W and Colt revolvers often had the chambers bored out to take the .45 LC round as the rim thicknesses were similar and the difference in bore size was minimal.

I will post some pictures tomorrow.

Regagrds

TonyE

[TonyE]

On page 116 of William Chipchase Dowell's authoritative book on Webleys " The Webley Story " he states :-

" Standard cylinders for Webley Government revolvers are chambered for the rimmed cartridge. The rims do not fit in recesses in the chambers but rest on the rear face of the cylinder; a maximum clearance of .052" is allowed between the rear face of the cylinder and the front face of the shield. - Standard cylinders were modified for use with the Smith & Wesson clips and .45 A.C.P. cartridges. The modification entailed shortening the overall lenght of the cylinder by the removal of 1/16th " of metal from the rear face. " Since the book was first published in 1962, and was probably actually written even before that, this clearly dates the use of .45 ammuntion in Webley Mk.V1's as being at the very least in the 1950's, and long before the common and incorrect theory that Webley Mk.V1's were only altered in the 70's & 80's by the Americans, specifically for the American market.

LF.

Two points:

Nowhere does Dowell state that this was a British government conversion. He simply says that it has been done, and we are all agreed on that.

Neither I or anybody else said that it was done in the 1970s or 80s in America. Webley revolvers were available in quantity on the U.S. surplus market from the 1950s onwards and companies like "Ye Old Hunter" were doing all sorts of conversions and fiddles to hype the market. I am old enough to remember the fake "Jungle carbines" made from L-E No.1 Mark IIIs and the "Tanker" L-Es made by chopping six or eight inches out of a perfectly good SMLE.

Dowell was simply stating a fact. Webley cylinders HAD been shaved to chamber .45ACP and half moon clips. You have extrapolated that to make out that it was a British army conversion. Not so.

Regards

TonyE

[TomcatPC]

Since I was the person who brought up this calibre conversion discussion when I mentioned the revolvers I fired, I just want to say that I'm sorry for bringing this up. I will try and think a bit more before I bring up things the next time.

Mark

[shippingsteel]

Since I was the person who brought up this calibre conversion discussion when I mentioned the revolvers I fired, I just want to say that I'm sorry for bringing this up.

Don't worry yourself too much Mark - these 'brushfires' tend to flare up from time to time - with the net result being that we all get to learn a lot more in a very short time.!

Cheers, S>S

[4thGordons]

I am old enough to remember the fake "Jungle carbines" made from L-E No.1 Mark IIIs and the "Tanker" L-Es made by chopping six or eight inches out of a perfectly good SMLE.

Hey Now! me too - one does not have to be that old to remember those! Navy Arms was doing them in the mid 1990s with Indian 2As and making the "tankers" out of No4s!

I have to admit unlike most forms of enfield I have found those utterly and completely resistable

You might be remembering the old-timey "jungle carbine" conversion by Golden State Arms (Santa Fe) whole also made "sporter" versions of the No1 and No4 rifles.

Most of those stayed in the original calibre -- but I think Navy Arms may have converted some No4s into 45-70 calibre for some reason.

Chris

[Lancashire Fusilier]

TonyE.

Not so, I did not say anywhere that the quote from " The Webley Story " represented, supported or agreed that the conversions were done officially by the British Government/Army, but rather the quote does support that conversions were done as early as the 1950's. Please read my post again.

Furthermore, I agree with 4thGordons that there must be tangible support for a statement, and I shall continue to look for the text I previously read. In the meantime, and until I find supporting evidence, I am happy with the statement that conversions of the Mk.V1 were not routinely carried out by the British Government/Army, but were done unofficially, be that privately or commercially, and that those private or commercial conversions, could have been done either in the U.K. or the U.S.A as early as the 1950's. I think that is a fair statement to make.

LF.