Webley MARK VI 455

Vern Humphrey said:

Both the .455 and the .38/200 are long supplanted by superior cartridges, and in the case of the .38/200, supplanted before its creation/

Click to expand...

Whatever you say, Vern.

cxm said:

S&W made their Military & Police revolver for the Empire forces in WWII. The British Purchasing Commission finally wound up buying the M&P ( "K" ) frame as opposed to the large frame ( "N" ) frame because of ease of production and lower price as well as the fact it could be easily chambered for the (then) current standard Army cartridge the 38/200 (which is a 38 S&W cartridge with a 176 gr. bullet (earlier ammo production used a nominally 200gr bullet.) The small frame Webley and the Enfield revolvers used this cartridge. The S&W product with it's 5" barrel was generally preferred by the British who used them. As an aside Australia, South Africa and New Zealand used the S&W M&P in considerable quantity.

The 38/200 (38 S&W) used a bullet of .361 (nominal) bore as opposed to the .356-57 used in the 38 S&W Special.

After WWII Parker-Hale refurbished quite a few 38-200 cal. British surplus M&P revolvers for the U.S. market. They shortened the barrels on some to 2" and sold them as carry guns (this however cut the front locking lug off along the the front of the barrel and the front sight. Parker-Hale added front sights but the locking lug was gone. Many consider the conversion with the 2" barrel unsafe.

This conversion also allowed the use of 38 S&W Special ammo in these guns... though it too is not a particularly safe thing to do... and the cases often split upon firing... this is really not a satisfactory conversion at all... Surprisingly you don't hear much about accidents with these guns, possibly because they are fairly rare now.

In addition quite a number of the British guns were imported into the U.S. still in the 38/200 chambering. These guns shoot 38S&W ammo just fine... they are strong well built guns that can be quite accurate with good ammunition... that of course being the rub... the ammo is scarce and expensive... Remington still makes 38 S&W ammo from time to time and it works. Winchester also catalogs the ammo... Likewise PPU and Fiocchi list the 38 S&W.

Hope that will be of interest...

V/r

Chuck

Click to expand...

Add MagTech to the list of ammo manufacturers.

I suspect that S&W may have shipped some .38-200's to the UK that accidentally had .38 Special bores. I read an article in a British gun mag some years ago that mentioned that RAF shooting teams sometimes had bullets stick in the barrels! (Only in S&W barrels, not in Enfield or Webley barrels.) A tight bore could account for that, especially as they were using FMJ military ammo. This has a higher friction factor than do lead bullets, but your bore is tight even if lead was used!

I suggested this possibility to a well known S&W official who denied it, somewhat heatedly. But would he know? It'd probably be a mix-up on the production line and not something he could look up in the records. Unless your barrel was manufactured by Parker-Hale, it seems to bear out this possibility. Please check that barrel carefully, and be sure that it is an S&W barrel that they cut and re-sighted. Your bore measurement was most interesting. If the measurement is correct, your gun may shoot .38 Special ammo quite well. But your chambers should still be oversize for .38 Special brass and the fired cases may crack if the chambers were bored on the large end of tolerances.

As an aside, about 1970, I bought two S&W M-19 .357 revolvers that gave tight extraction with fired cases in both warm .38 loads and with .357 ammo. These were new guns, bought in stores. I found that I could chamber FIRED .38 S&W cases in both cylinders! Those cases had been fired in an S&W .38-200 made about 1940. (Made for the UK.) The .357 chambers were probably oversize! If they can get that wrong in what was relatively peacetime (Viet war was in progress), why might they not have sometimes sent .38 Special barrels mismarked on .38-200 guns in WWII?

Just a thought.

Personally, I think it's always a mistake to buy one of those re-chambered .38-200 guns. The surplus dealers who did that were at best guilty of questionable ethics. They just wanted to sell a lot of guns for a more popular caliber.

If you're lucky, you may get tight chamber dimensions and 38 Special specs on the bore and find that you have, in essence, got a .38 Special after the dealers bored out the cylinders for .38 Special. The odds don't favor that and I certainly wouldn't shoot Plus P Special ammo in one.

Anyone having one of these altered guns should have the chambers and the bore measured by a competent gunsmith.

The Brits did get a small number of .38 Special M&P from S&W. They also bought commercial S&W (and Colt's, H&R and Iver-Johnsons) revolvers from various sources after losing most much of their equipment at Dunkirk. Americans were also asked to donate rifles and pistols to the Brits following Dunkirk (most if not all of these were destroyed by the Brits when the war ended. Lots of this wound up in the hands of the Home Guards along with a LOT of 1917 Enfields we sent them.

The Brits preferred 5" barrels, but they could not be picky in 1940 so they did wind up with all sorts of odds and ends. They ordered a large order of 9x19mm carbines from S&W which turned out to be unsatisfactory and nearly all were destroyed... The Brits had advanced S&W over a million dollars for the carbine project which S&W repaid in the form of M&P revolvers. They were used throughout the war, and continued in at least limited service after the war along with the Enfield revolvers in 38/200 (.380 revolver) along side 9x19 mm high powers.

The Brits also received 38/200 M&P revolvers under Lend-Lease. After the war various Empire police agencies bought new S&W 38 S&W revolvers for their forces and later bought a few S&W Mod 11 revolvers.

A quantity (quite small I expect) of Victory model M&P revolvers (.38 cal 4" barrel) were also supplied to the UK under lend lease.

FWIW

Cooldill said:

Some say the .455 was this awesome man stopper, and the .38/200 was not good. Rubbish mate. Rubbish. The .38/200 was JUST FINE with the original 200 grain lead bullet. Had quite a thump on to it. With good shot placement, it was the equal to the .455 in effectiveness.

Click to expand...

1) I already remarked on "good shot placement" a week or two ago in this thread. It reminds of of an anti-tank weapon that was guaranteed to knock out any tank on earth - provided it hit the tank commander in the eye.

2) Who is it who said that .38/200 was just fine? I have never heard this, and am curious to know.

3) 38 Special with a 200 grain RNL bullet was available in the US until at least the early 1980's. I know, because I bought a box for a 1939 vintage 5-inch Colt Official Police back then. It shot well, but had absolutely no reputation regards stopping power. It was not missed when it faded away, and most people don't know it ever existed. Which I, for one, think they would if it had been useful in any way.

4) I've never heard that .455 was an awesome manstopper, except for the same kind of campfire anecdotes you used to hear about the awesome stopping power of 45 ACP hardball. Sure, people used to think it was, but hard evidence to back that up just wasn't there.

Monac said:

1) I already remarked on "good shot placement" a week or two ago in this thread. It reminds of of an anti-tank weapon that was guaranteed to knock out any tank on earth - provided it hit the tank commander in the eye.

2) Who is it who said that .38/200 was just fine? I have never heard this, and am curious to know.

3) 38 Special with a 200 grain RNL bullet was available in the US until at least the early 1980's. I know, because I bought a box for a 1939 vintage 5-inch Colt Official Police back then. It shot well, but had absolutely no reputation regards stopping power. It was not missed when it faded away, and most people don't know it ever existed. Which I, for one, think they would if it had been useful in any way.

4) I've never heard that .455 was an awesome manstopper, except for the same kind of campfire anecdotes you used to hear about the awesome stopping power of 45 ACP hardball. Sure, people used to think it was, but hard evidence to back that up just wasn't there.

Click to expand...

Colonel Rex Applegate was satisfied with the performance of the .38/200 load when he used it in Germany on one of his missions.

But what did he know?

The Brits commonly manufactured two different military loads for the .455 Webley revolvers. The first was the generally known 265gr lead conical point bullet, and the second and less known "Colonial" load, which was a 250gr (at least the few I have seen) hollow point with a massive cavity somewhat like Bill Jordan's upside down hollow base WC for the 38/357Mag.

The "Colonial" loading is 3rd from left in this photo... most have never seen one and many are unaware of it's existence.



All the reports of the use of this bullet describe the effects as "devastating." It was considered so devastating some boxes of this ammo are labeled "Not to be used against Europeans." There was also a wad cutter type bullet and several other variations. I suppose however, the reports of the use of .455s have to be seen in the light of what was around to compare it to.

The British military wanted a smaller revolver following WWI and selected the Webley .380 revolver (basically a Mk. VI scaled down to .38) to replace the big Webley Mk. VI 455. Needless to say the 200 gr bullet at speeds similar to that of the bigger .455 was not loved by the British military. It goes without saying the "geniuses" in the War Department insisted the 38/200 was "just as good" as the 455/265 round... it wasn't. If you read reports of it's use by the military they were unconvinced from the start. The arrival of the 176gr bullet did not improve things... The Royal Navy while having to officially adopt the 380 revolver (38/200) the RN had sufficient quantities of Webley 455s and Webley 455 Autos on hand that they didn't acquire many .380 revolvers prior to WWII. The RN also liked the 1911 in .455 auto a lot, though the 45ACP was a good deal better. The Brit military welcomed the arrival of the Canadian Inglis built High Power in 9x19 as a replacement, though the .380 revolvers (mostly the Enfield 'rip-off" version of the Webley) hung on well into the 1950s.\

As a reference point here is the 455 Webley auto cartridge which was used in Webley 455 autos and Colt's 1911 autos.



FWIW

Chuck

Cooldill said:

Colonel Rex Applegate was satisfied with the performance of the .38/200 load when he used it in Germany on one of his missions.

But what did he know?

Click to expand...

Well, that is exactly the question. One person used it one time and was satisfied with the result. The number of cartridges that have not worked well at least once is probably zero. So what?

In the United States, the S&W 38/200 "Super Police" and its successor, the 38 Special 200 grain load, were widely available for many years. And the British used the 380/176 grain load for a couple of decades, and more in police service. Yet if any of those cartridges had any particular potency, it has been widely forgotten. In fact, pretty much the opposite is what is on the record about them.

Back to the "making .455 Webley ammunition from .45 long Colt". Here are four rounds of various .455---



Left to right: .476 or .455 MkI by Eley, .455 Colt by WRA, .45 LC converted and a 185 grain .455.
The LC case has had the upper side of the rim lathe-thinned to work in an unmodified Webley and although the head is about .002" narrower that the factory .455s, there is no distortion upon firing---it's not a hot rod, after all.

-----krinko

cxm said:

The Brits commonly manufactured two different military loads for the .455 Webley revolvers. The first was the generally known 265gr lead conical point bullet, and the second and less known "Colonial" load, which was a 250gr (at least the few I have seen) hollow point with a massive cavity somewhat like Bill Jordan's upside down hollow base WC for the 38/357Mag.

The "Colonial" loading is 3rd from left in this photo... most have never seen one and many are unaware of it's existence.

All the reports of the use of this bullet describe the effects as "devastating." It was considered so devastating some boxes of this ammo are labeled "Not to be used against Europeans." There was also a wad cutter type bullet and several other variations. I suppose however, the reports of the use of .455s have to be seen in the light of what was around to compare it to.

The British military wanted a smaller revolver following WWI and selected the Webley .380 revolver (basically a Mk. VI scaled down to .38) to replace the big Webley Mk. VI 455. Needless to say the 200 gr bullet at speeds similar to that of the bigger .455 was not loved by the British military. It goes without saying the "geniuses" in the War Department insisted the 38/200 was "just as good" as the 455/265 round... it wasn't. If you read reports of it's use by the military they were unconvinced from the start. The arrival of the 176gr bullet did not improve things... The Royal Navy while having to officially adopt the 380 revolver (38/200) the RN had sufficient quantities of Webley 455s and Webley 455 Autos on hand that they didn't acquire many .380 revolvers prior to WWII. The RN also liked the 1911 in .455 auto a lot, though the 45ACP was a good deal better. The Brit military welcomed the arrival of the Canadian Inglis built High Power in 9x19 as a replacement, though the .380 revolvers (mostly the Enfield 'rip-off" version of the Webley) hung on well into the 1950s.\

As a reference point here is the 455 Webley auto cartridge which was used in Webley 455 autos and Colt's 1911 autos.

FWIW

Chuck

Click to expand...

In your photo, the MKs. IV and V are the wadcutters you refer to. The difference between those two is the mixture of the lead/alloy formula. I think one used more antimony or something similar. You probably know this, but I thought it might interest others.

You ever pull and weigh the HP and WC bullets? You said they weigh 250 grains. Sources I've read say just 225 grains. The HP almost has to weigh less than the solid wadcutters. ?? Weight of the normal RN lead and the MK VI jacketed ball rounds was 265 grains. This includes the .455 Colt, basically a commercial MK I. It was loaded here by Winchester, and in Canada by CIL/Dominon. The .455 Colt fired its 265 grain bullet at a nominal 750 FPS, a useful improvement over the shorter MK II at just 620 FPS + or - 25 FPS. Given a choice, I'd have preferred it to any other .455 load back then, unless I was likely to face savage warriors at close range, where the HP or WC loads might well perform better. I doubt they retained velocity well at extended ranges, but they'd probably be fired within 50 feet of the wild-eyed tribesman intended to experience their effect.

BTW, the .455 auto bullet weight was listed as 225 grains. I think velocity was stated as 750 FPS, well under the 230 grains at a nominal 850 FPS for the .45 ACP. When Churchill bought a Colt Govt. Model in 1915 en route to war in France, he got the .45 ACP. The gun remained in his family at least until the very restrictive gun law of 1997. I hope it's now in a museum, if the Churchills were unable to keep it and his other pistols. They had at least four. And at least one pair of flintlock pistols owned by John Churchill, the Duke of Marlborough, for whom the marvelous Blenheim Palace was built. However, a friend referred me to a recent photo of the present Lord Churchill holding one of those, so I think they were too old to have been affected by the nasty 1997 act. That banned virtually all modern handguns. I understand that about 315 modern pistols are still licensed, all for the (again licensed) dispatch of animals injured in road accidents and the like. A man posting on another board owns one of these, a Walther PPK in 7.65mm.

Oh: the once infamous Dum-Dum bullets were the Colonial HP and WC loads, supposedly developed at Dum-Dum Arsenal in colonial India. However, the term was eventually corrupted to mean almost any HP bullet. Dum-Dums were also called Manstopper bullets.

As a humorous aside I read a quote years ago from a British officer. He said, "The .38 is an excellent man-stopper; simply shoot them through the skull and they drop in their tracks!"

Cases for the .455 revolver (various types) are easily made from .45 Auto-Rim by chucking the case in a lathe or drill press and trimming the rim from the front. The same can be done from .45 Colt but the case must also be trimmed to length. It sounds like a lot of trouble but I have done a 50 round box of .45 AR in well under an hour, so it's hardly a burdensome task.

Jim

This is what I use in my hand loads for the projectile. It's a .454 dia 255 grain RNFP. I use 4 grains of Bullseye to shove it down the barrel. I use .45 ACP (w/ moon clips), .45 AutoRim, and .455 Mk I (with a machined disk to make it fit) brass in my .455 MkVI (all numbers matching) that has been shaved.

http://www.buffaloarms.com/Hornady_452_255_Grain_FP_Cowboy_Swaged_Bullets_it-159757.aspx?CAT=4144




And yes, I do sometimes open carry it as my Self Defense Gun. Only once have I been approached over it and that was by a gentleman asking what it was.

New member here. .455 Fiocchi is available at outdoorlimited.com as of Jan 23 2018. I already bought 1000 rounds a few weeks ago from another company so I thought I'd pass on the info.

My mk vi was handed to me in 1966 when I was around 12 years old by my father, who brought it back from ww2 in 1945.
He told me I would never be able to shoot it because there was no longer any ammo for it. We made a picture frame for it to hang on my bedroom wall. So after looking at it and wanting to shoot it for 50 years. I found out last year ammo was now available, and was able to get 20 boxes. It's serial numbers match and it hasn't been shaved, and came with a holster. Also recently found a hammer for it, to replace the broken original.

Deanimator said:

I know I've seen Fiocchi .455 in the past. I wouldn't be surprised if they still make it.

Click to expand...

I occasionally run across some here and there.
I have probably shot a few hundred rounds through mine over the years. And mine is a very good shooter.

I have loaded for mine. I got some correct bullets.....I think from Old Western Scrounger. However at some point, I decided that for the guns I own in some odd ball caliber that I rarely shoot, I am just going to buy factory ammo when I see it, and let it go at that.

GunnyUSMC said:

I have no plans to convert it to 45 ACP. One of the reasons I bought it is because it was still chambered in 455 Webley.

Click to expand...

Don't convert it to 45 ACP. I was able to find a 45 ACP conversion but not a 455 Webley. Back in the 1950's when these were imported, the 45 ACP conversions would sell, so very poor hack conversion jobs were done by outfits like Golden State Arms. The 45 ACP operates above the proof pressures of the 455 Webley and will stretch the top strap in time.

After playing with my Webley, I think the British spent a lot of time and effort coming up with an excellent fighting revolver. It is super easy to reload, is a natural pointer, the sights easy to acquire and point. The British understood pistol fighting was at close range, like spitting distance, and the pistol is set up so in a confused combat situation, the user can shoot and hit quickly within arms length. The recoil is very low, which is good as long as the round is lethal, which for the 455 Webley, it is.

There is loading data out there,http://www.handloads.com/loaddata/default.asp?Caliber=455 Webley&Weight=All&type=Handgun&Source=, I would keep all 265 grain bullets less than 700 fps.

Cooldill said:

Very cool. A Webley modified to .45 Colt would make a great bear gun if loded with Buffalo Bore hard cast +P loads.

Click to expand...

For one shot maybe.

Very nice, a little cleaning and it will be ready to serve the empire once again.....

The .455 is dimensionally identical to the .45 Colt -- except the case is much shorter and the rim thinner. In a pinch, you can trim .45 Colt cases, chuck them in a drill press and thin the rims with a file.

Mohler said:

My mk vi was handed to me in 1966 when I was around 12 years old by my father, who brought it back from ww2 in 1945.
He told me I would never be able to shoot it because there was no longer any ammo for it. We made a picture frame for it to hang on my bedroom wall. So after looking at it and wanting to shoot it for 50 years. I found out last year ammo was now available, and was able to get 20 boxes. It's serial numbers match and it hasn't been shaved, and came with a holster. Also recently found a hammer for it, to replace the broken original.

Click to expand...

So how does it shoot?