The Un-Ugly Webleys

[lewwallace]

This 1896 WG was up, for private sale a few yrs ago and I had to pass. $7,500. An who sed they were ugly?

 

[RPZ]

I've always thought the plain military Webley revolvers have a beauty all their own. Never had one, and just another gun I'd like to add to my arsena.. uh I mean collection.

 

[NIGHTLORD40K]

Wouldn't mind an RIC Pistol in my armory........uh, I mean safe.

 

[Panzerschwein]

Um... Webleys are not ugly.

THAT Webley is ostentatious, though.

 

[Mizar]

Whoever think that Webleys are ugly ought to be ashamed of themselves.







P.S. That winking face is just to calm them down - I do mean what I said!

 

[bannockburn]

lewwallace

This 1896 WG was up, for private sale a few yrs ago and I had to pass. $7,500. An who sed they were ugly?

I assure you my good man it was not I!

Have never seen such an ornate Webley like that before! Seems like something a wealthy Rajah would have had done in England and then sent to him in India. Love the engraving and the ivory grips!

 

[MosinT53Hunter]

Whoever think that Webleys are ugly ought to be ashamed of themselves.







P.S. That winking face is just to calm them down - I do mean what I said!

The same people who think Mosin Nagant's are ugly. I disagree with that. Its a beautiful, simple, elegant weapon that will outlast any and all who say otherwise.

 

[ThomasT]

Those guns must have belonged to a Limey pimp.

 

[Monac]

I cannot recall people saying that Webley revolvers were ugly (although, IMO, the Mark IV 380 is no thing of great beauty). It is the Webley automatics that were usually considered graceless. Although of course that very fact makes them appeal to some.

And I agree with the Ratshooter about the revolvers in the OP. Those lilies have not just been gilded, but chrome-plated.

 

[mcb]

Webleys are ugly, I love them but they are ugly. Sometime the beauty is more in their function then their lines.

My Webley Mark IV

 

[Monac]

OK, mcb has a good looking Mark IV 380. I stand corrected.

 

[ThomasT]

I like the gun MCB posted the best. I like guns that just look like business. And I'm a sucker for a flap holster.

 

[WestKentucky]

The “ugly” of the webleys is the same “ugly” of very many topbreak revolvers, and is reminiscent of their predecessors (muzzleloading arbor/wedge barrel revolver designs). For some reason many companies decided that rather than have a nice round barrel that they would machine a barrel assembly with odd flat sided contraptions. I don’t see how this was even remotely cheaper than making multiple pieces and assembling them, but ok...so you have a big single plane with the exception of essentially grips, blast plate, and cylinder. I wouldn’t say it’s necessarily ugly, but it leaves the gun looking rather plain.

 

[JohnKSa]

I like the way the Webley revolvers look, but it's in the same way I like how an A10 Warthog looks. I would never describe either a stock Webley revolver or an A10 as beautiful or elegant. They look very business like and functional.

The plating, engraving and contoured grips and other custom work on the revolver in the OP dresses it up quite a bit. Maybe enough to call it beautiful--but certainly enough to label it as 'striking'.

 

[WrongHanded]

To some, Function is Beauty.

I'd buy a good quality new Webley if they were produced again. I probably wouldn't spend more than $1,000 though. Seems like Ruger could do a decent modern day copy, if they wanted to.

 

[Monac]

Making a new top-break revolver seems to have come up fairly regularly in this forum. People who know modern methods of manufacture seem to feel it would be cost-prohibitive, and others feel it would not be strong enough for anything greater than 45 ACP (if that) or longer than 38 Special (once again, if that). That makes me sad, but I have no useful knowledge on the subject. I hope I have not set off more fruitless acrimony here.

 

[the Black Spot]

I take the blame: in the thread "webley mark VI 455" i said in post 108: "webleys are the prettiest ugly"
Dont hate me too much

 

[bannockburn]

The only "ugly" Webley I had was one that had the expedient "WAR FINISH". Not pretty but has held up fairly well over the years.

 

[Tallball]

That is gorgeous!

 

[Gelrir]

My Webley-Green has a non-original nickel finish (the nickel plating covers a couple of small dings), except for a blued hammer.

 

[Deltaboy1984]

The weigh a ton as I remember my great grandfather had one!

 

[doubleh]

Beauty is in the eye of the beholder. This beholder finds Webleys and Mosin-Nagants less than beautiful. Quite a bit less in fact. They do the job they were designed for of course and being attractive really plays no part in that job.

 

[roo_ster]

Making a new top-break revolver seems to have come up fairly regularly in this forum. People who know modern methods of manufacture seem to feel it would be cost-prohibitive, and others feel it would not be strong enough for anything greater than 45 ACP (if that) or longer than 38 Special (once again, if that). That makes me sad, but I have no useful knowledge on the subject. I hope I have not set off more fruitless acrimony here.

Large frame top break in .45ACP would be nifty

Small frame TB in 9mm with cylinders only just long enough for 9mm cartridges would be the bee's knees.

 

[mnrivrat]

Not to offend, but that Webley looks like it was engraved with a Dremel tool.

 

[Jim NE]

They all look pretty cool to me because of their historical significance, but yes, some Webleys have lines and contours that don't flow very well. I actually like the looks of the less expensive .38's, though, (mark III??) and might like to own one, if I could shoot it. Are people actually shooting their ultra expensive 100 year old Webleys?