Mystery revolver

[4V50 Gary]

I'm reading Richard Hillary's The Last Enemy, a WW II Spitfire pilot's book. On page 63 he wrote:

"An order came that all officers were to carry side arms, and at the station armoury I was issued with an anitquated shortnose Forty-five and six soft-lead bullets. I appealed to armament sergeant.

'Sorry, sir,' he said, 'but that's the regulation. Just content yourself with six Jerries, sir.'

That in itself would not have been so bad if only the ammunition fitted, which I soon found out it did not. With only six bullets there was little temptation to waste any of the practising, but one day by low cunning I managed to get myself another twelve and loosed off. The first round fired but the second jammed. I had .455 bullets for a .45 revolver."

I'm thinking S&W or Colt as we supplied them in WW I, but was unaware that 2" barrel revolvers were supplied. Thoughts?

[Jim Watson]

Maybe a Webley British Bulldog in .450 Revolver.
http://policehistoryni.com/webley-ric-revolver.html

[Lucas McCain]

Early in the conflict between England and Germany and prior to our declaration of war the US sent the British side arms.
England just did not have any side arms for the troops. I’m not sure just what was involved in the collection of these used American side arms, if they were donated, purchased or just how they were collected. But as I understand ammo was a problem. Quite a few had just a few rounds that was in the gun. There were no new guns sent. Probably similar to to days but back programs that some cities stage. Nothing but mostly crap.

[Driftwood Johnson]

Howdy

There were some S&W Triple Locks chambered for 455 Mark II. I don't know how many, probably not very many. They were shipped to Britain, but the Brits did not like the fancy 3rd latch mechanism, complained it could get gummed up with mud. And yes, they were shipped new.

So when the 44 Hand Ejector 2nd Model came out in 1915 some were also chambered for 455. The Brits liked these better because the 3rd latch mechanism was gone. These were also shipped straight from the factory.

When I bought this 44 Hand Ejector 2nd Model, I noticed a few details were wrong. Eventually I discovered it was a 455 HE 2nd Model. Originally chambered for 455 it was sent to Canada. That's a Canadian Broad Arrow inspection mark under the thumb piece. At some point this one went back to the factory and was modified for 44 Special.







But I don't think any of these Smiths were made with 'short noses'. 4", 5", 6 1/2" and 7 1/2" were standard barrel lengths for Triple Locks, 6 1/2" was standard for the 2nd Models, 5" were scarce and 4" were rare.




The Colt New Service was chambered for many cartridges; 38 Special, 357 Magnum, 38-40, 44 Russian, 44 Special, 44-40, 45 ACP, 45 Colt, 450 Eley, 455 Eley, and 457 Eley. Apparently barrel lengths available were 2 inches up to 7 1/2". No idea of the specifics, but perhaps he had a 2" New Service. The one at the top of this photo is chambered for 45 Colt, the bottom one is a 44-40. These are really big guns. Bigger than a S&W Model 17.

[4V50 Gary]

Didn't think of Webley. Could it have been in .450 Adams and would a .455 barely fit?

[44 AMP]

From the beginning days of black powder cartridge revolvers there has been a bewildering number of British rounds with similar names and different dimensions, and different names with similar dimensions. .450, .455, .476. etc. And add in various Mark #s (which may, or may not be important) and sometimes its rather difficult to say what cartridge fits what gun.

With German invasion looming on the horizon, and Britain being critically short of all kinds of small arms to equip the rapidly growing military, any and possibly everything could be found pressed into service.

An Englishman, writing about an "antiquated short nose .45" would most likely be talking about one of the "bulldog" class of guns, short barrel large bore revolvers, produced from the 1880s on.

one of the Colt or S&W revolvers, whether supplied by Lend Lease, or donated by US civilians, probably wouldn't be described as "antiquated". SO, I'd be thinking the gun in question was an older (pre WW I) British Bulldog, where were made by a number of firms, not just Webley.

It fits in with an RAF armorer having it, as pilots and aircrew's sidearms aren't at the top of the military supply chain. Also fits in with having a very limited amount of ammo, that "doesn't fit the gun"

I can just see a harassed supply clerk, getting orders he issue things he hasn't got, and everyone clamoring for something...
"roight, rules say you need a pistol, (rummages about, finds a pistol hands it to the pilot) "this is a pistol, (digs through other boxes, finds a pitiful few rounds - of something-, hands them to the pilot) "and this is ammunition. There you are, So, off you go now, sor!"

The reality is, the gun could have been almost anything with a nominal .45 caliber name. No way to know, if the author isn't around to give more details.

[Mike Irwin]

I really doubt if anyone would have considered an S&W, Colt, or even a Webley would have been considered an antiquated revolver, and they were certainly never supplied to the British in 2" lengths.

The problem is, we don't know what he considers to be "short barrel."

My guess, though, is that he was issued something along the lines of a Webley British Bulldog revolver -- 5 shot, 2.5" barrel, and chambered in .450 Adams (Webley).

The .450 Adams and .455 Webley Mk II were very similar in dimensions.

[straightshooterjake]

It has been said twice already, but I'll still say it a third time in agreement. I do not believe that any revolver made during the World War One timeframe by Smith, Colt, or Webley would have been viewed as "antiquated" in the WWII era. If fact, if you like big bore revolvers, then a .45 caliber revolver from around 1917 is still pretty serviceable by today's standards.

I recently handled a 1917 Colt, and though it appears pretty large, it is actually well balanced and not too heavy. In any era, I think someone who needed a sidearm would have been happy to have it. And I say that as someone who prefers a Smith & Wesson.

[FrankenMauser]

What about something like a Colt 1878 DA with a short barrel...?
It would definitely be plausible that such could be viewed as 'antiquated' by WWII.

It is even possible that some could have been sent over by our flappy-headed neighbors to the north, as Canada issued 'standard' barrel length versions (in .44-40 and .45 Colt) to some RCMR divisions until roughly 1905 - starting before the RCMR was officially created.


(In 1900, the RCMR further complicated the supply chain by adding New Service revolvers in .455 Eley for some units. But that's another subject...)

[SIGSHR]

The Brits were pretty desperate for small arms. In the book "If Britain had fallen" the author tells of an Army maintenance unit that had to hand over its small arms, including the lieutenant's revolver.

[RickB]

The British cartridge naming "system" doesn't help much in identifying specific guns and chamberings.
I have a Webley RIC that could be chambered for any of three or four different cartridges, and a .45 GAP case chambers perfectly.
I'm now working on loading for my Webley Mk. I, which should be ".455", but I've heard that such guns usually mike .452" in both the chambers and the barrel, though a .45 ACP case loaded with a .456" bullet will drop as far into the chamber as an empty case.
A .45 Schofield round chambers perfectly, though the case is considerably longer than the .455 round for which the Webley is chambered.

A "short nose .45" could be any of a number of "bulldogs", and it would be no surprise if a random gun did not chamber a random, provided cartridge.

Imagine a U.S. Cavalry trooper issued .45 Colt cartridges for his Schofield, or, less of an issue, .45 ACP rounds already clipped together for use in a M1917 revolver, issued to troops with M1911 pistols.

[tallball]

Sounds like an old Bulldog to me, too.