Photo:  1926 Enfield RSAF/Webley Mk.VI



Photo:  One and done. "Take one and don't call me in the morning."   Tommy would have been one and done with the Hun.  Likewise with the FuzzyWuzzy or TokyoPeril.



Photo:  But Dog Gone, there are 49 more in the box and you'se gotta clean it anyhow.

DA pull is not quite up to S&W standards, but it works.  I don't think Tommy was walking about un-armed with the .455 in the old days.

Very nice!  I really want to add a Mark VI to go with my Mark IV...

Google The Service Revolver and How to Shoot It by Captain C.D. Tracy.
Developed and published during WW1. Download free.

Speedloaders, tactical reloads, Speedstrips(SMLE chargers) stress inoculation, combat shooting...none of it is new.

Beautiful revolver, I'd be proud to own that.

Nice Enfield much rarer than Webley made one.

The double action is a little heavier than a S&W or Colt M1917 but imop the Webley's better grip makes it easier to shoot DA more accurately . 1917's smooth grips are too small and slippery.

Second Model HE S&W in 455 are better with checkered commercial grips.

It’s not new, just rebranded/marketed as: Tier 1 Tactical Ninja Steath Operator.

I think they had it right the first time.

I don't suppose you have a link for the download, do you? I'm not finding anything other than links to auctions where that copy has already been sold. From the photos at the auction links it looks like a definite requirement for the bookshelf (real or electronic).

Don’t know much of anything about those guns, but damn if I don’t love the looks of the one in the OP.  Would buy in a heartbeat!

I can't hotlink

Look in the handgun discussions subforum towards the bottom of page 2 for "WW1 manual..."

http://www.lulu.com/shop/charles-d-...and-how-to-use-it/ebook/product-23483904.html

Many thanks!!

Niiiiiiice.

I wish I'd gotten one of these back when they were a lot cheaper.

As a followup, there should be a few things mentioned about the Mk.VI revolvers made by Webley & Scott and the RSAF Enfield version of it.  The Mk.VI series was the end result of 40 plus years of W&S designing a top break .455 Webley revolver to use a heavy very slow lead bullet.  255/260 grain lead at barely 600fps.  Both revolvers and ammo were blackpowder designs to start with.  No problem thus far.

After World War II, the Webley and Enfield Mk.VI's were imported into the USA.  .455 Webley was as relatively expensive then as now.  An importer idea was to face off the rear of the cylinder so that US .45acp pistol ammo from a Colt 1911 could be used in the Webley's on half moon clips just as 1917 S&W and 1917 Colt revolvers used .45acp on half moon clips ever since WW I.  No problem with Colt.  Minor problem with S&W since they did not begin heat treating cylinders until 1929.  For both, the .45acp loadings of the time, 230 grains at 825fps, were probably OK, but modern loads easily stress them.

As to the faced off cylinder Webleys, not such a good idea.  The low pressure design of a top break combined with a low pressure originally black powder now cordite loaded cartridge combined with removing metal from the cylinder means that the average operating pressure of smokeless .45acp ammo is about like a mild to medium proof load used in the original .455 Webley.  A steady diet will make a mess of them first loosening parts and frames and lockwork and the latch.  Peters developed the .45 Auto Rim lead bullet loads as a solution to the 1917 revolver problems which also made half moon clips un-necessary.   The .45AR factory loading of lead bullets also prevented damage to modified Webleys.  Maybe.  Just Maybe.

If anyone has a modified Webley and thinks a few .45acp+P or hot .45AR loads might be interesting, I think that is called a "Mills Bomb."  (English hand gernade.)

The other side of the conversation is that the English Ministry of Defense decided the .455 Webley was such a ferocious cartridge that they needed to make a revolver with less recoil for the post WW I-pre WW II English boys no longer as studly as they had been.  RSAF Enfield's No.2 Mk.I .380 Revolver won the contest over the Webley Mk.IV .38S&W entrant.  No wonder since Enfield was making the Mk.VI at the time anyhow.

Noteworthy points in brief:

1)  The new Enfield No.2 Mk.I was designed for a version of the .38 S&W that used a 200 grain lead bullet.  The .38/200.  The .38S&W Super Police of the day.  Very heavy, very slow in the 600fps range again, and effective because it was so long for the rifling twist rate used that it tumbled.  The Enfield bores were on the large side of standard.

2)  The 200 grain lead bullet was soon replaced with a 178 grain FMJ pointy bullet.  The jacket had a lot more friction and was equally slow.  No problem in the large Enfield bore.

3)  Webley & Scott continued on with their design, sold it commercially, sold it to the English police, and when WW II started up, the English MOD bought a lot of W&S Mk.IV revolvers.  All were intended for use with the US standard .38S&W 146 grain load.  The load was fine in the W&S bore since it was lead and since W&S used an only slightly tighter bore than the Enfield.

4)  The English started buying S&W .38S&W revolvers.  They were designed with an even tighter bore for the US standard .38S&W 146 grain lead bullet.  No surprise there.

WW II conducted itself to conclusion and the Enfield and Webleys and S&Ws soldiered and policed on.

In the 1970's and 1980's, the police in England and the MOD finally noted that the 178 grain FMJ bullet of the .380 MK.2Z was not really appropriate for the Webley and the S&W revolvers.  Their bores were smaller than the Enfield and too tight.  The Webleys and S&Ws were better used with the 146 grain standard US lead bullet loads.  The NRA picked up the information and printed it in that era.  Mostly everyone forgets about it these days.

Unless you shoot a S&W or a Webley AND have British .380 Mk.2Z ammo with FMJ bullets, who cares.  

The only care is that compared to the fat bore of the Enfield, the tighter bore of the Webley and the way tighter bore of the S&W will stick the FMJ bullet in the barrel.  The big flash gaps hiss for a moment and leave the bullet in the bore.  Pull the trigger again and kiss your nice collector gun goodbye.  There are no spare barrels these days.

Droll info, so more fun.



Photo:  1938 RSAF Enfield No.2 Mk.I .380 Revolver.



Photo:  The .380/.38S&W ammo the above paragraphs were chattering about.  .380 Mk.2Z FMJ and .38S&W Lead.



Photo:  Head stamps there of.  FN made the one, NC FMJ and Remington the Lead Round Nose.

But for the rain and snow, I would have shot the Enfield .380.

Anyone have a photo of a Webley Mk. IV ??

Without any question, way better than a rock or a sharp stick.



Photo:  1938 Enfield No.2 Mk.I .380 Revolver and Army Holster.  Red markers are SA, Yellow markers are DA.



Photo:  Clearer view.  The shooter was getting the hang of it at 20 yards.

The SA pull combined with the small at the top grip and overall small grip is a squirming squirrel to aim and fire.  Without really clamping down super hard with the right thumb, it wants to squirm out to the left.  In DA firing, it tends to stay better centered at 10 yards.  The DA pull to the right and the squirm to the left sorta cancel each other out.  The one wild one low and left was the shooter flinching while waiting for the DA pull

to
ever
end.

A S&W DA, it ain't.

Generally acceptable for 25F with freezing fingers and it went bang every time with ancient FN .380 2Z 178FMJ ammo.

I would note that the Webley No.1 Mk. VI is a heavy gun.  It has a large squarish grip on it.  The .45 caliber gun simply goes whooomp and pushes to the rear.  It is far more pleasant to shoot than the .380 No.2.

And for the umteenth time the GD barrel latch ate the top off my shooting hand thumb.

The Limey MOD screwed the chicken picking their own designed Enfield instead of the Webley Mk.IV in .38S&W.  The Webley has a far smoother action, a far better grip shape, and were far better made.  And they ended up buying them anyhow during the war.

Watched a nice unmolested Webley Mk. V on GunBroker a few weeks ago knowing that I couldn't afford it. Sure enough it sold north of $1600.
I've wanted a .455 Webley, specifically a Mk I to V, since the first time I saw Zulu.
Having done the research since then I want a Mk. VI too.