Webley Mark I

[soundguy]

is the 455 fioochi safe to shoot?

[Ken W]

I no longer endorse this item. I went back to look at it again and pass on more information that I have discovered from responses here and at another forum plus my own research. He still has it marked as 455 and refuses to change it despite the pictures I emailed him and the detailed explanation I provided. There actually is remnants of the serial number on the cylinder he pointed out, matching no less. I pointed out that all of the numbers were not visible on account of the cylinder being shaved. He replied that "I don't care" even though I mentioned that it would be dangerous for anyone to fire non black powder or very low hand loaded rounds in .45 auto and also if someone tried to fire a .455 in it on account of the excessive headspace. He figured that if someone buys it that doesn't know what it is than it's their problem. This is very disturbing and, I hate to say, probably typical of small shops like this all over. All they give a damn about it profit. What a wonderful system.
If after all of this someone is still interested in it you can PM me and I'll provide the contact info. Don't expect a change in the $1,000 price tag though. At least until it sits there a few months.

[Ken W]

Originally Posted by soundguy

is the 455 fioochi safe to shoot?

I can't say for certain. It's specs are fairly low powered, listed below:

Technical Information
Caliber: 455 Webley Mark 2
Bullet Weight: 262 Grain
Bullet Style: Lead Round Nose
Case Type: Brass

Ballistics Information:
Muzzle Velocity: 655 fps
Muzzle Energy: 420 ft. lbs.


Even so I'm not sure I'd try it without getting a definite answer from an expert on the matter.

[Jim K]

The problem with firing those "shaved" revolvers with .455 ammo is not with the pressure, but with the unsupported rear end of the case resulting from excess headspace. If the revolver is loaded with .455 ammunition, the cartridge will fall into the chamber until it is stopped by the rim. But when the round is fired (assuming the firing pin can reach the primer), the case will move back, and part of the case will be unsupported, possibly resulting in the case failing and releasing gas. Even at the low pressure of the .455, that would not be good and could result in injury to the shooter. That will not happen with the .45 ACP case, which has a stronger head than the typical British .455, but the .45 ACP standard load runs over twice the pressure of the .455, inviting trouble in the old revolvers.

I reiterate my advice; fire those guns only with lightly loaded .45 ACP and clips, or with lightly loaded .45 Auto Rim.

Jim

[soundguy]

Originally Posted by Jim K

The problem with firing those "shaved" revolvers with .455 ammo is not with the pressure, but with the unsupported rear end of the case resulting from excess headspace. If the revolver is loaded with .455 ammunition, the cartridge will fall into the chamber until it is stopped by the rim. But when the round is fired (assuming the firing pin can reach the primer), the case will move back, and part of the case will be unsupported, possibly resulting in the case failing and releasing gas. Even at the low pressure of the .455, that would not be good and could result in injury to the shooter. That will not happen with the .45 ACP case, which has a stronger head than the typical British .455, but the .45 ACP standard load runs over twice the pressure of the .455, inviting trouble in the old revolvers.

I reiterate my advice; fire those guns only with lightly loaded .45 ACP and clips, or with lightly loaded .45 Auto Rim.

Jim

yep.. so if shaved.. lite 45acp..

what about the auto rim 45 you mention.. what are it's pressures like? would it have to be laoded low as well?

and when you mean low? do you mean the lowest 'starting' charge on a regular 45acp?

sounds like the real safe bet is to find an unshaved one and load with 455 then?

[soundguy]

Originally Posted by Ken W

He replied that "I don't care" even though I mentioned that it would be dangerous for anyone to fire non black powder or very low hand loaded rounds in .45 auto and also if someone tried to fire a .455 in it on account of the excessive headspace. He figured that if someone buys it that doesn't know what it is than it's their problem. This is very disturbing and, I hate to say, probably typical of small shops like this all over. All they give a damn about it profit. .

unfortunately I have seen it all over. uninformed or straight out dishonest sellers.

I collect bolo and broom mausers. you see guys with the chinese copies of a broom.. like a hanyang... you point it out to them.. but they still refuse to 'care'

[deadin]

OK, we’re going to put Jim K to the test!!
All this talk about early Webley’s got me to dig out a couple of pictures of two I owned a number of years ago. I’ve gone through Boothroyd’s book and just got myself even more confused with the MkI, Mk1*, MkI**, MkII, MkII*, MkII**, MkIII, MkIV, MkV and MkVI, (Apparently the Mks I,II &III came in two different barrel lengths, 4” & 6”.) The first one I had identified as a MkI** and the second as a MkII (Civilian).( It has the Winged Bullet W/S logo on the side of the frame.) I have to assume that I was going strictly on the frame for identification and now I just don’t know what they are. Both had been shaved and, for all I know are a compilation of parts that were thrown together to sell to us Yanks….

[soundguy]

saw a mk6 at a show.. guy said he shot 45acp with moon clips in it.. but also said he shot 45 auto rim and 455 original in it.

my question is how? did he have a special clip for them made up?

[deadin]

He would have needed a shim for the .455 rounds or an extra long firing pin. (without a shim he would have been playing with a dangerous headspace problem.)

[soundguy]

would a hollowed out moon clip act as a shim. the guy at the show had a couple clips.. one looked like it had been filed on. one I asusme was for 45acp..t he other? for the rimmed cartridges? and he removed meat fromt hem to get them on the cartridge base under the rim?

[deadin]

Were they half or full moons? I would have to check to see if there is any kind of a groove above the rim on a .455 that a half moon could clip into. (Otherwise it could come loose with cylinder rotation and fall out at an inopportune time...) As for setting headspace, as long as the clip thickness was right, it should work.

[soundguy]

i was learry about it. price was good but I passed without much observation.

he had 2 sets of clips.. one looked like a full clip.. and had shiney metal exposed and looke dlike it had been machined. that appeared to be the one he said he had for 455 or 45auto rium. i believe the half clips were normal and 45acp

again.. i didn't actually measure them as it made me feel uneasy witht he questions on that gun.. even though price was attractiver..

[Jim K]

Deadin, I think your first gun is a Mk I with a barrel from a later Mark. Mk I's were not upgraded to the new cylinder retention system but the barrel of a Mk III would fit a Mk I if the frame were altered to take the lever fixing screw. The second picture is of a Mk II; it is the same as the Mk I except that it has no hump on the backstrap. AFAIK, all the service models Mk I, II and III were made only with the 4" barrel. Both the guns pictured have been "shaved" to allow the use of .45 ACP with half-moon clips.

The Mk I was made with the recoil shield as part of the frame; the Mk I* had the shield as a separate part dovetailed in with a screw to keep it from moving sideways.

The Mk IV (not to be confused with the Webley commercial Mk IV in .32 and .38) was approved in 1899 and was the same as the Mk III but with a slightly different hammer spur and a sturdier firing pin. It was also available in 5" and 6" barrels in addition to the standard 4".

The Mk V had a slightly larger cylinder (.012" larger) to make it safe with smokeless powder. (see note)

The Mk VI, adopted in 1915, is the "Webley revolver" that most American gun hobbyists know, as thousands were sold war surplus in the 1950's. It is the quintessential "British army revolver" and is seen in just about every WWI and WWII movie. While the frame is not very different from the Mk V and previous Marks, the longer barrel and square butt make it look larger than the earlier models.

Note: I strongly advise against firing ANY of those converted revolvers with standard .45 ACP or .45 Auto Rim. The pressures of factory .45 AR are lower than the .45 ACP, but still way above the standard pressure of the .455 Webley. It is of interest that the British War Office issued a bulletin warning against use of the .455 Webley Automatic cartridge in ANY of the service revolvers, so the danger of high pressure loads in those revolvers is not something some American dreamed up last week.

Jim

[deadin]

Thanks Jim, that's pretty close to what I thought.
However, Ezell in his "Handguns of the World" mentions a Mark I** and a Mark II**. He states that both of these were a recognized "conversion" using a Mark IV barrel and a Mark V cylinder. This could explain the first picture although he states that it should be the 6" barrel, not the 4". As these changes were done in 1915 as a wartime expedient there may have been some 4's in there. From his definitions, the second picture is just a standard Mk II, as there were only minor changes from the Mark I*. The most noticeable being a slightly changed hammer. (And the lack of a hump..)

[Jim K]

I had the same thought about wartime expediency. The frame is a Mk I, with the hump. But the barrel shows no sign of ever having had the Mk I type retention screw.

Jim

[deadin]

If the barrel on the Mark I** is from a Mark IV, as Ezell described, it wouldn't have the cylinder retention screw of the Marks I and II. ????

[Jim K]

A Mk III or Mk IV barrel would have the later cylinder and cylinder retention system, and the frame of a Mk I or Mk II would have to have a hole drilled and tapped for the fixing screw (the coin slot screw at the bottom of the lever).

Jim

[deadin]

Are we looking at the same picture?? The first picture of the Mark I frame (with the hump) has what you just described.

[Jim K]

Yes, it does; I am agreeing with you.

Jim

[WHSmithIV]

I wouldn't pay $1000 for it for sure - There are a lot of absolutely super pieces available for less!