.38-200 update
- Thread starter waidmann
- Start date
- Status
Strange, and interesting. Given what it is, it should have South African military markings on it. I have to speculate that the way the war was going in 1940, they issued the revolver without bothering to apply the usual stampings. Since the unmarked revolver is unusual, I would say that the collector's value has now gone up enough to more then pay for the cost of the letter.
Radagast
Member
Very interesting. I wonder if it ever made it to the South African government. Lack of markings, lack of wear makes me think it may have been 'liberated' prior to being issued. It's fun to speculate 
Apparently S&W records show it as "shipped to," so if it was liberated it had to be after it left the United States. Quite possible, but not very probable because inventory control over weapons in anyone's army is pretty tight.
On the other hand, there seem to be no markings that indicated it was reimported back into the United States as military surplus. If that was the case I would expect it to be stamped: "Not English Made." Also it lacks any military or commercial proof marks.
Could someone lifted it at the S&W factory? Again possible, but hardly probable.
On the other hand, there seem to be no markings that indicated it was reimported back into the United States as military surplus. If that was the case I would expect it to be stamped: "Not English Made." Also it lacks any military or commercial proof marks.
Could someone lifted it at the S&W factory? Again possible, but hardly probable.
Commonwealth markings & cetera
.My experience is that only firearms for British use went through the English proof houses. All revolvers I have seen bore Birmingham proofs, M1911A1's London and of course the "NOT ENGLISH MAKE". My other .38-200 bears the crossed flags, the crown and various inspector's marks but no proofs or the arrow C. Canada, Australia and New Zealand (and Uof SA) are not members of the International Congress of Proof and had no mechanisms or facilities for that purpose.
U.S. Property may bear inspection or proofs but not property marking.
Per the letter the British Purchasing Commission received 1905 HE's from June to December of 1940, 21,347 going to U of SA. This lot of 1200 went on May 3, 1940.
In April 1941 8,000 went to Australia. After that Lend Lease through U.S. Army channels took over.
My thoughts, Jinks' dates and numbers.
.My experience is that only firearms for British use went through the English proof houses. All revolvers I have seen bore Birmingham proofs, M1911A1's London and of course the "NOT ENGLISH MAKE". My other .38-200 bears the crossed flags, the crown and various inspector's marks but no proofs or the arrow C. Canada, Australia and New Zealand (and Uof SA) are not members of the International Congress of Proof and had no mechanisms or facilities for that purpose.
U.S. Property may bear inspection or proofs but not property marking.
Per the letter the British Purchasing Commission received 1905 HE's from June to December of 1940, 21,347 going to U of SA. This lot of 1200 went on May 3, 1940.
In April 1941 8,000 went to Australia. After that Lend Lease through U.S. Army channels took over.
My thoughts, Jinks' dates and numbers.
Last edited:
Radagast
Member
Waidman:
Thanks for that extra info. I've annotated my SCSW for future reference.
Thanks for that extra info. I've annotated my SCSW for future reference.
Some misunderstanding there on British proof marks. Guns sent to England during WWII or under Lend Lease were not given those proof marks when received in the UK. Some that were actually issued were marked with the military proof and propertly mark (broad arrow) but many were not.
Those proof marks usually seen on surplus guns brought from England are post-war commercial proofs, applied when the guns were sold out of military storage. They are not "export marks", since the guns were proved without regard to their ultimate destination, nor are they US "import marks". The word "ENGLAND", on guns made in that country, is the Country-of-Origin mark required for all products imported into the U.S., and was usually put on in bond in the U.S. (The 1968 law changed the requirements for marking firearms and the COO is no longer used for surplus guns.) The COO mark was not normally applied to US made guns being brought back, though mistakes were made, like the Savage-made No. 4 rifles I have seen marked "ENGLAND".
If the British military bought a gun or got it by LL, and then sent it to, say, South Africa, which after the war sold it to a U.S. importer, it would not carry any British proof marks. It might have a South African property mark (an arrow insude a "U") but sometimes such marks were hit-or-miss in wartime.
Jim
Those proof marks usually seen on surplus guns brought from England are post-war commercial proofs, applied when the guns were sold out of military storage. They are not "export marks", since the guns were proved without regard to their ultimate destination, nor are they US "import marks". The word "ENGLAND", on guns made in that country, is the Country-of-Origin mark required for all products imported into the U.S., and was usually put on in bond in the U.S. (The 1968 law changed the requirements for marking firearms and the COO is no longer used for surplus guns.) The COO mark was not normally applied to US made guns being brought back, though mistakes were made, like the Savage-made No. 4 rifles I have seen marked "ENGLAND".
If the British military bought a gun or got it by LL, and then sent it to, say, South Africa, which after the war sold it to a U.S. importer, it would not carry any British proof marks. It might have a South African property mark (an arrow insude a "U") but sometimes such marks were hit-or-miss in wartime.
Jim
- Status
Similar threads
