.44 Special or .455 Webley?

[Miami_JBT]

Yes, and even if you are told it hasn't been, you still have to test it to make sure it'll shoot .455 There are ways of converting a shortened Webley cylinder back to shoot .455, I think duelist1954 did a video this year where he silver soldered a spacer/shim onto the cylinder; it's a fair amount of work that it would be nice if a professional service could do to improve the value of the revolver.

Years back when I started to get interested in top breaks and Webley's, I thought it over and decided that any shortened cylinder is no bueno because it's unknown how much factory hardball .45 ACP was shot in them, the lifespan of those revolvers will be short. Could be used as a bargaining tactic to get one for a lower price if someone really needed to sell it for quick money.

Thus, my thinking is the .38 Webley's are the way to go as they have not been altered and since they're built to shoot 200 grain loads are probably the best .38 S&W chambered revolvers made.

There were other revolvers made in .455, same as .38 S&W, notably solid frame Colts and Smiths, part of why I wanted to focus more on the .455 caliber, not necessarily all the revolvers it's available in.

I have a Enfield No.2 Mk I that for a DAO is a gem to shoot. Trigger is a little on the heavy side. But it shoots well. A Webley is in the works too. So many .455s were shaved and it sucks. I want to find a nice conditioned original that won't break the bank. But .38 S&W guns are abundant and fairly affordable.

 

[BobWright]

Many years ago I bought one of those Colt New Service revolvoers in .45 Colt, in reality an ex-.455 Eley. After reading Elmer Keith very heavily, I had it customized, including transformoing it into a .44 Specail, the .44 Magnum had been announced, but still was on the horizon of the market. This gun was parted from me through theft, and I bought one of those newly announced Charter Arms Bulldogs in .44 Special. This turned out to be not what I was looking for and sold that little revolver. Then for many years I was ".44 Special poor." Then I realized my pauper's state so far as the Special was concerned and rectified the situation. Here a few more recent acquisitions:


From the left, two Colt New Frontiers, right top is a Ruger Three Screw, and ex-.357 Magnum Blackhawk, and bottom right is a Uberti Model P.


And later bought this Ruger:


The story behind this .44 is that I spotted a New Vaquero .45 Colt in a ship sporting these grips. I bought the .45, swapped out the grips and kept the stags. Then had to buy another Ruger to fit these grips.


Bob Wright

SHOP! Shop, not ship!

 

[bannockburn]

Between the two, I would roll with the .44 Special.

I can still remember many years ago going to a local gunsmith's shop whenever I had a problem with a gun. Waiting around while he was busy with other customers, I happened to notice a box of Canadian made Dominion ammunition in .455 Webley sitting on the shelf. And from the look of things that box had been on there for quite some time! In all of the intervening years I believe that's the only factory box of .455 Webley that I have ever encountered.

I picked up a Ruger Flattop Blackhawk .44 Special shortly after they came out. I always wanted a .44 Special and this definitely was the best of both worlds! First thing I did was replace the plastic factory grips with a Rosewood set; then later with a pair of American Holly Wood grips. I also ordered 4 or 5 boxes of factory ammo which was at the time readily available and reasonably priced.

 

[Milt1]

There's a lot of history in America with the .44 Special magnified by Elmer Keith's work with it as Bob Wright pointed out earlier. I handload for the .44 Special for use in my Ruger flattop. I know nothing about the .455 Webley and I'm fairly well read on handguns as they have been my favorite to shoot since the late 50's.

 

[Ugly Sauce]

For those who bought a shaved Webley, what did you do to determine it wasn't shot to crap with factory .45 ACP? I get the appeal of using the moon clips with a top break, it's starting to appeal to me, but as I said previously I'm hesitant to buying one unless it's from someone I trust.

Good grief. Can you cite a case of a shaved Webley failing with loads equal to .455 Webley chamber pressure? The condition of the pistol would be a clue as to whether is had been shot-to-crap. It would be in crappy condition. The fear of shooting a shaved Webley with .455 loads is going a bit too far, I think, but I may be wrong. Don't shoot any old pistol if it's not in good condition. How do you know if an old Colt has been shot to crap with hot reloads?

 

[Ugly Sauce]

Then it comes down to the superiority of the round. .44 Special wins this race all around. A more powerful round and probably generally more accurate as well, especially when you note there are more bullets one can use in the .44 Special vs .455 Webley, as well as more loading date available for the .44 Special out there.

Wow, quite a post. Well done! I think that the Special being more powerful than the Webley is only a concern if your intended target requires more power. For target shooting, rolling tin-cans or a safe queen, or a collectable, it wouldn't matter. Hiking in Grizz country, then the .44mag is "superior" to both, and I wouldn't want either. Limited to the old double action Colt, and standard loads, I'd want neither in that situation. So, just saying, the power-edge the Special has over the Webley would not be an advantage in it's self, only for a specific purpose.

Also, how superior is the Special. Just going by memory, the Webley (and correct me if I'm wrong) throws it's 260-265 grain bullet at around 650fps, the Special a 240 grain bullet at 750fps. Is that enough difference to make a difference?

Not arguing, just saying.

 

[CraigC]

Wow, quite a post. Well done! I think that the Special being more powerful than the Webley is only a concern if your intended target requires more power. For target shooting, rolling tin-cans or a safe queen, or a collectable, it wouldn't matter. Hiking in Grizz country, then the .44mag is "superior" to both, and I wouldn't want either. Limited to the old double action Colt, and standard loads, I'd want neither in that situation. So, just saying, the power-edge the Special has over the Webley would not be an advantage in it's self, only for a specific purpose.

Also, how superior is the Special. Just going by memory, the Webley (and correct me if I'm wrong) throws it's 260-265 grain bullet at around 650fps, the Special a 240 grain bullet at 750fps. Is that enough difference to make a difference?

Not arguing, just saying.

Well, in the big New Service, it's good for at least the 950fps Skeeter load and the Keith 1200fps load is a possibility.

 

[TTv2]

Good grief. Can you cite a case of a shaved Webley failing with loads equal to .455 Webley chamber pressure? The condition of the pistol would be a clue as to whether is had been shot-to-crap. It would be in crappy condition. The fear of shooting a shaved Webley with .455 loads is going a bit too far, I think, but I may be wrong. Don't shoot any old pistol if it's not in good condition. How do you know if an old Colt has been shot to crap with hot reloads?

Obviously my concern is not shaved Webley's shot with .455 power .45 ACP, but full power .45 FMJ that was found in every hardware store for decades.

 

[Bcwitt]

Most Webleys used a larger diameter bore. Where 45 pistol in the states was .451 (.454 for the early 45 Colts) the Webley uses .455 diameter bullets. 45 ACP bullets work but the proper size works better and is less likely to lead the barrel and will often produce better accuracy.

Interesting. The Webley still wins by a mile for cool factor.

 

[Ugly Sauce]

Well, in the big New Service, it's good for at least the 950fps Skeeter load and the Keith 1200fps load is a possibility.

Truth, (or...is it prudent to "magnumtise" an old Colt, anymore than a Webley?) but, we must compare apples to apples. !! Hot .44spl loads be like...grapefruits.

 

[Ugly Sauce]

Obviously my concern is not shaved Webley's shot with .455 power .45 ACP, but full power .45 FMJ that was found in every hardware store for decades.

Oh I get that. But the "magnumtise the .44special" fad has been around for as many decades. How many "Skeeter" loads, or worse, have been fired in that old Colt?

And I get your point, and understand the concern. I just think that if a shaved Webley has been abused with a very high round count of .45acp, it will show it. It will have been "shot loose". As would a Colt that had fired too many Skeeter Specials. My shaved Webley is nice and tight in all respects, was probably fired sometime in the past with .45ACP. But I don't think it ate too many of them. Maybe half a box and into the safe or "collection" it went. !! I'm not concerned that it might let-loose firing standard pressure loads.

My last, silly, and most weak and meaningless argument, who knows if some re-loader in the past cooked up some ".455 Magnum" loads for his un-shaved Webley? He be like: "hey! I can make a .44spl out of this! Or a .45 Colt!" Unshaved does not equate to, or is no guarantee of "never-abused".

 

[Ugly Sauce]

Most Webleys used a larger diameter bore & groove. Where 45 pistol in the states was .451 (.454 for the early 45 Colts) the Webley uses .455 diameter bullets. 45 ACP bullets work but the proper size works better and is less likely to lead the barrel and will often produce better accuracy.

Not only that, but the Webley chamber is "different", and works best with the Webley bullet. I believe the long cone shaped nose is what chambers it in the throat. However, my Webley seems to shoot fine with the standard .45 caliber bullets, which I don't use anymore since I got a good supply of the replica Webley bullet, which is more accurate, just that the .451's-.452-.454" bullets were not "bad".

 

[Driftwood Johnson]

I have two Colt New Service revolvers. Note they have the older style trigger guard. The one at the top is chambered for 45 Colt, it shipped in 1906. The one at the bottom is chambered for 44-40, it shipped in 1907.

I really don't have a whole lot of revolvers chambered for 44-40. This Merwin Hulbert is chambered for 44-40.

And yes, I do shoot it on occasion.

The only other 44-40 revolver I have is this 1st Gen Bisley Colt.

Like all Single Action Army revolvers chambered for 44-40, it is marked Colt Frontier Six Shooter on the barrel.

Now here is something interesting. When I bought this Smith and Wesson 44 Hand Ejector, 2nd Model, that is what I was told it was. However I got a bit suspicious.

The barrel is marked 44 S&W Special CTG, but the underside of the barrel should have had the serial number stamped on the flat. Instead there is just this diamond shaped mark.

And there was this strange marking on the side of the frame.

So I had it lettered. Turns out it is a 455 Mark II Hand Ejector that shipped to Canada in 1916. At some point it was sent back to the factory and converted to 44 Special. The diamond mark in the underside of the barrel means it was modified at the factory. The strange marking on the side of the frame is the Canadian Broad Arrow inspection stamp. A British Broad Arrow circled by the letter C, since Canada was still part of the British Empire at the time.

 

[TTv2]

Not only that, but the Webley chamber is "different", and works best with the Webley bullet. I believe the long cone shaped nose is what chambers it in the throat. However, my Webley seems to shoot fine with the standard .45 caliber bullets, which I don't use anymore since I got a good supply of the replica Webley bullet, which is more accurate, just that the .451's-.452-.454" bullets were not "bad".

Lee claims the .45 Colt sizing die can double for the .455, so I don't think there's anything lost by using the .45 ACP as long as it's being sized with a .45 Colt sizer. The bullet diameter is the only thing that's different, but expanding the ACP neck for a .454 bullet isn't too out there and there are hollow base bullets available for the .45

 

[Ugly Sauce]

since Canada was still part of the British Empire at the time.

Still is I believe. It has achieved a different "status" or something, but is not independent. ?

 

[Driftwood Johnson]

Canada became a Dominion in 1867, but it was still part of the British Empire. Queen Elizabeth II signed the Canada Act in 1982, making Canada a completely independent country. There is no British Empire any more. It was replaced by the Commonwealth of Nations. Canada is one of many completely independent countries in the British Commonwealth today.

 

[StrawHat]

… In fact, British involvement is what led to the eventual demise of this model, as the .44 (and .455 Webley) Hand Ejector Second Model revolver was created to replace the .44 Hand Ejector First Model (aka New Century aka Triple Lock) revolver due to the claim that mud buildup in the shroud precluded the revolver from functioning properly. A valid and likely claim from use in the trenches…

The British insisted the New Century was too heavy and jammed with mud before the first ones were even delivered! They imagined it would jam and with three precision locks it might have. But, here is a headline for you, the same mud would jam any revolver or self loader! Removing the third lock and shroud pared the weight by maybe 2 ounces, probably less. The big saving? Cost! I believe the difference between a New Century and a Second Model Hand Ejector was about $3.

And the obligatory photograph,








Kevin

 

[Ugly Sauce]

Queen Elizabeth II signed the Canada Act in 1982,

Hence, "Canada Day"?

 

[dickydalton]

For those who bought a shaved Webley, what did you do to determine it wasn't shot to crap with factory .45 ACP? I get the appeal of using the moon clips with a top break, it's starting to appeal to me, but as I said previously I'm hesitant to buying one unless it's from someone I trust.

Well, the one I have is shaved enough to allow the 45 A.R. that it is proofed for but NOT enough to allow 45ACP on a moon clip in it. 45ACP with no clip drops down into the chamber. The cylinder star is like new and the barrel also, so I guess my $600 wasn't wasted.

 

[Driftwood Johnson]

According to Roy Jinks in his book History of Smith and Wesson, the retail price of a New Century (Triple Lock) was $21 when introduced. The retail price of the 44 HE 2nd Model (without the fancy third lock) was $19 when introduced in 1915, a savings of $2 mostly from eliminating the extra machining required for the third lock.

According to Neal and Jinks, 808 Triple Locks were converted to 455 Mark II for sale to the British. The Brits actually received 666 revolvers, the remaining ones were sold commercially. The Brits received 33 different groups of this revolver from April 8 1912, to April 28, 1916. The majority were delivered to Britain in a shipment dated October 21, 1914.

It is true the Brits were not happy about the possibility of the ejector rod housing filling up with mud, clearly they received some well before WWI started.

Obligatory photograph, a Target Model Triple Lock, chambered for 44 Special,

 

[Onty]

S&W Triple Lock Target, it doesn't get better than that!

 

[orpington]

.44 Hand Ejector First Model cost $21 throughout production.

.44 Hand Ejector First Model TARGET MODEL revolver cost $22.50.

.44 Hand Ejector SECOND Model cost $19.

Prices were likely the same for .455 Webley revolvers, except I don’t know if the British government received a discount due to the volume of their purchase.

 

[Buzznrose]

I don’t know much about the Webley but I know a little about the .44 special. Guess that’s my choice.

 

[the Black Spot]

44

 

[Onty]

Some 25-30 years ago I had seen, I think in Shotgun News, advertisement for triple lock crane for N-frame. At that time I wasn't aware of it's significance ("Dirty Harry" syndrome). As usual, we get smarter when opportunity is gone.