My .455/45 Colt rework

shooter37 · #1 02-23-2011, 01:21 PM

These are some pix. of a Smith I have had for years. It is a reworked .455 with Brit. proofs. The rear sight is a micro as is the front. Very nicely installed. It appears to be quite old.
The gun shoots well and likes almost any moderate load.
Anyone out there familiar with these conversions. I was told the gun came out of Canada but I'd like some knowledgeable collector thoughts.
Thanks
Al

Hondo44 · #2 02-23-2011, 01:46 PM

These 455s were ordered by both England and Canadian RCMP. The stampings are different, however. Canadian used guns are much more scarce.

The modifications are fairly common, especially the rechambering to 45. And of course negate the collector value.
It's a 2nd Model Hand Ejector 1st made in 1915. Most of these were sent to England for the 1st WW. A serial # will help us determine the vintage. A letter from Smith ($50) will tell you where and when it was shipped.

They are great shooters as you well know and light or moderate loads should be the rule for these pre tempered cylinder guns. The SCSW book will help you identify the proof marks.

shooter37 · #3 02-23-2011, 01:53 PM

HONDO44
Can you explain the differences between Brit and Canadian markings.

DCWilson · #4 02-23-2011, 02:01 PM

Nice gun. I also have a converted .455/Second. I think it was first converted to .45 Colt in the '20s, then reblued and fitted out with Micro sights in the 1960s.

The rechambering stamp on the barrel says .45 S&W, but the gun accepts .45 Colt without trouble. I think it possible that the factory just couldn't put the Colt name on a rechambered revolver.

The problem of the case rim thickness was solved not by slightly counterboring the chambers, but by planing a couple of thousandths of an inch off the face of the recoil shield. I'd be interested to know if your gun was adjusted that way too.

I bought this on a whim last year when I saw it on the shelf at my usual range. I couldn't even tell what it was at a glance, so I asked to look at it. It took only a few moments to form the thought, "Wow, cool." So I brought it home.

I have fired it a couple of times, but I have not yet really made an effort to get to know it and get it properly sighted in. As heavily modified as it is, it is not really a collector's piece, but it sure is a nicely turned out .45.

Hondo44 · #5 02-23-2011, 02:23 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by shooter37

HONDO44
Can you explain the differences between Brit and Canadian markings.

Sorry, I mean Al, I'm in the hospital w/my wife away from my resources. But if memory serves me and it seldom does anymore, the Canadian mark has a crown over crossed sabers of flags or something, but different from English marks.

I'll have to recheck notes when I go home next to shower.

shooter37 · #6 02-23-2011, 03:31 PM

DCWILSON
My conversion appears to have the cylinder rear face turned. The recoil shield looks untouched.
I have been shooting Hornady 3D .454 dia SWC bullets over 7.5 Gr Unique. Pleasant and accurate to shoot.

HONDO44
Thanks for the info.

Hondo44 · #7 02-23-2011, 03:54 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by DCWilson

Nice gun. I also have a converted .455/Second. I think it was first converted to .45 Colt in the '20s, then reblued and fitted out with Micro sights in the 1960s.

The rechambering stamp on the barrel says .45 S&W, but the gun accepts .45 Colt without trouble. I think it possible that the factory just couldn't put the Colt name on a rechambered revolver.

The problem of the case rim thickness was solved not by slightly counterboring the chambers, but by planing a couple of thousandths of an inch off the face of the recoil shield. I'd be interested to know if your gun was adjusted that way too.

I bought this on a whim last year when I saw it on the shelf at my usual range. I couldn't even tell what it was at a glance, so I asked to look at it. It took only a few moments to form the thought, "Wow, cool." So I brought it home.

I have fired it a couple of times, but I have not yet really made an effort to get to know it and get it properly sighted in. As heavily modified as it is, it is not really a collector's piece, but it sure is a nicely turned out .45.

David,
I'm assuming since you mention the factory doing the caliber stamping that it was a factory conversion. Does it have a rework date stamp on the grip frame or was it verified in a letter from Roy? Most of these conversions seem to have no pedigrees.

I love the 45 S&W stamping! It's very historic since, as you probably already know, S&W did develop a "45 Special" cartridge (not to be confused with the 45 Schofield) for the New Century Hand Ejector (Triple Lock) when they submitted it for competition in the Army trials.

Hondo44 · #8 02-23-2011, 04:09 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by shooter37

HONDO44
Can you explain the differences between Brit and Canadian markings.

Al,
Still looking for the difference in British and Canadian markings. However, the guns made for England were usually stamped "Not made in England" at their proof house. If yours doesn't have that it's a possible Canadian gun. Can you send pics of the proof marks.

Also, are you sure your gun was converted to 45 Colt? If it still has the serial number on the rear face of the cylinder, it may not have been converted. There are about 724 reported as being originally chambered for 45 Colt and made specifically for the Canadian government, although many more, 14,500, were made for them in 455.

I believe the 724 were the ones used by the RCMP because their standard handgun was the Colt New Service in 45 Colt. The 455s were for their armed services.

Hondo44 · #9 02-23-2011, 04:25 PM

Al,
It just came to me: I believe the Canadian mark is a C broad arrow on the frame somewhere, maybe on the left side above the grip.

DCWilson · #10 02-23-2011, 04:27 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Hondo44

David,
I'm assuming since you mention the factory doing the caliber stamping that it was a factory conversion. Does it have a rework date stamp on the grip frame or was it verified in a letter from Roy? Most of these conversions seem to have no pedigrees.

I love the 45 S&W stamping! It's very historic since, as you probably already know, S&W did develop a "45 Special" cartridge (not to be confused with the 45 Schofield) for the New Century Hand Ejector (Triple Lock) when they submitted it for competition in the Army trials.

Here's the photo of the cartridge mark, which is a little above and to the right of the original stamp.

There is no rework stamp on the gun, and my assertion that it is a factory conversion is based on the use of the .45 SW stamp; why would an independent shop label it for the wrong proprietary cartridge when it was converting it to shoot .45 Colt? I haven't lettered it, but would not expect to get more than the basic info about date and destination. I should really research this before shooting my mouth off.

This one is 73778, by the way, late in the .455/Second production run. It shipped in July 1916.

k22fan · #11 02-23-2011, 04:46 PM

Hello Al,

When I bought my .45 ACP 1917 in 1975 it was wearing the same Micro front sight base but with a ramp blade that was lower than David's to match its J frame adjustable sight. When I had its barrel shortened to 4" in 1989 it got a rifle "shorty" ramp or base with a Redfield Sour Dough blade with a bronze insert. I like old military guns that were tastefully converted back when sporterizing them was more economical than buying modern guns. I'd enjoy target shooting with a gun like yours.

I'll go out on a limb and guess that yours was Canadian because the British guns had numerous proof marks along with their "NOT ENGLISH MADE" stamp while the RCMP .455 I looked at recently had only one small stamp on its frame above its grip. Most RCMP revolvers had prominent ownership markings running down their back straps but those have been removed from a large percentage of them.

Quote:

Originally Posted by DCWilson

[...] I bought this [... .455 converted to .45 Colt ...] on a whim [...] It took only a few moments to form the thought, "Wow, cool." So I brought it home.

I have lots of guns bought with the same questionable logic. Perhaps someday the American Psychiatric Association will define this as a mental illness that mostly affects older men. On the other hand, I would have acted the same in my youth if my budget didn't impose more sensibility.

shooter37 · #12 02-23-2011, 05:26 PM

ALL
OK. There is a "C" around a broad arrow on theleft side of the frame just above the trigger guard. There is no "not english made" stamping and the .455 stamp is the only caliber marking. The cyliner is for sure cut back and the recoil shield is or appears uncut. S/NBR is 589XX and there are some assorted markings (stamped) on the left side: one is another small broad arrow the other looks like a small crown with II below it. A final marking, sort of a crossed flag, is on the frame forward of the cylinder.
Al

Hondo44 · #13 02-23-2011, 05:27 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by DCWilson

Here's the photo of the cartridge mark, which is a little above and to the right of the original stamp.

There is no rework stamp on the gun, and my assertion that it is a factory conversion is based on the use of the .45 SW stamp; why would an independent shop label it for the wrong proprietary cartridge when it was converting it to shoot .45 Colt? I haven't lettered it, but would not expect to get more than the basic info about date and destination. I should really research this before shooting my mouth off.

This one is 73778, by the way, late in the .455/Second production run. It shipped in July 1916.

David, both fascinating and bewildering! What was your clue that the breechface has been faced off?

Hondo44 · #14 02-23-2011, 05:33 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by shooter37

ALL
OK. There is a "C" around a broad arrow on theleft side of the frame just above the trigger guard. There is no "not english made" stamping and the .455 stamp is the only caliber marking. The cyliner is for sure cut back and the recoil shield is or appears uncut. S/NBR is 589XX and there are some assorted markings (stamped) on the left side: one is another small broad arrow the other looks like a small crown with II below it. A final marking, sort of a crossed flag, is on the frame forward of the cylinder.
Al

Al,
Bingo! It's Canadian, for the armed services. They were made 1915 to 1917, serial range 5001 to 74,755. So yours is towards the end of production probably late 1917.

shooter37 · #15 02-23-2011, 05:59 PM

HONDO44
Is there any way to determine if this gun was reworked by S&W, the Canadian military, or ????? The work looks professionally done and is not recent.

Hondo44 · #16 02-23-2011, 06:15 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by shooter37

HONDO44
Is there any way to determine if this gun was reworked by S&W, the Canadian military, or ????? The work looks professionally done and is not recent.

Look for a month and year date stamp under the left grip panel on the butt near the front lower corner like: 2-50 or 12/42 or 05 61. If there is a date, it won't tell you for sure that the factory converted it, only that it went back to the factory for re-work of some kind. Most likely it was done by Micro sight or other well known firm of the time (late '40s or 50's) when these conversions and sight work were popular.

A computerized data base is being worked on to be able to locate factory work orders by serial # but not complete yet. Maybe someone else can jump in with the name of the project that eludes me right now.

DCWilson · #17 02-23-2011, 06:21 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Hondo44

David, both fascinating and bewildering! What was your clue that the breechface has been faced off?

The relative shallowness of the cut in which the ratchet slides when the cylinder is opened or closed. Also the direction of the tool marks on the face of the recoil shield.