Smith & Wesson Forum

Go Back   Smith & Wesson Forum > Smith & Wesson Revolvers > S&W Hand Ejectors: 1896 to 1961
o

Notices

S&W Hand Ejectors: 1896 to 1961 All 5-Screw & Vintage 4-Screw SWING-OUT Cylinder REVOLVERS, and the 35 Autos and 32 Autos


Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old 09-25-2016, 04:26 PM
BibleronKJV BibleronKJV is offline
Member
Canadian PreVictory question re caliber markings Canadian PreVictory question re caliber markings Canadian PreVictory question re caliber markings Canadian PreVictory question re caliber markings Canadian PreVictory question re caliber markings  
Join Date: Feb 2014
Posts: 408
Likes: 0
Liked 88 Times in 56 Posts
Default Canadian PreVictory question re caliber markings

I have a Canadian marked PreVictory #831790 which has the standard factory caliber marking "38 S&W Ctg" on the barrel, but is also is marked "38/380" to the rear of the S&W ctg marking. Pate says on pg. 111, "...where it was possible to do so, 38 Special revolvers were converted to 38-200 and marked "/380 or 38/380 to indicate the conversion." My question is this....Why is this revolver marked 38/380 (38-200) when it was already marked 38 S&W Ctg.? This would not seem to be any type of conversion on an already 38-200 revolver. Was this 38/380 marking simply placed there so that its original 38-200 caliber would not be confused with 38 Special? Pate shows a similarly marked example on pg.111 which is identical to mine. What's going on here? Thanks in advance, Ron
Reply With Quote
  #2  
Old 09-26-2016, 08:56 PM
BibleronKJV BibleronKJV is offline
Member
Canadian PreVictory question re caliber markings Canadian PreVictory question re caliber markings Canadian PreVictory question re caliber markings Canadian PreVictory question re caliber markings Canadian PreVictory question re caliber markings  
Join Date: Feb 2014
Posts: 408
Likes: 0
Liked 88 Times in 56 Posts
Default

Anyone have any ideas on this one? Thanks, Ron
Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old 09-26-2016, 11:15 PM
2152hq 2152hq is offline
Member
Canadian PreVictory question re caliber markings  
Join Date: Sep 2005
Posts: 7,727
Likes: 1,633
Liked 9,099 Times in 3,366 Posts
Default

Just a guess,,, that the '38/380' was the Canadian official caliber designation for that cartridge. Training, printed manuals and cartridge/ammo packets might also refer to it as 38/380.
The servicemen and women using the revolver would expect to see that caliber designation on the revolver.
We know the 38S&W cartridge to be the same but not all soldiers are 'gun people'.
It has to be made very simple sometimes.
I'd guess the caliber mark was added at the same time the Canadian property mark was stamped. '

Or perhaps a Unit Armourer decided the caliber marking was needed for whatever reason and it was added to the revolvers only under their responsibility.

The latter would explain why all are not additionally 38/380 caliber marked.

Again,,just my guess.
Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old 09-26-2016, 11:48 PM
Absalom's Avatar
Absalom Absalom is offline
SWCA Member
Absent Comrade
Canadian PreVictory question re caliber markings Canadian PreVictory question re caliber markings Canadian PreVictory question re caliber markings Canadian PreVictory question re caliber markings Canadian PreVictory question re caliber markings  
Join Date: Jan 2014
Location: Oregon
Posts: 12,834
Likes: 10,103
Liked 27,995 Times in 8,452 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by 2152hq View Post
Just a guess,,, that the '38/380' was the Canadian official caliber designation for that cartridge. .
......
I'd guess the caliber mark was added at the same time the Canadian property mark was stamped. '
......
The latter would explain why all are not additionally 38/380 caliber marked.
......
This does raise some interesting questions.

.38/380 was actually the official BRITISH caliber designation at the time. Ron, you mention the picture on p. 111 of Pate. You probably saw the chart on p.112 where he explains the different markings. So it appears this was indeed a rule, maybe for standardization purposes, but whether it was applied or not may have been spottily enforced. It apparently ceased with Lend-lease; I haven't seen a BSR in Victory configuration so stamped.

Your gun would have shipped around October 1941. That's likely too early for Lend-lease. Pate lists a Canadian purchase contract for 27,168 M&P's with 5" on 6/10/1941; if that's your barrel length, I'd bet it shipped under that.
Reply With Quote
  #5  
Old 09-27-2016, 08:05 AM
BibleronKJV BibleronKJV is offline
Member
Canadian PreVictory question re caliber markings Canadian PreVictory question re caliber markings Canadian PreVictory question re caliber markings Canadian PreVictory question re caliber markings Canadian PreVictory question re caliber markings  
Join Date: Feb 2014
Posts: 408
Likes: 0
Liked 88 Times in 56 Posts
Default

Thanks for the input so far. To add to the confusion I also have another Canadian marked PreVictory #938813 which does NOT have the "38/380" marking on the barrel. This example has no U.S. Property marking on topstrap, but does have "WB" and "P" and Ordnance bomb on butt. The factory letter on this gun states that it was shipped to Hartford Ordnance Depot on March 4,l942. Maybe some of the other Victory experts will have some ideas. Ron
Reply With Quote
  #6  
Old 09-27-2016, 01:49 PM
BibleronKJV BibleronKJV is offline
Member
Canadian PreVictory question re caliber markings Canadian PreVictory question re caliber markings Canadian PreVictory question re caliber markings Canadian PreVictory question re caliber markings Canadian PreVictory question re caliber markings  
Join Date: Feb 2014
Posts: 408
Likes: 0
Liked 88 Times in 56 Posts
Default

Upon close examination I notice that both of these Canadian PreVictories have London proof marks according to the Rules of 1925 as illustrated on page 107 of Pate's book. Since neither of these guns seem to be Lend Lease is it possible that they were London proofed and marked "38/380" at the same time? Thanks for putting up with my unending questions. This is what happens when you are retired and have too much time on your hands. Ha Ha Ron
Reply With Quote
  #7  
Old 09-27-2016, 06:03 PM
Skeetr57 Skeetr57 is offline
SWCA Member
Canadian PreVictory question re caliber markings Canadian PreVictory question re caliber markings Canadian PreVictory question re caliber markings  
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Inman, SC USA
Posts: 1,303
Likes: 95
Liked 649 Times in 372 Posts
Default

My opinion is that the caliber markings and the London proof markings were both applied at the same time, and that they were applied post war and after the revolvers left government ownership. Neither the British government nor the Canadian government required that the revolvers purchased be sent through the proof houses at London or Birmingham prior to use. Some revolvers have acceptance stamps from the government arsenals, and no other markings post factory, and some have no post S&W markings at all.
__________________
Tom
1560
Reply With Quote
  #8  
Old 09-27-2016, 07:29 PM
Absalom's Avatar
Absalom Absalom is offline
SWCA Member
Absent Comrade
Canadian PreVictory question re caliber markings Canadian PreVictory question re caliber markings Canadian PreVictory question re caliber markings Canadian PreVictory question re caliber markings Canadian PreVictory question re caliber markings  
Join Date: Jan 2014
Location: Oregon
Posts: 12,834
Likes: 10,103
Liked 27,995 Times in 8,452 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Skeetr57 View Post
My opinion is that the caliber markings and the London proof markings were both applied at the same time, and that they were applied post war and after the revolvers left government ownership. Neither the British government nor the Canadian government required that the revolvers purchased be sent through the proof houses at London or Birmingham prior to use......
There is no question that the London proof markings were applied post-war. However, the .38/380 caliber stamping does not conform to the well-known British proof mark for the caliber, which is .38 .767".

Pate is really quite clear on this. "Given the wide variety of acquired by the British during the 1940-1942 period, some means had to be developed to indicate what British ammunition was acceptable in a given firearm." (Pate, p. 111)

The .38/380 marking on the barrel is provided for in Army Council Instructions from June 4, 1941. Pate's info is properly sourced (chart p. 112), so it really leaves little room for opinion. And to be clear, this does not refer to the small number of converted .38 Special guns, but all weapons in .38 Colt or S&W.

I suspect it wasn't consistently applied and then ceased due to the fiction that the Lend-lease BSR's remained US property.

Last edited by Absalom; 09-27-2016 at 07:37 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #9  
Old 09-27-2016, 08:48 PM
BibleronKJV BibleronKJV is offline
Member
Canadian PreVictory question re caliber markings Canadian PreVictory question re caliber markings Canadian PreVictory question re caliber markings Canadian PreVictory question re caliber markings Canadian PreVictory question re caliber markings  
Join Date: Feb 2014
Posts: 408
Likes: 0
Liked 88 Times in 56 Posts
Default

Absalom, What you offer makes good sense and it brings up a new question. Most of the BSR's that I have seen were proofed post War according to the Rules of 1955 as per Pate pg.107. My two Canadians are the only ones that I have seen which were proofed according to the Rules of 1925. What do you think? Thanks, Ron
Reply With Quote
  #10  
Old 09-27-2016, 09:43 PM
Absalom's Avatar
Absalom Absalom is offline
SWCA Member
Absent Comrade
Canadian PreVictory question re caliber markings Canadian PreVictory question re caliber markings Canadian PreVictory question re caliber markings Canadian PreVictory question re caliber markings Canadian PreVictory question re caliber markings  
Join Date: Jan 2014
Location: Oregon
Posts: 12,834
Likes: 10,103
Liked 27,995 Times in 8,452 Posts
Default

Ron, that's another interesting question, together with how Canadian guns ended up being proofed in Britain. But the proofing was initiated by whoever had purchased the surplus guns, not the government before sale; we know this because the British-converted .38 S&W-to-.38 Special BSR's, like Cogswell & Harrison's, were proofed for the new caliber .38 Special, not the one they had when the government sold them. So the Canadian military could have sold those revolvers to a British wholesaler who then prepped them for sale in Britain by having them proofed. The Rule of 1925 may just indicate this happened earlier than with the British-held BSR's.

I have not owned any Canadian pre-Victory BSR's, but those few I've come across all had no British proofs, just the Canadian ownership marks. So there must have been other ways, not by way of Britain, for those to make their way back to the US.
Reply With Quote
  #11  
Old 09-28-2016, 07:59 AM
BibleronKJV BibleronKJV is offline
Member
Canadian PreVictory question re caliber markings Canadian PreVictory question re caliber markings Canadian PreVictory question re caliber markings Canadian PreVictory question re caliber markings Canadian PreVictory question re caliber markings  
Join Date: Feb 2014
Posts: 408
Likes: 0
Liked 88 Times in 56 Posts
Default

Absalom, Thanks again for your helpful insight. It is mysteries like these that make S&W collecting so interesting. Ron
Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Caliber markings in .45 Colt and .44 WCF Texas Star S&W Hand Ejectors: 1896 to 1961 21 11-28-2017 12:48 AM
Unusual PreVictory question BibleronKJV S&W Hand Ejectors: 1896 to 1961 15 09-07-2016 08:15 PM
Question on preVictory M&P 38 Special BibleronKJV S&W Hand Ejectors: 1896 to 1961 7 01-09-2016 03:22 PM
Canadian PreVictory for database BibleronKJV S&W Hand Ejectors: 1896 to 1961 13 05-08-2015 11:49 AM

Powered by vBadvanced CMPS v3.2.3
smith-wessonforum.com tested by Norton Internet Security smith-wessonforum.com tested by McAfee Internet Security

All times are GMT -4. The time now is 07:09 AM.


Smith-WessonForum.com is not affiliated with Smith & Wesson Holding Corporation (NASDAQ Global Select: SWHC)