I have a 455 second model 62XXX. The only non-factory mark on it is a Crown over 11 on the butt. A crown over 30 is a Canadian acceptance mark. What is a crown over 11?

Picture?!

Peter

Welcome to the Forum. Markinigs on the British 455s were all over the place. I have an idea that as the production went on and when delivered to England, inspections and stampings became more erratic and sparce over time, with early examples having lots of stamps and later years hardly any. There were about 70,000 2nd Models made and yours serial number suggests it was shipped towards the end of production in 1916. By the time the US became involved with WWI in 1917, England had been at war for nearly 4 years. The 455 revolvers were delivered to England from 1914 to 1917.

Crown over 11 should be a British inspector or view mark as it was called. All three of my 455s had 44 under their crown stamping and were located on the rear left side of the frame, to the rear the hammer.

Is it still in original 455 caliber?

__________________
Gary
SWCA 2515

The Crown with 11 under it on the base of the butt strap is still a Canadian marking, just less common than the crown with 30 under it.

The Savage made Lewis guns in .303 that Canada got in WW1 were stamped with the same crown but the number 24 under it.
So a variety of numerals were used on the S&W .455's. with 30 being the most common.

Regards

AlanD

Surely the number, be it 11 or 30 or whatever, is merely the particular inspector's number?

Peter

Yes, any number seen under a crown is the number of the inspector. Other stampings on a British shipped S&W will tell you if the inspector was at which of the two British inspection locations, London or Birmingham. Ed.

Ed:
I believe Birmingham and London were/are the two British proof houses, not military/government inspection stations.

Revolvers received in Britain were usually inspected at RSAF Enfield, a government-run facility outside London. Peter and Alan will know whether there were other sites.

Enfield’s inspection military marks actually did not satisfy British civilian requirements, which is why you will often find post-service Birmingham or London commercial proofs on both British and American revolvers that also bear service-applied acceptance marks and the crossed-pennant proof; these couldn’t be sold on the commercial market without additional proofing.

Mine was lettered to the Canadian Government. In addition to the Crown/11 marking on the butt of the revolver, it also has the double broad arrows on the crane.








Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

The opposing arrows were used by Britain and Canada to indicate the gun was sold out of service and was no longer crown property.

So far, I only know of two ways to definitely tell if a 455 is British or Canadian. One is the big "C" and the other is a letter. I would love to see some documentation that ties Inspector "11" and Inspector "30" to Canada only? How do we know that there was no Inspector "11" or "30" in England as well? Does is also mean that all English 455s were only stamped crown over 44?

What were there, 14,500 Canadian 455s ordered directly? Why didn't all of them have the "C" stamp? Also, did they receive any from England and if so were those considered Canadian or British?

__________________
Gary
SWCA 2515

Australia certainly got some, and had additional markings for their Military Districts.

Alan David in Sydney may have some and could supply a photo. Hint, hint...

The British contract guns were inspected and proofed by Enfield. The photos (done in a hurry and handheld) show the positioning of the military crossed pennants proof mark and two different inspector's stamps. No similarity with Canadian markings.

Peter

Attached Images

	British HE markings.jpg (41.1 KB, 63 views)
	Enfield inpector F9.JPG (34.4 KB, 77 views)
	Enfield inspector V3.JPG (59.3 KB, 72 views)

I see your example has different inspection markings than mine. All three of miy 455s were stamped as E44, obviously Enfield inspected and I assume that 44 is linked to an individual? Two of mine the opposing arrows, but one has nothing on the front left side of the receiver. I have also seen 455s with maybe only one of the markings and a few with no markings other than NOT ENGLISH MADE on the barrel. It seems that there are no hard fast rules to who did what, but wish that someone had information to validate the non-C marked 455s. Factory letters would be helpful for those E11 guns that link them to Canada shipments.

Attached Images

P6210003.jpg (117.9 KB, 38 views)

__________________
Gary
SWCA 2515

"...with no markings other than NOT ENGLISH MADE on the barrel."

It is hard to read, but the stamp actually says "NOT ENGLISH MAKE".

__________________
John 3:16
WAR EAGLE!

I think the 'E' is part of the Enfield Arsenal Inspectors View Mark.
E for Enfield
Crown/#/E

The 'II' stands alone and signifys the Model or 'Mark' of the revolver.

(The # is one assigned to a specific employee/inspector at the Facility.
I'm not aware of any records that'll tie names with the numbers in any era,,but you never know..

So, I would hazzard a guess that a Crown/# would be an English (or Commonwealth?) arms inspector applied mark BUT not done within one of the Royal Arsenal facilitys like Enfield, BSA, LSA, ect.

Maybe one of the Arsenal inspectors assigned right to a factory like S&W, Savage (Lewis Guns).
Or a Canadian small arms inspector doing his/her job and marking the revolvers as they arrive in Canada.

(Seems like the Canadian Ross rifle of WW1 issue was stamped with the Crown/30 (Final?) inspection mark also and was applied at the Quebec Arsenal.
Might be wrong but that's what I seem to recall from my somewhat loose knowledge of the military Ross rifles.)

>
>
That Crown/II mark on the butt of the revolver in the pic posted by acco40
looks more like a view/acceptance mark of the Model (Mark II) than for a an Inspector #2.
Awfully fancy 'II' for a simple inspectors stamp.
(Beautiful Revolver too BTW!)
IIRC the commonly seen '30' on the Canadian MkII's is just a block figure stamp number. No fancy numerals there.

...Those British guys,,,I think they got a new and different set of number and letter stamps every Christmas.

Love your revolver! I know the brits never found a stamp they didn't like and apparently that goes for the rest of the commonwealth.

__________________
Well done > well said

That is a stunning revolver. What was the ship date of this particular gun?

__________________
Some Might Say.

According the the letter, the revolver was "shipped from our factory on December 4, 1915 and delivered to Canadian Government, Ottawa, Canada.".


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I've seen the theory that the II stamp means chambered for MK II .455 ammo or that it means MK II S&W revolver.

Probably just speculation. And the guns chamber both MK I/.455 Colt ammo and MK II ammo. The MK I gives an additional 150 FPS and is assuredly what I'd try to get, had I lived back then and been using the gun in earnest. The .455 Colt was a commercial loading of MK I, made by Dominion and by Winchester, I think. It was actually slightly more potent than US Govt. loaded .45 Colt, including the M-1909 version with a wider rim.

My S&W .455 had the II stamp. The barrel was marked for caliber. I paid $31.58 for it in Denver about 1965, tax included. The price has risen slightly since then. Nor will you find the ammo on sale at Wal-Mart!

No theory, to quote List of Changes 17463 5 Jul 1915: QUOTE The Mark I Smith & Wesson pistol is that described by the Trade as the "Old Model". The Mark II, known as the "New Model", is distinguished by having the numeral II stamped on the left side of the frame. UNQUOTE

The "Old Model" was of course the Triple Lock.

The late Tony Edwards did extensive research into British Military Small Arms Ammo. He gave velocity figures as: Mk I Black Powder 700 fps; Mk I Cordite 600 fps; Mk II (cordite) about 600 fps. The 750 fps Dominion “455 Colt” was I feel sure intended for the RCMP’s (stronger?) Colt New Service revolvers.

Peter

To my knowledge (which is admittedly limited and which I currently cannot support with sources), the large C-with-broad-arrow was NOT applied as the Canadian military property mark during WW I, but was adopted at some point in the inter-war years.

Any .455‘s with that mark, most of which based on my spotty observations also have Enfield stampings, should probably be assumed to have entered Canadian service post-WW I by transfer from Britain.

Anyone know more about this? The only thing which would contradict that would be .455‘s lettered as delivered directly to Canada, stamped with the C. Can anyone show one of those?

I agree that the Colt is stronger, but .455 Colt shouldn't be a problem for the S&W, either.

BTW, I've read that ammo boxes of some lots of MK III (HP) and IV (wadcutter) .455 ammo are marked as not being authorized for use against European foes. It was evidently thought to be so brutal that it was meant only for use on savage native peoples in colonies.

If memory serves me correctly the double broad arrow marking stands for "sold out of service". Dave_n

Yes, that's been addressed here and on other sites, numerous times. It's in this very thread. (See Post No. 9)

But guns sold directly to officers won't have the Broad Arrow at all, unless Sold From Stores.

Why is the Colt any stronger than an N frame S&W that ultimately became a 357 & 44 Magnum?

I have a Canadian Military 12 pack from WWII (1942) that is Mark VI. That ammo was available in WWI starting in 1915, so if the II had something to do with the ammunition marking, why didn't S&Ws have a "VI" stamp?

On the other hand, The "II" stamping does not appear to be S&W factory applied, as it was stamped by hand and appears heavier and lighter and at times not perfectly vertical?? So why would England label it II if it referred to the gun model? Roy does name both the TL and 2nd Model as 455 Mark II Hand Ejectors.

__________________
Gary
SWCA 2515

The jacketed bullet Mark VI was not introduced to service until 1940. The lead bullet Mk II, introduced in 1898, was the standard round until then and most certainly from 1914 onwards (Thanks to Texas Star for picking up my typo).

As regards to the II on the revolvers, I have editied my previous post above to make the wording on the LoC more clear; Roy is wrong. The II marking was applied by Enfield to distinguish between the two S&W models. Not every British soldier or armourer knew what a Triple Lock was!

Peter

I knew that I had seen something on this subject and have just found it!

In his book "Worldwide Webley" Steve Cuthbertson reproduces a letter dated 11th December 1911from the South African Government Secretary for the Interior to the SA High Commissioner in London regarding the adopotion of the Arrow in U SA ownership mark. The final paragraph reads:

"I may state that Canada has adopted Arrow in C as their Ordnance mark and Australia Arrow in D".

Peter

Peter-

I'm sure it was a misprint, given your vast knowledge, but .455 MK IV ammo was a Man Stopper round, a full wadcutter. MK V was the same, but the bullet was of a different lead alloy. MK III was a full wadcutter HP.

MK II lead was the standard service load in WW I.

I think this is the first error that I've seen in your posts. Proves that even the best aren't infallible, I guess.

Gary-

I think it's generally known that Colt metallurgy was superior to that of S&W in most models. Jan Stevenson commented on this years ago in, Guns or in his book of pistols and revolvers.

Colt was also heat treating cylinders before S&W. The S&W .455's were not heat treated. The US M-1917 was, but only at US military insistence.

You are 'WAY off base in comparing special S&W models like the .357 Magnum, which used special steels and heat treatment to WW I S&W .455's.

Without measuring, I think the Colt New Service also had a larger, thicker cylinder. It's a bigger gun.

Peter has already corrected your post about MK VI ammo, so I won't address that.

It is called a typo Tex! Yes, you are correct.

Peter

I owned 35711 and it shipped to “agents of the British Government” in NY, NY on Jan 6, 1916.

__________________
Some Might Say.

As far as the Canadian inception marks are concerned on the base of the grip straps on .455 revolvers, I belive these may not necessarily not identify an individual inspector unlike a British inspection stamp.
The reason I say this is that in the documentation concerning the inspection of 4,000 Remington Model 14 1/2 44/40 rifles on behalf of the British government by Canadian inspectors it was stated that the rifles would be stamped on the wrist with the number 3. See attachment. A small batch of 250 Ross rifles which the British had purchased were to be stamped with a different number, which may have been 5, but document not to hand. It would seem unlikely that just one inspector would be given the task of inspection all 4,000 Remington's.
I think Canada did their own thing as far as inspection markings rather than following British practice.
Regards
AlanD

Attached Images

Crown3.jpg (44.9 KB, 22 views)

That is one lovely revolver. I have not seen one any where near that condition