Disclaimer - I do not own this gun. I did not take the photos.

I am considering the purchase of this revolver, S/N V419XXX.

My question is about the 38/380 marking. I have not seen this on other Lend Leases. There are also "JNG" (I think) stamped on the cylinders. Do these markings mean the gun was later modified for a different caliber?

SW LL - Album on Imgur

The gun was sold commercially after the war and required British proofing. The marks between the cylinder stop notches are “BNP” (British Nitro Proof). I’ve seen the 38/380 before and believe it’s a fairly common designation for the .38/200 British Service round, aka .380 Revolver, which is interchangeable with .38 S&W.

The gun may also have a small “Not English Made” stamp, surrounded by a zigzag line border. The stocks appear to be aftermarket replacements, or poorly checkered modified originals.

__________________
"I also cook."

Thanks! The gun does have the usual bevy of British marks, so it was clearly sold commercially post-war. I just wanted to make sure it wasn't modified for a different caliber, as that would end my interest in purchasing it.

The 38/380 stamp was a requirement included in early regulations by the British pertaining to guns from foreign sources. It was supposed to confirm that the revolver could chamber the standard British military round.

For some reason this particular stamp went quickly by the wayside. It is not exactly exotic, but quite uncommon, and how it got on a mid-war Victory from 1943 is a mystery to me.

It was not part of standard commercial proofing after the war like the BNP.

Interesting; thanks!

I don't remember seeing another with a number stamped below the "MADE IN U.S.A." stamp. Regarding modification to another caliber, many BSRs were rechambered to .38 Special in the 1950s-60s for U. S sale. You might want to check for that.

Not quite correct Absolm. Army Council Instructions 1140 of 1942 and 925 of 1941 explain everything! I have a 6" 38 Special that was so modified; the job was done very well, not like some drilled out British 380 (not 38-200 as frequently stated) chambered M&Ps that were commercially modified after WW II to take the 38 Special.

Peter

Attached Images

	ACI 925 of 1941 p1.jpg (680.2 KB, 53 views)
	ACI 1140 of 1942.jpg (93.3 KB, 35 views)

My understanding is that the British Purchasing Commission bought up .38 Special revolvers available from U. S. dealer stocks during the pre-Lend-Lease era (1940-41), and had them rechambered to accept the .380 Revolver (Mk II) military cartridges, which would have been a simple job. I do not know if such conversions would have been identified by a stamping or proofmark, such as "38/380" or done in the U. S. or in Great Britain. I assume that is the topic of the second document. I can't make out what the first document says. It would be interesting to know more about exactly what happened regarding revolver procurement from private sources in the U. S. by the British Government during this time period.

Just FYI: The actual phrase is "NOT ENGLISH MAKE" (with a K).

__________________
Jim
S&WCA #819

Peter:

That would make sense on those, as the one you describe, that were converted from .38 Special. That’s also how Charles Pate explains the 38/380 mark.

However, those I’ve seen pictured and discussed which had the 38/380 marking were, like the OP’s gun, already chambered in .38 S&W and thus made and marked for the caliber. No conversion was necessary. That may be why the marking is so little encountered: It occurred to someone at some point that it was superfluous on S&W British Service models.

I think the alterations and marking of guns occurred in the UK as opposed to the USA. Not sure if this was ever done in SA - Peter?
Why this marking was applied to a V prefix Lend Lease revolver already in .38S&W is a bit of a mystery. Perhaps it was applied by an RAOC armourer who did not know any better, or was told to do it by his boss.
DWalt, as to private procurement of revolvers (and autos and rifles and shotguns and machineguns and flare pistols) I have been researching this topic for years and will one day publish it in the form of a book; "British Military Secondary Issue Small Arms 1920-1990". It will be in the order of four to five hundred pages.Hopefully, most of it will be unpublished information along with the correction of many urban myths. If I win the Lottery tonight, I will start typing tomorrow - goodbye day job!
Regards
AlanD

A companion and related topic would be the calls for American civilians to contribute any sort of small arms (and perhaps other useful items) to the British cause during the dark days of 1940-41. I know it was done, but nothing about how it was organized and managed, and if any of those donated guns were actually put to use, and what happened to them after the war.

The full story of the American Committee for Defense of British Homes, is covered in a chapter of a recently published book titled, "To the Last Man - The Home Guard in War & Popular Culture", by Malcolm Atkin. Its published through Pen & Sword books but I think you can get it through Amazon. There are 20 in depth pages in the book on this topic. Most of the information comes from files in the National Archives in London. The coverage of the subject stands head and shoulders above what has been published previously. Also, covered is the 1st American Motorized Squadron, a Home Guard unit based in London the members of which were American. Small arms used by this unit are also covered, although more research is needed.
Regards
AlanD

Wow, this thread really took on a life of its own. Great information! Fascinating to start learning about this little slice of the war effort.

OMG, it's upside down. I feel like an idiot.

If an S&W Victory originally made in .38 S&W does not have a U.S. Property stamp, can it still fairly be called a Lend Lease? Who would it have been made for, if not for LL export?

Not at all. I only knew because I’ve owned several guns with that mark.

__________________
"I also cook."

"If an S&W Victory originally made in .38 S&W does not have a U.S. Property stamp, can it still fairly be called a Lend Lease? Who would it have been made for, if not for LL export?"


If it has the United States (or U. S.) Property stamp AND is a .38 S&W BSR, then it would be a Lend-Lease gun. Many U. S. Navy guns have the U. S. Property stamp, but are not L-L. I am not sure, but it might be possible that some early BSRs (pre-Victories) may be L-L but without a property stamp. L-L guns began shipping around the Fall of 1941. Not sure of the starting SN, but around the early mid-8xxxxxx SN range.

Thanks. This seems to up the intrigue a bit. It's a V-series from 1943, .38 S&W, but no US Property stamp. So it sounds as though it is not a true L-L. But it's still pretty cool.

That is actually impossible. By the time of the start of the V prefix, all BSR's went to L-L. If a gun has no property stamp, it has been scrubbed.

BUT:

As DWalt says above, revolvers were included in L-L and started shipping to US Ordnance/Hartford Ordnance Depot for further processing by L-L authorities in very late 1941. That is when the US property stamping started.

Before then, since 1940, S&W had produced these under contracts for the British and other Commonwealth governments, without US government involvement. At times these contracts took up 100% of the factory's capacity. Some like South Africa and Canada went directly, others through the British Purchasing Commission in New York.

So there are plenty of pre-Victory M&P's with no property stamp in .38 S&W.

Below an example, presuming that the member who posted this first a while ago doesn't mind me re-posting it:

Attached Images

Canada BPC doc 1.jpg (95.9 KB, 134 views)

The US PROPERTY stamping is fairly shallow and easily buffed out. If that gun really doesn't have one, somebody who owned it previously got nervous about owning a gun so marked. Happened a lot to US marked surplus guns.

Attached Images

BSR13.jpg (84.1 KB, 132 views)

I find that acceptance letter particularly interesting as my paternal grandfather served in the Royal Canadian Air Force during WWII. Who knows, he could have been issued one of those revolvers.

I have decided to purchase it. Something about it really speaks to me.

Will post full details and quality pictures in a new thread when I receive it in a few weeks.

Very interesting, can you post a larger readable photo of Instructions 1140 of 1942/

OK firstly I made a typo in that ACI 025 of 1941 should be 925 of 1941, I have edited my previous post. Secondly I feel sure you meant that ACI and not 1140 of 1942 because the right hand attachment is 1140 and it opens clearly for me.

My original for 925 is a JPEG of 1361 Kb and is perfectly readable. Uploading it appears to have resulted in a massive reduction in size and this I cannot read!

What is the maximum size for an upload, can anyone tell me?

If I cannot upload a readable version then I will type the relevant part of the text in another post.

Peter

Got the tracking info today. Scheduled to arrive Thursday. I'm about bouncing off the walls with anticipation (truthfully, hadn't exercised my C&R in a few years).