Pre-Victory and Victory Model Timeline
- Thread starter DWalt
- Start date
Absalom
SWCA Member, Absent Comrade
Yes, your photos confirm what I said before. The P is not part of the serial, but the proof as I explained. You can notice how it is struck differently, even though it happens to be in line with the numbers under the barrel. Probably a fluke that it didn't end up in all places. There were inconsistencies during wartime production.
lamarw
Member
I have an additional tidbit to add to the Pre-Victory paragraph of DWalt's timeline. My letter from Mr. Jinks states my Union of South Africa example was part of a 1,800 unit shipment to South Africa. The shipment date was Dec. 1, 1940.
There is a chart on page 118 of Pate's publication showing the shipment of 8,800 of 4" barrel revolvers to S. Africa on Feb. 19, 1940. This is likely the reference made by Peter. The chart also states there was another shipment of 5,047 revolvers with 4" barrels to S. Africa on Oct. 9, 1940. Pate's publication does not reference the shipment of Dec. 1, 1940 mentioned by Mr. Jinks in my letter from S&W. This shipment was also probably 4" barrel revolvers since this is the barrel length of mine. Back to the chart in Pate's book since it also mentions a shipment of 7,500 revolvers with 5" barrels on Jun. 7, 1941 to S. Africa.
To another discussion about the "P" stamped marking: Mine has the P mark on the butt to the far right of the lanyard whereas the serial number is to the left of the lanyard. This is the only place I can find the "P" on my example.
There is a chart on page 118 of Pate's publication showing the shipment of 8,800 of 4" barrel revolvers to S. Africa on Feb. 19, 1940. This is likely the reference made by Peter. The chart also states there was another shipment of 5,047 revolvers with 4" barrels to S. Africa on Oct. 9, 1940. Pate's publication does not reference the shipment of Dec. 1, 1940 mentioned by Mr. Jinks in my letter from S&W. This shipment was also probably 4" barrel revolvers since this is the barrel length of mine. Back to the chart in Pate's book since it also mentions a shipment of 7,500 revolvers with 5" barrels on Jun. 7, 1941 to S. Africa.
To another discussion about the "P" stamped marking: Mine has the P mark on the butt to the far right of the lanyard whereas the serial number is to the left of the lanyard. This is the only place I can find the "P" on my example.
LOBO
Member
To follow on lamarw's post regarding South African Pre-Victory models, here are mine with their factory letters.
Last edited:
lamarw
Member
This latest information raise more questions than answers. Here is what I come up with on S&W shipment of Pre-Victory Revolvers to the Union of South Africa:
DATE BARREL QUANITY SOURCE
Feb. 19, 1940 4" Barrel 8,800 each Pate's Book
May. 3, 1940 4" Barrel Unknown S&W Ltr. on SN: 685147
Aug. 1, 1940 4 inch* 1,800 each S&W Ltr. on SN: 720058
Oct. 9, 1940 4" Barrel 5,047 each Pate's Book
Dec. 1, 1940 4" Barrel 1,800 each S&W Ltr. on SN: 720730
Jun. 7, 1941 5" Barrel 7,500 each Pate's Book
Here are some assumptions on my part:
1. * - The revolvers delivered on Aug. 1, 1940 were 4" barrel revolvers since the S&W Letter was on a 4" revolver. Shipments seemed to consist of revolvers of the same barrel length.
2. There is something amiss since one of the revolvers in the Aug. 1, 1940 shipment was serial number 720058 and one of the revolvers in the Dec. 1, 1940 shipment was serial number 720730. This is a difference of 672 revolvers. Yet Pate's book states a shipment of Oct. 9, 1940 of 5,047 revolvers between the above two serial numbers.
Are we to surmise the numbers published in Pate's book are incorrect?
DATE BARREL QUANITY SOURCE
Feb. 19, 1940 4" Barrel 8,800 each Pate's Book
May. 3, 1940 4" Barrel Unknown S&W Ltr. on SN: 685147
Aug. 1, 1940 4 inch* 1,800 each S&W Ltr. on SN: 720058
Oct. 9, 1940 4" Barrel 5,047 each Pate's Book
Dec. 1, 1940 4" Barrel 1,800 each S&W Ltr. on SN: 720730
Jun. 7, 1941 5" Barrel 7,500 each Pate's Book
Here are some assumptions on my part:
1. * - The revolvers delivered on Aug. 1, 1940 were 4" barrel revolvers since the S&W Letter was on a 4" revolver. Shipments seemed to consist of revolvers of the same barrel length.
2. There is something amiss since one of the revolvers in the Aug. 1, 1940 shipment was serial number 720058 and one of the revolvers in the Dec. 1, 1940 shipment was serial number 720730. This is a difference of 672 revolvers. Yet Pate's book states a shipment of Oct. 9, 1940 of 5,047 revolvers between the above two serial numbers.
Are we to surmise the numbers published in Pate's book are incorrect?
Last edited:
Absalom
SWCA Member, Absent Comrade
While Pate isn't perfect, my first suspect would be irregularities in the sequence of serial numbers shipped. By that time, the factory was mostly filling large institutional official orders and accumulated guns for larger shipments. I had a Victory which, extrapolated from other serial numbers, was made in October or November 1942, but didn't ship until April 1943, together with another lettered gun to the same destination about 30,000 (IIRC) or so serial numbers later. That kind of issue is where I'd surmise the reason first, not Pate using wrong numbers.
lamarw
Member
Yes Absalom, You and DWalt have both pointed out your observations of shipments out of serial number order.
This possibly explains the "amiss" part of my assumption. I do find it interesting that of three Letters associated with the revolvers of LOBO, two Letters, and mine, one letter, none corresponded to the shipment dates printed in Mr. Pate's publication. This is not to dispute Mr. Pate's data; although it is interesting he was not aware of the additional shipments. I am sure if he had been made aware of it, they would of been published. The data possibly was simply not readily available at the time of his research.
The shipments to South Africa I mentioned in my early post total 24,947 Pre-Victory Revolvers in 1940 and 1941. This is without knowing how many were in the May 3, 1940 shipment. We could make a very "questionable assumption" it was another 1,800.
Maybe Peter can advise us on the number he is aware of having been directly shipped to the Union of South Africa. It appears he has done a lot of detailed research in this area. He may or may not be surprised at the above numbers.
I have not researched squat other than to count the eggs in the basket as a result of Mr. Pate's excellent publication and the numbers referenced in this forum thread.
This possibly explains the "amiss" part of my assumption. I do find it interesting that of three Letters associated with the revolvers of LOBO, two Letters, and mine, one letter, none corresponded to the shipment dates printed in Mr. Pate's publication. This is not to dispute Mr. Pate's data; although it is interesting he was not aware of the additional shipments. I am sure if he had been made aware of it, they would of been published. The data possibly was simply not readily available at the time of his research.
The shipments to South Africa I mentioned in my early post total 24,947 Pre-Victory Revolvers in 1940 and 1941. This is without knowing how many were in the May 3, 1940 shipment. We could make a very "questionable assumption" it was another 1,800.
Maybe Peter can advise us on the number he is aware of having been directly shipped to the Union of South Africa. It appears he has done a lot of detailed research in this area. He may or may not be surprised at the above numbers.
I have not researched squat other than to count the eggs in the basket as a result of Mr. Pate's excellent publication and the numbers referenced in this forum thread.
PJGP
Member
Hello Chaps
There are numerous errors in both Pate's book and the factory letters. I need a few days to find the time to explain further, but for starters would point out that the first SA contract order was placed in mid Feb 1940. Clearly none could have been shipped that month in what was a new calibre for the model!
Peter
There are numerous errors in both Pate's book and the factory letters. I need a few days to find the time to explain further, but for starters would point out that the first SA contract order was placed in mid Feb 1940. Clearly none could have been shipped that month in what was a new calibre for the model!
Peter
lamarw
Member
Peter, I look forward to your research results and personal analysis. Lamar
PJGP
Member
Most of your collective confusion is because you equate contract dates with delivery and fulfilment dates; Pate’s remarks on page 18 is an example. Furthermore, you must understand that the “shipping dates” given in Roy’s letters are actually “placed in bond store” dates. Shipping to SA was not handled by S&W, but by the British Purchasing Commission(?).
South Africa had three direct contracts with S&W, although the second was just an additional quantity to the first:
Indent 578 signed Feb 19th 1940 for 8800 4” revolvers.
Indent 578 (Additional) signed Sept 9th 1940 for an additional 5000 4” revolvers. In the event S&W ended up with 47 contract overrun revolvers which SA purchased.
Indent 1352 signed June 7th 1941 for 7500 revolvers. SA asked for 4”, but S&W were by then heavily committed to producing 5” for Britain. However, they assured Pretoria that existing 4" spares would fit!
In June 1940, as I have posted before, the first 4600 produced against Indent 578 were diverted to Britain following an agreement between SA and Britain. This was done after the guns left the factory so their records still show SA as the destination. Replacements for those revolvers were taken from production for Britain and the first shipment to SA was not until July 8th. The final batch (of the qty 13847 4”) was only received by May 15th 1941. The guns were shipped in batches, and the batch sizes quoted in Roy’s letters do not match with the records held in the SA Defence Force Archives.
If your S&W M&P does not have the ↑ in U mark and a rack number it was NOT delivered to Cape Town (en route to the main ordnance depot outside Pretoria) whatever the “letter” says. However, the converse is not the case. I have an early serial number and late UDF number 5” that carries British military inspection marks. This will have been allocated to SA after the London Munitions Assignment Board (LMAB) took control of warlike stores distribution to Britain, Australia, India, NZ etc. Similarly, Lend Lease UDF revolvers were assigned by the LMAB.
The confusion over serial numbers not running consecutively is easily explained. Guns were taken at random from production and packed in cases of 100. Batches of cases were then placed in bond for shipment as and when the BPC arranged. On arrival in SA the UDF numbers were stamped on the grip frames in whatever order the armourers picked them up. Thus there is no correlation between serial and UDF numbers.
I trust that this helps
Peter
South Africa had three direct contracts with S&W, although the second was just an additional quantity to the first:
Indent 578 signed Feb 19th 1940 for 8800 4” revolvers.
Indent 578 (Additional) signed Sept 9th 1940 for an additional 5000 4” revolvers. In the event S&W ended up with 47 contract overrun revolvers which SA purchased.
Indent 1352 signed June 7th 1941 for 7500 revolvers. SA asked for 4”, but S&W were by then heavily committed to producing 5” for Britain. However, they assured Pretoria that existing 4" spares would fit!
In June 1940, as I have posted before, the first 4600 produced against Indent 578 were diverted to Britain following an agreement between SA and Britain. This was done after the guns left the factory so their records still show SA as the destination. Replacements for those revolvers were taken from production for Britain and the first shipment to SA was not until July 8th. The final batch (of the qty 13847 4”) was only received by May 15th 1941. The guns were shipped in batches, and the batch sizes quoted in Roy’s letters do not match with the records held in the SA Defence Force Archives.
If your S&W M&P does not have the ↑ in U mark and a rack number it was NOT delivered to Cape Town (en route to the main ordnance depot outside Pretoria) whatever the “letter” says. However, the converse is not the case. I have an early serial number and late UDF number 5” that carries British military inspection marks. This will have been allocated to SA after the London Munitions Assignment Board (LMAB) took control of warlike stores distribution to Britain, Australia, India, NZ etc. Similarly, Lend Lease UDF revolvers were assigned by the LMAB.
The confusion over serial numbers not running consecutively is easily explained. Guns were taken at random from production and packed in cases of 100. Batches of cases were then placed in bond for shipment as and when the BPC arranged. On arrival in SA the UDF numbers were stamped on the grip frames in whatever order the armourers picked them up. Thus there is no correlation between serial and UDF numbers.
I trust that this helps
Peter
Last edited:
lamarw
Member
Thank You Peter, Your post makes sense to me. It clears up a lot of my confusion/questions.
I do appreciate you taking the time to further clarify how it all proceeded or at least the process.
In my view, your post adds value to DWalt's Timeline. It should help all of us current owners of Union of South Africa revolvers and future new owners. Thanks again, Lamar
I do appreciate you taking the time to further clarify how it all proceeded or at least the process.
In my view, your post adds value to DWalt's Timeline. It should help all of us current owners of Union of South Africa revolvers and future new owners. Thanks again, Lamar
LOBO
Member
Thank you so very much for your help Peter. It is most beneficial.
Below you will find pictures of the guns that I posted earlier, but this time I have included all markings that are on the two guns.
Below you will find pictures of the guns that I posted earlier, but this time I have included all markings that are on the two guns.
Josefius
Member
Sorry took so long to respond, I have a couple pictures that I took recently after I installed some victory model grips I got from ebay to replace those ugly bright after market ones. I noticed on the back side of the grip it has AOP 124 stamped in the frame.
Last edited:
lageologist
Member
- Joined
- Dec 10, 2018
- Messages
- 5
- Reaction score
- 6
Thanks
Thank you for posting this. I spent a good 2 hours researching stuff, then made a post asking questions about a gun I inherited. As these things usually go, the site suggested this post right after.
You answered all of my questions. Thanks again.
Thank you for posting this. I spent a good 2 hours researching stuff, then made a post asking questions about a gun I inherited. As these things usually go, the site suggested this post right after.
You answered all of my questions. Thanks again.Slippery98
US Veteran
- Joined
- Jan 5, 2019
- Messages
- 4
- Reaction score
- 1
Hey everyone. Was wondering something about Victory pistols. I was in the USAF for a few minutes and have become interested in USAF issued handguns of the WWII and Cold War era. I know S&W made the M13 Aircrewman but as you know better than I, those are super rare and expensive. So, it was suggested I look into Victory handguns.
But, it seems like the only service to use Victory handguns was the Navy. Or, am I missing something and there were some issued to AF aircrew?
On a related note did S&W make other handguns for the USAF besides the Aircrewman??
Thank you all very much for any insight/advice!!
But, it seems like the only service to use Victory handguns was the Navy. Or, am I missing something and there were some issued to AF aircrew?
On a related note did S&W make other handguns for the USAF besides the Aircrewman??
Thank you all very much for any insight/advice!!
Bacon
Member
The USAF certainly did issue revolvers from S&W, the Model 15 was carried by Airmen especially security.
There was no USAF during WWII. It was called the Army Air Corps. Victory revolvers were issued to a wide range of military, security/law enforcement and civilian offices as well as Allied forces. After the USAF was created, the Aircrewman and Model 15 were purchased by the USAF, but this was long after Victory revolvers went away.
OP
DWalt
Member
I doubt that many, if any, Victories were issued by the USAAF during WWII. I know of none at that time. Virtually all of them went to the British, the U. S. Navy, and for use on the home front by law enforcement and defense plant guards. The Combat Masterpiece (Model 15) was the standard USAF handgun for ground service from the early 1960s until the M9 Beretta was adopted in the late 1980s.
Last edited:
Absalom
SWCA Member, Absent Comrade
As pointed out above, any Victorys that ended up with the Army Air Force in WW II, if they exist, would be virtually impossible to identify as they would have shipped to some Army depot.
I do remember some post-war AF veteran members here talking about the Air Force issuing WW II vintage Victorys through Vietnam and later, for base guards and such, and that these actually were transferred from the Navy. I don't recall any details.
