Why didn’t 38 S&W or .455 become the standard?

[BLACKHAWKNJ]

IIRC the 38 S&W has always loaded on the mild side because of the large number of old and lower quality revolvers out there, Iver Johnson changed
the position of the Owl's Head to indicate their revolver was safe for smokeless. The UK loading was originally a 200gr RNL, this was changed to a 173gr cupro-nickel bullet to comply with the Geneva Convention requirements. The British found it was easier to train people with the 380/200. British practice up until WWI at least was that an officer provided his own equipment.

 

[Doug M.]

One must also recall that a sidearm is largely a tertiary weapon and sometimes a badge of office for military folks. Crew fired stuff (artillery and morons, for example) are used in preference to individual weapons; rifles are the common individual weapons for combat arms, and pistol are specialized niche platforms in a most military uses.

 

[mtgianni]

One must also recall that a sidearm is largely a tertiary weapon and sometimes a badge of office for military folks. Crew fired stuff (artillery and morons, for example) are used in preference to individual weapons; rifles are the common individual weapons for combat arms, and pistol are specialized niche platforms in a most military uses.

Yet Seals and other special forces in Viet Nam did very well with Model 39's, silenced and standard. Tunnel rats found handguns much more maneuverable than rifles. While it is true that the average soldier had very little training time with handguns, not all do and several depend on them.

 

[Krogen]

I like my .38 S&W Webley. I would shoot it more often if it came in .38 Special.

I like mine too. I would shoot it more often if I could hit the broadside of a barn with it. I doubt it would do it from inside the barn!

 

[LouisianaMan]

The 45 Colt predates the 455 Webely by almost 20 years. By the time the 455 was introduced the 45 Colt was already established in the States. When the Army decided they wanted a semi automatic they basically were looking for 45 Colt ballistics in a cartridge that would function in a semi auto.

Regarding the 38 S&W to me the mystery is why Britain chose the 38 S&W over the 38 Special. Had Webley Mk IV been designed around the 38 Special it might still be in production.

Old thread, I realize, but maybe some will see this. When the British Army was testing .38's to replace the .455, the Webley factory already produced a .38 caliber revolver, and its cylinder was too short to support modifications necessary to chamber .38 Special ammunition. This Webley firearm was modified to some extent, then re-engineered at Enfield (to avoid paying Webley) and adopted as the new Pistol No. 2 in caliber ".380 Rim," which was essentially the .38 S&W case with a 200g LRN (bottlenose) bullet at 590 fps.

Worries about Hague Convention regulations led the Brits to replace the 200g LRN bullet with a 178g conical FMJ Mark 2 bullet, which change occurred in 1938 IIRC.

When war broke out and the BEF was routed off of the continent (Dunkirk), the desperate need to equip a greatly expanded Army resulted in the adoption & production of the Webley .380 Rim revolver, as Enfield couldn't produce their No. 2 fast enough. Both handguns served throughout the war, supplemented by great quantities of Smith & Wesson "Victory" Models, as well as older-pattern .455 Webleys.

 

[Glenn R. McMannly]

If I recall the .45 ACP is approximately the same power as the .455 webley proof load. The .455 is a mediocre anti-personnel load, but is superior to the .38/200 that supplanted it, which is a truly mediocre anti-personnel load.

Agreed. I once chrono’d some Kynoch .455 that was barely around 600 FPS. The .455 was very underpowered and had to be so due to the fragile nature of the top break Webleys.

The .380 caliber guns were a joke. The .38/200 performed poorly. Has about the same muzzle energy as a .22 rifle. It was adopted as the new recruits struggled with the already weak .455. The British sure had a different idea of stopping power in regards to handguns then the west.

 

[.455_Hunter]

Agreed. I once chrono’d some Kynoch .455 that was barely around 600 FPS. The .455 was very underpowered and had to be so due to the fragile nature of the top break Webleys.

The .380 caliber guns were a joke. The .38/200 performed poorly. Has about the same muzzle energy as a .22 rifle. It was adopted as the new recruits struggled with the already weak .455. The British sure had a different idea of stopping power in regards to handguns then the west.

Wrong on many fronts.