2nd model or MKII ?

i have recently been trying to learn about wwI & II revolvers , i was wondering what is the difference between the second model hand ejector and the hand ejector MKII? i have a couple examples of canadian 455 mkIIs incoming.
ill be sure to post pics when they arrive .
they were both advertised as second models in 455 how do i know if i come across a mkII? just curious. is the mk II just the british term for the same thing?

2nd Model N frames do not have the enclosed ejector rod shroud like the 1st Model (Triple Lock).

The S&W revolvers built for the Brits were both deemed to be Mark IIs. 1st Models were Triple Locks; 2nd Models did not have the enclosed ejector rod shroud.

As you stated, it's a Brit thang.

thanks, i had read that mud in the ejector housing would cause malfunctions in the 1st model h.e.
so you are saying that a 1st model h.e., if sent to england, would also be a MKII?

It would be a MkII to the Brits and a Triple Lock to us. Ed.

I had understood that the MkII referred to the .455 MkII cartridge?

Just to straighten this out - the revolver without the ejector shroud is a 455 Hand Ejector, Second Model. They chambered the 455 Mark II cartridge. With the ejector shroud, it would be a 455 HE, First Model

Were the guns advertised as Canadian 455s? It will be interesting to determine if that is the case once you get them and if the caliber still remains 455.

kamloops67 said:

thanks, i had read that mud in the ejector housing would cause malfunctions in the 1st model h.e.
so you are saying that a 1st model h.e., if sent to england, would also be a MKII?

Click to expand...

IF it were chambered in .455.

glowe said:

Just to straighten this out - the revolver without the ejector shroud is a 455 Hand Ejector, Second Model. They chambered the 455 Mark II cartridge. With the ejector shroud, it would be a 455 HE, First Model

Were the guns advertised as Canadian 455s? It will be interesting to determine if that is the case once you get them and if the caliber still remains 455.

Click to expand...

yes, canadian. but maybe british surplus? ill have to wait and see.
id be ok with one of each.
both were reported to be uncut 455s.

The Mk II refers to the cartridge. IIRC there were about 16,000 sent to Canada. The rest were for UK consumption and went to England. Often the Canadian proof or acceptance marks are found on the left side near the rear of the frame (just above the stocks).
As for this:

i had read that mud in the ejector housing would cause malfunctions in the 1st model h.e.

Click to expand...

I don't think so. The reason the Brits did not want the TL is that it was too expensive. They only bought a few because they were on hand when the order was first placed. Then S&W produced the second model which was less expensive to produce and both England and Canada ordered a bunch of them.
Jack

British issue second model .455's will be marked with an Enfield inspection stamp, under this will appear 11. This refers to second model. The first model or triple lock will have an Enfield inspection mark with no 1 or 11 under it. The marking of 11 is nothing to do with the type of ammunition the revolver takes, both the first and second models shoot the same type of ammunition.

Regards

AlanD
Sydney

I have seen in several place that the S&W revolvers sold to the British were chambered for the .455 MkII cartridge. The one in my collection is a 2nd Model without the ejector rod shroud or 3rd lock, but it is definitely chambered for the MkI .455 cartridge, with the longer chamber. A Colt New Service that I owned many years ago was chambered for the MkII cartridge and could be fired with .45 ACP ammo with out moon clips because of the shorter chambers. What is the correct chamber for S&w guns made for Brit use?

ALL of the S&W 455s that I have handled (hundreds), both 1st and 2nd models, have the long chamber. That was probably at the request of the Brits so they could use obsolete Mk I ammo if they wound up in some far off corner of the Empire.

Just to put a couple images on this post, so you have something to look at while waiting. This is a 2nd model I acquired recently, which has been sleeved for 38 special. The finish is original and the only outward appearance difference is the shape of the front sight.

AlanDavid said:

British issue second model .455's will be marked with an Enfield inspection stamp, under this will appear 11 . The first model or triple lock will have an Enfield inspection mark with no 1 or 11 under it. The marking of 11 is nothing to do with the type of ammunition the revolver takes, both the first and second models shoot the same type of ammunition.
Sydney

Click to expand...

I have to disagree, since I am sure that the II stamping is all about the ammunition. The 11 ia actually a II stamp signifying the revolver is designed to shoot the Mark II ammunition. I have heard that early TLs were stamped for the Mark I cartridge as well, but I have not seen an example. Look at my and H Richard's pictures and you will see the marking on the left side of the rear frame.

thanks for the help guys, it appears im not the only one confused by this issue.

glowe and h richard: thanks for the eye candy, they are both in such nice condition. i will be embarrassed to show mine when they arrive lol.

i also picked up a 1917/1937brazilian and a canadian (for sure this time)38s&w m&p at the same time from a different guy ...and a smooth bore colt new service 45 and a 45 derringer...and a unused/unsharpened randall #1-7. all should arrive in the next week or two

Mud would gum up the works on pretty much any revolver. I have come around to the belief that the TL was too expensive (and too heavy), as others here have said.

It's interesting to listen to both sides of the "Mk II" meaning discussion. I always thought it meant "capable of firing the Mk II (smokeless) cartridge". It seems like that would be vital information when the transition from black powder to smokeless wasn't all that far in the past.

glowe said:

I have to disagree, since I am sure that the II stamping is all about the ammunition. The 11 is actually a II stamp signifying the revolver is designed to shoot the Mark II ammunition. I have heard that early TLs were stamped for the Mark I cartridge as well, but I have not seen an example. Look at my and H Richard's pictures and you will see the marking on the left side of the rear frame.

Click to expand...

Both the triple lock and the second pattern take the same ammunition. The 11 marking certainly does mean 2, but this refers to second pattern or model. It is nothing to do with ammunition as both models take the identical ammunition.You will NEVER see a TL with 1 under or 11 under the Enfield inspection mark.

Regards
AlanD
Sydney

kamloops67 said:

thanks, i had read that mud in the ejector housing would cause malfunctions in the 1st model h.e.
so you are saying that a 1st model h.e., if sent to england, would also be a MKII?

Click to expand...

Here's a quick quote in an excellent old thread with outstanding photos and a story on the subject from our fearless leader, the HGIC
(Head Gorilla In Charge):

"
.455 History
Roy tells us in History of Smith & Wesson that nearly 75,000 of the 455's were supplied to the British Commonwealth in WW I.
Only around 5,000 of them were Triple Locks, the rest being .455 Second Models with no ejector rod shroud and no third lock.
The story you have always heard is that the Brits demanded the Second Model development because of complaints that the shroud and 3rd lock got jammed by mud in the trenches and no-mans-lands of that awful war.
Well, sorta-kinda, but that's not exactly how it went.
In the SUMMER of 1914, the Brits had asked S&W if they could build .455 revolvers. S&W built a .455 TL and sent it to them. The Brits responded that it was too heavy and so precise they felt it could be jammed by dirt. So, they wanted a lighter, less precise, and I suspect, CHEAPER gun for military use. The War had not yet started.
Before S&W could design the 2nd Model, war broke out in August, and the Brits yelled "Send us what you got now!"

The first 666 of the .455's built were built on 44 TL frames that the factory had on hand. These frames were already numbered in the 44 N frame serial number series. As they built more frames, they started a new series for the .455's beginning at 1, and running to 5000 or more.
The change to the Second Model occurs between 5000 and 6000 of the .455 series. Since SOME of the 44 frames used to build .455's were numbered below 5000, it would be possible to have TWO .455 TL's sitting side-by-side with the same serial number below 5000. I've often wondered if we will ever see a pair assembled!

So, we have roughly 5000 TL's built in .455, and roughly 70,000 Second Models.
As the Brit contracts were finishing up in 1916, S&W found enough parts to build 691 .455 Triple Locks. These guns will be numbered in the 44 serial number series. I have no idea why they were not just numbered in the .455 series. Perhaps it was .455 barrels and cylinders that the factory found, and they simply turned again to existing 44 frames to use them up. They were sold commercially." Lee Jarrett

The entire thread is here: http://smith-wessonforum.com/s-w-ha...oung-lts-triple-lock-455-a.html#post137283503

one of the 2nd model HEs arrived today, the others are about week away. the finish isnt as bad as it looks ,but its pretty bad. its a canadian 455 though judging by the single "crown over 30" stamp on the base of the grip frame.
its still a 455 too. i tried to shove a 45 colt in there but no dice, im almost disappointed lol.

the lock up is a little loose but not unshootable, the action feels smooth in da.
when i hold this in one hand and the colt new service 455 in the other there is no question which one i would have bought back in the day..
both!

Kamloops,

Although it has wear, it's not abused, not buggered up and all original! Nice gun.

I was in Kamloops in 1962, beautiful country! There was a huge wildfire just before or just after my visit, just can't recall which right now.