My neighbor just sold me a SW Victory, of which I will add pictures to later. It has a 5 inch barrel, and is .38 SW which I assume means it's a Lend Lease gun, correct?

Anyhow the gun is in VG+ condiction, about the only major wear is on one side of the top strap and it still has the lanyard loop.

SN is V403249. What can you gurus tell me about this handgun in terms of when it was made. I have $300 in it which is cheaper than good SW's usually go for around here.

Nice buy, I look forward to the pictures.

Not up on these but, if it is a lend lease gun it should have import marks and other armorer marks.

That SN would put shipment at September 1943. It would be a Lend-Lease .38/200 British service revolver. If it shoots, it's worth what you paid for it, and then some. The major issue is availability of .38 S&W ammunition - available, but expensive and difficult to find in most areas. Have you checked to see if the chambers have been bored to accept .38 Special?

My computer is still giving me fits about adding pictures to the original post.

Anyhow--- I do have between 75 and 100 rounds of .38 SW ammo left I bought back in the mid 90's when I had a top break IJ I'd occasionally shoot. Remington LRN if I remember right. I'll have to burn through some that and buy some more.

Gun was not rebored to .38 SPL.

How do I know if it was lend lease or sold to civilian security/law enforcement through the DSC? It has no markings my post war M&P doesn't have. Didn't England or Canada proof them?

Hi most lend-lease guns would have "Property of U,S." on the top strap. and lend-lease guns from Canada theirs have a big C with a broad arrow and British there is BNP stamp all over it some come with an E and cross swords right under it and all come with a 5" barrel in 38 S&W in the V serial number range. That's some to name a few as they were also lend -lease guns to South Africa, Australia and New Zealand too and to what their marking are not knowing but I'm sure someone will chime in...

The topstrap stamping will usually be "United States Property", with the quotation marks.

Very few of these would have been sold Stateside via the DSC, as .38 Special was one of the standardized handgun rounds and .38 S & W was not. The proof marks (generally from England) would have been placed when the gun was sold onto the commercial market, mostly in the 1950s by report.

__________________
Alan
SWCA LM 2023, SWHF 220

At that SN, the topstrap stamping would be "U. S. PROPERTY" If it is a British service revolver (.38/200), it should almost certainly have that stamping. I don't believe any BSRs made that late in the war would not have a property stamping. DSC guns were all in .38 Special only, at least I have never seen or heard otherwise.

There are many Victory and BSR guns that have no importers or British proof marks. The importer marks were not required until 1968 or later, and many, if not most of these guns were imported before then Apparently a lot of the guns were never sold commercially in England, so did not have to be proofed. Theoretically, all should have the opposed broad arrow mark showing that the gun was sold out of government stores, but I have a pre Victory BSR that has no markings to show British ownership.

__________________
Tom
1560

Those BSRs sold out of service by the British government into civilian channels will have several distinctive proof markings, as proofing of commercial civilian guns was required under British law. Not so those BSRs which made their way into the US under rather more casual methods - like in the duffel bags of returning GIs - as they were not proofed by the British military prior to issue to their troops.

But should it have the US Property stamp? Mine lacks that stamp entirely.

Yes, it should have the U. S. PROPERTY stamping. However, that does not mean that it could not have inadvertently missed that stamping operation at the factory. Things like that have been known to happen. Another explanation is that it has been re-finished, and the stamping buffed off (the stamping is often very light). But if has not been re-finished, that would not be the case. Perhaps someone else has a better explanation for the missing stamping.

"...about the only major wear is on one side of the top strap..."

This may be the left, where someone removed the property stamp.

__________________
Alan
SWCA LM 2023, SWHF 220