British Lend Lease Victory 38 S&W 5-inch

Questions about a Smith and Wesson M&P Victory model
in 38 S&W. 5-inch barrel.

Numerous British proof? Marks on Barrel, Frame, each chamber on Cylinder with a crown and BNP which I now understand that stands for Birmingham Nitro Powder?

There is also a stamp on left side frame with crossing swords and numbers or letters.

I won’t pose all of my questions. Will make this initial post brief and hopefully the experts can guide me on what other features / dimensions I need to look for.

Yes, I know the finish is shot. But this one did not get reamed out to .38 special. Timing is good and locks up tight believe it or not. Looking at the finish you would think it was abused mechanically as well.

ALL SERIAL numbers match on cylinder, frame, butt, star wheel, and cylinder crane.

First question. This firearm was sent over to Britain and that is where the Crown proof stamps were added? Once the British stamps were placed. Then this firearm was issued to British soldiers?

And since this made it back to the states without any import marks like surplus stamps, etc. Does that mean a soldier probably brought it back from the war into the U.S.?

Second question. When I acquired it, I was told it was never reamed out for 38 special and that was true by trying a 38 special and of course it sticks way out on all chambers.

But my dilemma now is that ONE chamber does NOT index the .38 short correctly. The chamber ledge is not deep enough and the casing sticks out enough where I’m afraid to shut the cylinder and have the casing wedge against the back of the frame.

HOW did this get by factory inspection and THEN British inspection? Using feeler gauges the gap from the fwd. surface of the rim to the aft surface of the cylinder is approx. .031 inch. All the others there is about a .0015 gap. I never understood indexing to the fwd. end of the brass casing AND the fwd. end of the casing’s rim.

Almost seems like you’re double indexing. I guess the chamber index edge was to make it so you couldn’t use the wrong ammo. Like the 38 special or even a .357.

I have more questions but this will be a start of conversation and see where that leads.
I’m assuming that the fairly low number of V-197209 would be early in the war? I guess I also thought the Lend-Lease Victories did NOT have a “V” on them. I thought I read that somewhere but apparently, they did.

What does the .767” and 3 ½ ton mean on left side of barrel. Were those stamps from Britain inspectors?

Here are some dimensions I took. The ammo I got was from Fiocchi called Heritage. They call it 38 S&W short. I could only find it in 145 grain and this is FMJ.

The ammo in my opinion seems VERY loose in chambers compared to my 1905 which I got out just to have something to compare to. A 38 short will NOT chamber in the 1905. Case diameter is too big.

Dimensions on 3 of the Brit chambers Inside diameters are .3895 inch. The 1905 is .3795 inch. So .010 difference.
38 special case dia. Is .375 and 38 short case dia. Is .381. So, the Brit chamber has .004 clearance and 1905 has .002 clearance. I have no idea what tolerance should be chamber dia. to casing diameter.

I know the picture that shows the chambers appears that some do not have the index ledge, but they all do. A .38 special sticks way out.
Once again, my main concern is that one chamber not indexing the cartridge as I would expect. Any ideas what to do?

In the interim before an expert shows up, I'll give it a shot.


1. All the stamps except those on the butt were done at the Birmingham proof house AFTER the gun was sold to commercial vendors. The British accepted US military proof to put the gun directly into military service. The crossed swords stamp is a British inspector stamp.



2. The .767 and 3.5 square tonnes per inch are the .38 S&W cartridge casing length and the proof pressure. This was done as part of the proofing. I suspect the one chamber is just dirty with residue buildup around the chamber shoulder that prevents the cartridge from fully inserting. I suspect it would not have passed proof testing in the US or Brittan if the chamber was reamed short.


Yes, most lend-lease guns had the V stamp. Lend Lease started before the US entered the war but the V was not added until around April 1942 when numerical assignment started over at V1.


Don't know about your ammo. It is possible the diameter is the same as .38 Special even if the case length is shorter.


Hope that helps!

I would agree that the problem chamber likely has a build up of crud at the shoulder preventing the round from seating correctly. I have encountered this before, chambers looked clean but rounds didn't want to seat without a lot of pressure. A thorough cleaning with solvent and a wire brush will usually solve the issue. A couple times I had to resort to wrapping fine steel wool around an old brush and spin it in the problem chambers (working as a gunsmith you encounter these kind of things).

As to the ammo, if it won't fit in a 38 Special chamber then it is close to the correct specs for 38 S&W ammo and should be okay in your British service revolver. It may simply be at the smaller end of the +/- tolerance for dimensions for the 38 S&W round.

I think your Fiocchi ammo is correct for that gun.
The chambers on yours a close to mine, also normal (for that model)

• The chambers on my Victory Model (V661xxx) measure from .386 to .390, using a caliper.
• Older Remington .38 S&W cartridges measure .381~382 at the base.
• Some newer fancy (and overpriced) .38 S&W ammo I have measures .383~.384 at the base.

The Remington .38 S&W ammo WILL fit into a S&W Model 10-1 .38 spl cylinder just fine, and without any force. The newer .38 S&W ammo will NOT fit into the same cylinder. Not sure what to say about your short chamber. So, just because .38 S&W cartridges may fit into a .38 spl cylinder, does not mean their specs are off(!)

Colt was selling a similar gun to the brits also.

Mine is chambered in 38-200.

Charlie Foxtrott said:

Mine is chambered in 38-200.

Click to expand...

Nice! I didn't realize that. When I saw the grips I thought that was the Colt commando. But they didn't have a lanyard from what I have read. Another one to dedicate to memory and put on my list.

PeteC said:

I think your Fiocchi ammo is correct for that gun.
The chambers on yours a close to mine, also normal (for that model)

• The chambers on my Victory Model (V661xxx) measure from .386 to .390, using a caliper.
• Older Remington .38 S&W cartridges measure .381~382 at the base.
• Some newer fancy (and overpriced) .38 S&W ammo I have measures .383~.384 at the base.

The Remington .38 S&W ammo WILL fit into a S&W Model 10-1 .38 spl cylinder just fine, and without any force. The newer .38 S&W ammo will NOT fit into the same cylinder. Not sure what to say about your short chamber. So, just because .38 S&W cartridges may fit into a .38 spl cylinder, does not mean their specs are off(!)

Click to expand...

I guess I didn't explain that right. It was just my observation.
38 special in my 1905 1st change 38spcl. That cartridge had .002 clearance all the way around as opposed to the S&W 38 short had .004 clearance in the british victory model chamber. Thanks for the info

desi2358 said:

I would agree that the problem chamber likely has a build up of crud at the shoulder preventing the round from seating correctly. I have encountered this before, chambers looked clean but rounds didn't want to seat without a lot of pressure. A thorough cleaning with solvent and a wire brush will usually solve the issue. A couple times I had to resort to wrapping fine steel wool around an old brush and spin it in the problem chambers (working as a gunsmith you encounter these kind of things).

As to the ammo, if it won't fit in a 38 Special chamber then it is close to the correct specs for 38 S&W ammo and should be okay in your British service revolver. It may simply be at the smaller end of the +/- tolerance for dimensions for the 38 S&W round.

Click to expand...

Thanks for the info. Yes it looked clean and I didn't see any build up on the chamber ledge but will redo the cleaning in that chamber.

Wiregrassguy said:

In the interim before an expert shows up, I'll give it a shot.


1. All the stamps except those on the butt were done at the Birmingham proof house AFTER the gun was sold to commercial vendors. The British accepted US military proof to put the gun directly into military service. The crossed swords stamp is a British inspector stamp.



2. The .767 and 3.5 square tonnes per inch are the .38 S&W cartridge casing length and the proof pressure. This was done as part of the proofing. I suspect the one chamber is just dirty with residue buildup around the chamber shoulder that prevents the cartridge from fully inserting. I suspect it would not have passed proof testing in the US or Brittan if the chamber was reamed short.


Yes, most lend-lease guns had the V stamp. Lend Lease started before the US entered the war but the V was not added until around April 1942 when numerical assignment started over at V1.


Don't know about your ammo. It is possible the diameter is the same as .38 Special even if the case length is shorter.


Hope that helps!

Click to expand...

Thanks for the info. Will go clean that chamber again. Visually it looked fine. Odd they put casing length on proofing. My cartridge shows .766 so right on. I did find a sight last night that shows the gun Oswald shot the Police officer Tippin with was one of these British victory models cut down to 2 inches. You can still see the .767.

I know where there is a nice clean Commando for sale right now.

drcwks said:

Nice! I didn't realize that. When I saw the grips I thought that was the Colt commando. But they didn't have a lanyard from what I have read. Another one to dedicate to memory and put on my list.

Click to expand...

I would like to have it, but they are way too proud of it.

Charlie Foxtrott said:

I would like to have it, but they are way too proud of it.

Click to expand...

Yes. I'm looking for a commando too.

desi2358 said:

I would agree that the problem chamber likely has a build up of crud at the shoulder preventing the round from seating correctly. I have encountered this before, chambers looked clean but rounds didn't want to seat without a lot of pressure. A thorough cleaning with solvent and a wire brush will usually solve the issue. A couple times I had to resort to wrapping fine steel wool around an old brush and spin it in the problem chambers (working as a gunsmith you encounter these kind of things).

As to the ammo, if it won't fit in a 38 Special chamber then it is close to the correct specs for 38 S&W ammo and should be okay in your British service revolver. It may simply be at the smaller end of the +/- tolerance for dimensions for the 38 S&W round.

Click to expand...

I finally had some time to look at this British model again. I did do a quick check on any power residue, etc. in the chamber and especially in the groove of the chamber stop using a dental tool and that didn’t show any leftover residue I missed cleaning the first time.
Then with a good light it appeared the chamber had a burr close to chamber stop. It was about 1/16 of the chamber radius. I cut a .375 wooden dowel and was hoping to use some 600-grit paper but sand paper was too thick.
I did try some 0000-steel wool using the wooden dowel but that didn't do a thing. I then found a sanding stone from a Dremel attachment that was .375. It was rotating true. So right or wrong. I first inserted the stone
and then turned on the Dremel at low speed just for a second. Cleaned out residue and the cartridge fit fine. I have NO idea how a burr could develop inside the chamber like that. Anyway, that was solved but now I found another problem.

With the cylinder open it revolves freely, but when
I push the ejector rod out when cylinder is turned at 180 degrees using the serial number as my Zero reference at 12 o'clock, the ejector rod starts rubbing when pushed out 3/4 inch. When I rotate ccw to 270 it binds up sooner at about 1/4 inch when I push it. Then rotate back to Zero or 12 o'clock using the serial number at my starting reference. The ejector rod easily pushes out the full length at zero and 90 degrees and the spring tension brings it back in. When it starts to bind, the spring tension isn’t enough to return it. The ejector rod will just stick out until I push it back in.

I did this test with the long rod (center pin) and spring out to make sure that wasn't what was binding. Now I'm wondering if the problem is the extractor
rod collar. You would think if the extractor rod was bent, it would bind no matter which way the cylinder was turned. Maybe I'm not looking at this right.
Anyway. Any opinions?

Once again, the timing looks good and cylinder locks up tight and would like to shoot this. But
need to figure out why extractor rod binds when it does. The cylinder turns fine in single and double action.

LOTS of assumptions here, but opinions are based on your pictures.

In photo#1 and photo #3 assuming the cylinder is closed (?) the alignment of front locking lug is “noticeable.” The yoke appears to be closed but misaligned with the frame. Was hoping to see the yoke\pin connection but that picture was too dark. For any revolver (assuming the barrel hasn’t been moved) the straight line between the cylinder release face and the front locking lug ,, is considered 90* to everything else. Especially the ends of springs! Often old guns have springs replaced, stretched and cut off. There should be a full turn of wire on the ends, if not the end of the spring may spin freely in one direction (the direction the spring was twisted) but catch and bind in the other. Or they are too short or too long, causing the spring coils to be overly compressed. LOTS of leverage created at the hand of a S&W but very little is needed.

A pre V

Charlie Foxtrott said:

Mine is chambered in 38-200.

Click to expand...

Allegedly most of those Colt OP 38-200s (sic) went to the London Police, not the military. There are some threads here discussing that. And the British called neither the revolver nor its cartridge ".38-200" or ".38/200." The official military name of the revolver was the "Pistol, Revolver, Smith and Wesson, No. 2". The cartridge name was "Revolver, .380 Mk II".

Source for that assertion?

Just for clarification on the designation, Pate shows a Packing List for OSS shipment. Revolvers, caliber .38/200...
Signed by Al Janick, Smith & Wesson, Inc.

As for the British caliber designation, Mk I (obsolete 1937), Mk II.C.I. A lot of the Mk I was being used up.

Another point is some 38 special revolvers were converted to .38-200 and were marked /380 or .38/380 on the frame to indicate conversion. WW II was a crazy time for making weapons.

This may help until Ordnanceman gets here:

Close sidebar

.38/200 Military Load - Steinel Ammunition Co.

4K2022 said:

LOTS of assumptions here, but opinions are based on your pictures.

In photo#1 and photo #3 assuming the cylinder is closed (?) the alignment of front locking lug is “noticeable.” The yoke appears to be closed but misaligned with the frame. Was hoping to see the yoke\pin connection but that picture was too dark. For any revolver (assuming the barrel hasn’t been moved) the straight line between the cylinder release face and the front locking lug ,, is considered 90* to everything else. Especially the ends of springs! Often old guns have springs replaced, stretched and cut off. There should be a full turn of wire on the ends, if not the end of the spring may spin freely in one direction (the direction the spring was twisted) but catch and bind in the other. Or they are too short or too long, causing the spring coils to be overly compressed. LOTS of leverage created at the hand of a S&W but very little is needed.

A pre V

Click to expand...

I hope I took the right shots. I can only post 5 pics.

I was wondering if there were shims on cylinder or crane. Almost looks like a washer at fwd cylinder face to crane, or Frame to crane too.

I did unscrew the ejector rod just 1/4 turn and NOW the ejector rod binds up at ZERO, 12 o'clock using s/n on aft cyl face as zero ref. Tighten back down, just fine.

I have a LOT to learn when I look at used revolvers. Had I seen this at a gun show I wouldn't have bought it but bought it came from a relative and the money was going for a head stone so it was for a good cause, basically a donation. It was in their father's collection, my uncle and still had a tie on it so he had never messed with it.

I would still like to know if this is safe to shoot. The cylinder gap to barrel looks good @ around
.005-.006

Here are a few more pics

I hope the head stone turned out to every one's liking.

If you could take a nice clear close up of the "view marks" on the left side above the front of the trigger guard I might be able to narrow down the time of Mfg.. They look like two crossed swords with letters and dots.

Of course that doesn't help with your chambering problem.