.22 Victory

[cmansguns]

definitely NOT recessed

Thanks, Jack for catching me on this mistake. Indeed the 1915 22-32 Heavy Frame Target, does NOT have recessed charge holes.

Sorry for the misinformation.

 

[JP@AK]

Indeed the 1915 22-32 Heavy Frame Target, does NOT have recessed charge holes.

Yes, about 20 years too early. Interestingly, the K-22 Outdoorsman's was released at the beginning of the decade, but they didn't add the counterbore on the .22/32 until about 5 years later.

 

[Mk VII]

I think I see British proof marks above the ejector rod. Some of the P-H conversions had recessed case heads, some did not.

 

[DWalt]

Recessed chambers on the .22/32 HFT began around serial number 525600 in 12/1931.

Regarding the converted .22 Victory, what would one look for to establish it was not one of the 1950s British conversions, but was done someplace else? If it does in fact have British proof marks, I would consider that as an indication that the conversion had been done in England. Lacking British proof marks, I might agree that the conversion could have been done elsewhere. I remember seeing such a conversion once, but long ago.

Somewhere on this forum I remember seeing an old discussion thread of how the hammer was modified for .22 RF, maybe even with pictures. But I would not know how to begin searching for it.

 

[JP@AK]

Recessed chambers on the .22/32 HFT began around serial number 525600 in 12/1931.

Interesting. The Standard Catalog uses that serial number, but puts it in 1935. It would be good to get this difference clarified. Can you show us (or point us to) some documentation for the earlier date?

The SCSW 4th goes on to say, "However, collectors report recessed chambers as low as 384570."

Thanks for any help you can provide.

 

[DWalt]

Interesting. The Standard Catalog uses that serial number, but puts it in 1935. It would be good to get this difference clarified. Can you show us (or point us to) some documentation for the earlier date?

The SCSW 4th goes on to say, "However, collectors report recessed chambers as low as 384570."

Thanks for any help you can provide.

On my list is a .22/32 with SN 525668 which shipped on 6/15/31.
It is seemingly impossible that SN 384570 would have FACTORY ORIGINAL recessed chambers, as that SN would put the revolver's shipping date at around 1924. Because the sole purpose of chamber recessing was to provide extra support at the rim for using "High Velocity" .22 cartridges, there would have been no reason for a rim recess that early. HV .22s did not appear on the market until 1931. Western sold them first, with Remington on its heels. Someone could have had the rim recesses added to an older gun cylinder later in order to use HV cartridges in it. Or maybe some past owner replaced the original cylinder with a newer factory recessed one (and I believe that would be the most likely answer). I am very close to 100% certain that 1931 must be the correct year, not 1935, which would have been four years after the introduction of HV .22s. S&W would not have waited that long to make the change.

Depending on the information source, Colt modified the Colt Woodsman pistol to use HV .22 ammunition in 1932 or 1933.

 

[JP@AK]

Thank you DWalt. Much appreciated. What you write makes sense. I rather suspected the counterbored cylinders were related to the advent of HV ammo, but I did not know when that came about other than that it was sometime in the 1930s.

I'll make sure Jim S. knows about your comments.

 

[chrometank]

So my Victory finally turned up, I watched it tracking across the state then when it was in a town just an hour away it stopped there for four days before turning up today. Not in the best condition but for the price I think it is OK, I was surprised to find every cylinder has a British proof mark.
All the best

Sent from my SM-G996B using Tapatalk

 

[hkcavalier]

Interesting engineering on the cylinder and hammer nose! I'd love to own one of these as well. Another thing to hunt for...

 

[chrometank]

A few more of higher quality

Sent from my SM-G996B using Tapatalk

 

[StrawHat]

A few more of higher quality …

Sent from my SM-G996B using Tapatalk

chrome tank,

Is it the way I am interpreting the image or do the chambers really sit a little proud of the cylinder? It looks like they were sleeved, chambered with a recessed rim and trimmed to provide the correct headspace.

Cheers.

Kevin

 

[chrometank]

Yes they protrude a bit, I should have taken a photograph of the front of the cylinder, it shows the sleeves nicely, perhaps the sleeve has a lip on the end ? I will get better photographs tomorrow, cheers

Sent from my SM-G996B using Tapatalk

 

[chrometank]

The revolver arrived in this box, the original label is gone. Is this a late 70s early 80s box ? Cheers

Sent from my SM-G996B using Tapatalk

 

[larryofcc]

The rear sight, appears to be a highly modified Colt Accro. Big Larry

 

[Green Frog]

The more I see of this revolver, the more interesting it becomes! I'd say it was a real masterwork of the British gun maker's art. One hears of "making a silk purse of a sow's ear" and this was done here while imparting a good measure of style as well. The icing on the cake will be when you find out it shoots well too! Congratulations!

Froggie

 

[Mk VII]

I was going to say, the rear sight does not look typical of the P-H conversions and may be a later upgrade.