2nd Model HE .455

[saber58]

Walked in to a local gun shop, I had not visited in quite a while. By the time I left, I had also left a deposit. Today I picked this one up:

An unaltered 2nd Model Hand Ejector in .455 Webley. It looks to have been rarely fired, and never carried in a holster. Bluing looks to be 99% with only very light cylinder drag marks. It does have a chip in the right hand grip panel, and some indentations on the bottom of the grips as well. I assume the 70xxx serial number likely makes it a 1917 manufacture date.

I could find only one proof mark that could be British or Canadian. A crown over the number 30 on the bottom of the grip.

As always I'd love to hear more if anyone knows more about these.

Mark

 

[22hipower]

Looks good and the stocks are very nice. Only thing that I see, rather don't see, is an SN on the rear face of the cylinder. Might be there but from the one picture I don't see it. Should be a matching number on the barrel flat and the butt. . . .and a few other places.

Jeff
SWCA #1457

 

[jmace57]

Dang, that thing is PRISTINE!

 

[lamarw]

Congrats on your acquisition. I have one in similar nice condition. It was an auction win where I acquired it along with a .455 triple lock at a "two for one" bid price. Mine does have a small marking on the base of the butt which is supposedly a Canadian proof mark. I am guessing I paid about $950.00 of the total price for the 2nd Model. I could of put a big smile on the face of the auctioneer. I suspect that is what they hope for on two for one bidding.

 

[THE PILGRIM]

Great looking gun!
And I really like to say -
I LOVE THOSE GRIPS!

 

[saber58]

Hi Jeff,
Yes, all the numbers match.

 

[CptCurl]

It looks like you got a nice one there! We certainly would like to see more detailed photos in a better light setting. It's a beauty for sure.

I have one just like it and showed it in detail almost 10 years ago at this thread. Have a look. New comments to the old thread are welcome.
S&W .455 Mk. II Hand Ejector 2nd Model #69234

Curl

 

[dsf]

I have the same as shown in this and the linked thread, although not in quite so good condition. Shapliegh Hardware seems to have done a pretty brisk business in 455s. I had no idea they were at all popular in the US.

 

[Wiregrassguy]

Here's my commercial .455 HE, 2nd Model that shipped to Shapleigh Hardware in December 1917. Pictured with its original holster. It is in high 90's condition and AFAIK, never fired.

 

[saber58]

Great post. Beautiful HE.

 

[Hondo44]

That's a truly stunning example. Yes, one of the commercially shipped guns in Dec 1917. It's a category 3 .455 BSR.

Go to post #223 for the database info, page 5 in my 455 Study thread:
.455 British Svc Revolver Research Thread

 

[glowe]

Guy's post suggests to me that one needs a letter to confirm a 455 is actually a commercial model. My observations and understanding is that the British stamped less and less as WWI went on, with some only having inspector initials stamped on the barrel flat of under the stocks. Lettering is well worth the cost to validate the OP's shipping details and is proof that they have a very uncommon commercial model, or maybe not. S&W collectors should certainly put a premium on a lettered commercial 455.

 

[Wiregrassguy]

Here's the letter I got at a Symposium for the .455 HE, 2nd. It is not typical of the standard Historian's letter because it was done at the Symposium. It does remove any doubt the HE was a commercial vs. military version. My understanding is there were around 1000 revolvers including 1st and 2nd .455 HE models sent to Shapleigh in that shipment.

 

[Dave_n]

What is interesting as mentioned earlier is the apparent lack of any serial number on the rear of the cylinder. Perhaps commercial sales did not have that number but it is a little unusual. Would be interesting to measure the gap between the face and the shield using feeler gauges as then it could be seen if it had been cut for a 0.45 Colt. I have two Mk IIs one is still in 0.455 with the usual proof marks and numbers on the cylinder, the other is cut for 0.45 Colt and was actually sold to me as a 1917, though I was quite willing to pay the price for it. Dave_n

 

[Kinman]

I like the 2nd Model H.E. every bit as much as the rest of the .44's, yours is beautiful, prettiest I've ever seen.

 

[Hondo44]

What is interesting as mentioned earlier is the apparent lack of any serial number on the rear of the cylinder. Perhaps commercial sales did not have that number but it is a little unusual. Would be interesting to measure the gap between the face and the shield using feeler gauges as then it could be seen if it had been cut for a 0.45 Colt. I have two Mk IIs one is still in 0.455 with the usual proof marks and numbers on the cylinder, the other is cut for 0.45 Colt and was actually sold to me as a 1917, though I was quite willing to pay the price for it. Dave_n

All of the 1st and 2nd model .455s have the cyl serial #d, military or commercial from the factory, in fact all hand ejectors until ~ 1957. Exceptions would be true anomalies.

 

[Dave_n]

All of the 1st and 2nd model .455s have the cyl serial #d, military or commercial from the factory, in fact all hand ejectors until ~ 1957. Exceptions would be true anomalies.

Thanks Jim. Yet no serial number on the face of the cylinder was obvious, as mentioned above in one of the earlier comments.

Maybe the original poster could show a photo of the full cylinder face, as that is a very simple task which would solve the question. Dave_n

 

[Wiregrassguy]

If there is no serial number on the breech face of the cylinder, it was probably milled off for headspace. I have a .455 Triple Lock that was modified that way for .45 Colt.

 

[Jack Flash]

...
An unaltered 2nd Model Hand Ejector in .455 Webley. ...

... Only thing that I see, rather don't see, is an SN on the rear face of the cylinder. Might be there but from the one picture I don't see it. ...
Jeff
SWCA #1457

Hi Jeff,
Yes, all the numbers match.

I'm thinking it's not shaved based on Mark's (the OP) responses above. Also the spacing between the rear of the cylinder and the recoil shield looks way too small to accommodate .45 ACP & moon clips.

And he did say "unaltered" and "all the numbers match".

 

[CptCurl]

If it was shaved to accommodate the .45 Colt cartridge, it wouldn't have the wide gap required for the .45 ACP with clips.

The OP's statement about all numbers matching is a bit ambiguous. If there is no number on the back of the cylinder, that is a sure indication of an alteration.

Even if it was shaved for the .45 Colt, it still is a nice revolver - perhaps more useful to the shooter even if less desirable to the collector.

Curl