.455 HE/Second modified for target shooting

[DCWilson]

I heard from red9, who told me that his similarly marked TL does indeed chamber .45 Colt. I'm now toying with the notion that in the late 'teens and '20s the factory offered conversion to .45 Schofield for returned .455s, but would quietly (at least in terms of the barrel markings) bore the chambers out a little deeper on the request of owners who wanted to chamber .45 Colt as well. That minimizes the number of trips to the gunsmith that these converted guns would have required, and the simpler explanation is usually the better explanation when it comes to seemingly complex situations.

Tim, I like your converted .44; that postwar factory sight sure has nicer proportions and better fits the lines of the gun than the huge chunk o' metal that got bolted to mine! But I guess there is just no way to avoid a towering front sight on an N-frame target revolver with a thin-wall barrel.

Gail, I also am thinking about some postwar N-frame targets for this gun, maybe with the football or maybe not. In the interim, I may take some Sile thumbrest targets off an N-frame Outdoorsman and put them on this gun while I get to know it. (Tommy, I noticed you did this.) And I'm wondering if I dare to modify those sights a little more; my retirement eyes just don't work well with a black on black sight picture. It would not be hard to notch the top of the ramp to make a short vertical surface and add a gold bead to it, and it wouldn't be that tough to make a U-notch insert for the rear sight. Or since the front blade is nicely screw mounted, I could just fab a completely new one that looks like what I want.

Tommy, I like your approach to collecting! The .455 is a good round but has always had this kind of so-so reputation among American shooters. It just makes sense to bore them out to chamber a round that is more common here, but then one must guard against trying to shooting the hottest loads one can chamber. If I want a .45 Colt that can take higher pressure rounds, I'll go after a 25-5. For the moment, these converted old WWI HEs fill the bill nicely.

 

[tommy F]

Handloading allows for a lot of fun with these old HEs. I like 185 wadcutters with 3.7 Titegroup for ACP/AR and 4.5 of the same for SW brass.

Tommy

 

[okie john]

Micro sights were common on 1911s accurized for bullseye shooting up to about the 1970s. Ruger even used them on flattop Blackhawks. They're as good as anything made today, including Hamilton Bowen's work, and they're exactly what a discerning shooter would have used on a top-end conversion back in the day.

Good catch.


Okie John

 

[red9]

As David indicated, I tried chambering a 45 Colt in my Canadian Mk I #5788, and it's a perfect fit. Although the "45 S W" stamping looks the same, the recoil shield on mine seems to be rather coarsely hand filed and left in the bright,not what I would expect from the factory. I like the idea of shaving the recoil shield instead of the cylinder, as it leaves the s/n on the rear of the cylinder intact.

Bob

 

[DCWilson]

I think I see two different sets of tooling marks on that TL recoil shield. There is a lower straight-through set (which to my eyes is easier to see on the bottom third of the recoil shield), and then the more obvious coarser marks that cross the shield in a less regular pattern. I wonder if the recoil shield was resurfaced, blued, and after delivery was found to be not quite low enough -- at which point the owner just took a flat file to it and lowered it enough to make it work, removing any finish in the process.

I know -- speculative in the extreme. If we had half a dozen of these "CAL. 45 S.W." conversions to compare, it would sure be helpful.

Thank you for posting those photos. That's a nice looking TL!

 

[Andy Griffith]

DC,
Your gun deserves a nice set of target Ropers, or even a well figured set of Herrett's to keep it in line with the other period modifications. I think you can shoot this one.

 

[lebomm]

DC;
To my eye, that mark at the upper rear of the left grip looks not like the "Facing broad arrows", British "mustering out" mark, but the stacked rifles of the Birmingham Small Arms facility. It's known that BSA did some "commercialisation" work on various bits of Tommy Atkins' former hardware, but my personal experience with them has been too thin to state that with any authority.
Anybody else notice that similarity?
Beautiful piece, BTW, don't forget a range report!
Larry