A nice old Navy Victory:

[Donald Paul]

... just wanted to show it off again

 

[Donald Paul]

... one more:

... one more:

 

[leonardocarrillo]

Very nice revolver, thanks for showing it.

 

[raisedin99]

... just wanted to show it off again

I certainly don't blame you, that's a keeper,,,

terry

 

[Igiveup]

That revolver looks as though it was never issued. Did you paper it?

 

[Donald Paul]

No paper:

That revolver looks as though it was never issued. Did you paper it?

I haven't done anything yet thru Roy.

 

[Waveski]

Extremely well preserved , perfect screws , minimal turn line and a blast shield you could just about eat off of ...

Without going into personal specifics about the OP , what would folks you say the general market value of such a fine specimen is?

And , can anyone venture a meaningful speculation as to how such a firearm came to remain is such condition? With an individually purchased gun that was acquired by a person who then deliberately preserved it and handed it down - that I understand , but an item that was produced and shipped in mass for government contract?

Interesting.

 

[Breakaway500]

Not everything the gubbermint procures is used immediately and I will give them credit for actually trying to store items properly....and then those objects become surplus,never actually being used much,if at all.
Values are all over the place for Victory revolvers..but $1k and up for a clean bona fied Navy marked unit would not surprise me at all.

 

[BSA1]

And , can anyone venture a meaningful speculation as to how such a firearm came to remain is such condition? With an individually purchased gun that was acquired by a person who then deliberately preserved it and handed it down - that I understand , but an item that was produced and shipped in mass for government contract?

You answered your own question when you said mass produced for government contract.

I have a Russian Makarov 9 x 18 that I think has never been fired or carried. It came to me without any paper in the cardboard box to keep it from sliding around. It has some bluing wear on the left front exterior edge of the slide which could be the result of it sliding around in the box.

Another reason I think it is unfired is I had a heck of a time putting the slide back on the frame after cleaning the gun. After a long struggle I got it back together and when I worked the slide about a 1/8" silver metal shaving came out the back of one of the rails. I don't know how I missed it when cleaning but left undetectable it is possible, er probable, it would have caused malfunction when the gun was fired.

It is my understanding the Navy mainly issued the Victory revolver to pilots. With the war with Japan ending unexpectedly while manufacturing in the United States still going full blast it is easy to see how small arms were no longer needed and those in the production line were stored in warehouses. The real story is where it was found and sold.

Very, very cool find.

 

[Absalom]

..... With the war with Japan ending unexpectedly while manufacturing in the United States still going full blast it is easy to see how small arms were no longer needed and those in the production line were stored in warehouses. The real story is where it was found and sold.
....

There is, however, an issue with this quite reasonable theory as it concerns the OP's gun.

This is not a late-war production gun. Since it has the US NAVY stamping, it was produced before mid-1943, when that stamping ceased and all Navy-shipped Victorys received the US PROPERTY GHD topstrap marking.

And during the war there actually developed a shortage of these and the Navy exchanged the Victorys issued to Naval gun crews for 1911's so they'd have enough revolvers for aviators.

So this one must have taken the off-ramp from active service early on and never resurfaced. Maybe it disappeared in the desk drawer of a base commander or logistics officer somewhere.

 

[oneeyedpete]

Beautiful example of a navy revolver! I was always curious why WWII pilots were issued .38 revolvers instead of 1911s. Anyone have any idea?

 

[kwill1911]

Because there were never enough M1911A1s to go around so they were prioritized for troops that actually needed them.

 

[PALADIN85020]

Beautiful example of a navy revolver! I was always curious why WWII pilots were issued .38 revolvers instead of 1911s. Anyone have any idea?

I have been told that it was because a revolver was easier to manage with one hand while the pilot had to do other things in the cockpit or on the ground after parachuting. It was also that there were signaling .38 special rounds that were made for revolvers but not .45 autos.

I had a high school ROTC buddy who flew Mohawk observation planes for the Army as a lieutenant. He was issued a Victory in a shoulder holster that had spare rounds in a flat sleeve on the strap. Sadly, he was shot down and killed in Vietnam in 1963.

John

 

[kwill1911]

John,
I hope this doesn't come across as argumentative but I've never found any documentation for the "one-handed operation" story. There is documentation about the shortage of M1911A1 pistols. Also, there were signal cartridges made in .45ACP.

 

[Delta Rose]

Wow. Nice specimen!

 

[Absalom]

The revolvers were a Navy thing, not so much an aviator thing. The Army Air Force, which ended up considerably larger than Navy and Marine aviation, never used revolvers; their flying personnel all carried the 1911. So I doubt it was aviation-use specific.

It just so happened that Naval and Marine aviators flying off carriers were the best-known personnel to actually carry the Victory operationally. Generally, sailors didn't need guns and didn't have "standard issue sidearms"; even shipboard officers only drew a handgun if a special duty required it.

Even though the Navy did have 1911s, ever since the first order of 3000 .38 Special M&Ps in early 1941 they ordered a lot more revolvers for general duty, including not just aviation, but shore patrol, naval gun crews in the Atlantic, and base security (the sought-after "Navy Yard Mare Island" marked guns actually identify a duty station).

 

[JH1951]

Nice specimen Victory.
I was advised long ago by WWII vets that revolvers were preferred in aircraft because they did not eject shell casings into the aircraft that could potentially bind cockpit flight controls. I have also seen casing catchers made for the 1911 that supposedly served the same purpose (but they were very awkward contraptions). When the Army had me flying '69 thru '78, cockpit crew were issued revolvers.

 

[oneeyedpete]

Thanks for the response guys! As a Kid in the early 60s I remember Air Force Military Police also carried .38 revolvers. I Think that is the last time I saw a U.S. serviceman with a revolver side arm.

 

[ordnanceguy]

Beautiful example of a navy revolver! I was always curious why WWII pilots were issued .38 revolvers instead of 1911s. Anyone have any idea?

Kevin is correct about the shortage of M1911A1 .45 caliber pistols being the primary cause for the adoption of the Victory Model by the Navy. The Navy could not get all of the M1911A1 pistols it wanted and turned to S&W's M+P/Victory Model as the next best available sidearm.

On the question raised as to who the Navy intended the Victory Model to be used by the Navy's Bureau of Ordnance explicitly stated "...Smith & Wesson Revolvers are to be issued to flight crews. These side-arms are for aviation personnel only."

Donald Paul, would you mind sending me the complete serial number on your revolver so that it can be included in the Victory Model Database?

HTH.

 

[Absalom]

On the question raised as to who the Navy intended the Victory Model to be used by the Navy's Bureau of Ordnance explicitly stated "...Smith & Wesson Revolvers are to be issued to flight crews. These side-arms are for aviation personnel only."
.

Charlie:

What is the date on that pronouncement? It obviously does not reflect general Navy practice, so might it be from the period in 1944, when Pate reports the above-mentioned replacement with 1911's for Victorys to ensure enough revolvers for air crew?