S&W in 455 Eley

[Kurusu]

I do have a pre-WWI SAA which is marked on the barrel simply
45 COLT

I'll be...

I just went to check my first year 3rd generation SAA (1976).

And in the barrel is..."Colt Single Action Army .45".

 

[PJGP]

Winchester chose to label their 455 ammo as 455 COLT.
Here are 2 boxes of Winchester 455 , brass roll mark toll for the master carton of ammo and a S&W 2nd model shipped to Winchester as an ammo test gun.

I find it somewhat amusing that Winchester used a S&W to test "455 Colt" ammo!

So who was Winchester's target customer? I suspect Canada, given the 1915 date.

Peter

 

[Muley Gil]

I find it somewhat amusing that Winchester used a S&W to test "455 Colt" ammo!

So who was Winchester's target customer? I suspect Canada, given the 1915 date.

Peter

Most likely it was Great Britain and its commonwealth countries. They didn't have enough Webleys for its expanded troops during WW I. Just like the US buying S&W and Colt 1917s, since there wasn't enough Colt 1911s to go around.

 

[Kurusu]

Most likely it was Great Britain and its commonwealth countries. They didn't have enough Webleys for its expanded troops during WW I. Just like the US buying S&W and Colt 1917s, since there wasn't enough Colt 1911s to go around.

Not exactly the same thing. There was a lack of Webleys because the government was driving Webley into the ground back then (and finally succeeded in the end).

There weren't enough 1911s because there were problems speeding up production, mainly the magazines.

 

[Absalom]

I find it somewhat amusing that Winchester used a S&W to test "455 Colt" ammo!
......
Peter

Keep in mind that ammunition factories acquired sample guns for testing from various manufacturers all the time.

It wasn’t so much a matter of using a S&W to test the .455 Colt ammo, as it was to test a S&W with their ammo

 

[Mk VII]

Jack:
I just love that American Rifleman ad.

However, note the quote from Jim above. Given its condition and the absence of any British markings, It would be highly unlikely that this gun went to Britain for WW I anyways.

And of course the ad applies to WW II. These stories about collecting civilian arms in America and shipping them to Britain keep coming up. Is anyone aware of any serious research into whether and to what extent this actually occurred? The logistics would seem challenging, especially if it was a civilian committee and not the government organizing this.

It had to be seen to be a civilian committee in order to circumvent the neutrality laws. There were actually two committees, one in England and one in the US. Some of us have been doing some work researching the subject and we even have some of the lists of arms donated, including serial numbers, though the information uncovered so far is only a small percentage of the arms concerned.
At least a portion of the arms were returned after the war. The S.S. Vasconia sailed from London for New York City in October 1947 with 144 crates of arms being returned to the American Committee, via the British Consul in New York, Sir Francis Evans. The consignment weighed 14 tons and 4.5 cwt. 

Some extracts from letters received from donors were included in a file which I discovered in the Public Records Office.

“I am delighted to receive back in good condition the Remington rifle which I contributed some years ago in response to the appeal from England. As a matter of fact I had not supposed that I would see this rifle again.” – donor in Cleveland OH.

“This morning the Express Company returned the Krag rifle that I contributed to you in 1940. It is in perfect condition and when I replace it in my gun cabinet I will do so with gratification of the use to which it was dedicated.” – donor in San Francisco CA.

The American Committee reported that in a number of cases, their attempts to ship to ship the arms back to the donor had resulted in returned deliveries. Presumably the donors had died, or moved leaving no forwarding address. They decided to dispose of these arms locally and in their accounting figures the Committee reported that 36 cases of rifles and shotguns were sold to Francis Bannerman for $986, which suggests that they were not worth much. Sale of pistols and revolvers to J.F.Galef Inc. of New York City yielded $6149, suggesting that either a good many more handguns were disposed of, or that they were worth more.

There remained two crates, #145 and #146, that, for some reason, were not included in the original shipment. I have the manifests of these, which give some idea of the quantities in a crate, and the often incomplete details of the donor’s name and address. The question arose of whether these should be shipped back separately.

Charles Suydam Cutting of the American Committee, while admitting that the arms already received were a ‘small percentage of the total sent abroad’ suggested that the costs of doing so would be disproportionate (the American Committee had already paid the original consignment’s shipping charges) and that these arms should be sold locally and the proceeds given to a veteran’s organisation or a youth cadet organisation.

A civil servant minuted “The difficulties involved in the return of these weapons is clear from the pathetically incomplete list of names and addresses attached to the N.Y. [consul’s] letter.”

One of the staff at the Consulate wrote: “The Consul-General and I agree that it would be a complete waste of effort to go through all the process again of returning these last few weapons, particularly since we confirmed that a large number of those who lent weapons to the Committee for the Defense of British Homes did not expect them back in the first place, and certainly not now that the so-called final shipment has been received and despatched. It is also extremely difficult to dispose of pistols and revolvers since State laws prevent them being sent through the post or through the railway express without all sorts of permits and permissions, and I notice that the majority of weapons still at Weedon are either pistols or revolvers.”

The main file dealing with the return shipment remains to be found (if it still exists).

There is also another file dealing with a late enquiry on the subject in 1955.

 

[Absalom]

Mk VII:

That is marvellous stuff. This is the first real information I've seen on this topic.

It would be interesting to find out more about actually deploying these once in Britain. The mention of Weedon indicates that at the British end the Army did get involved in the process at some point; at least the guns ended up there. Since I suspect many of these guns did not fit any standard pattern, and in likely obsolete calibers like the Krag and Remington mentioned, they were probably quickly retired from service, if issued to anyone at all, once the immediate danger to have to "fight on the beaches, ....fight on the landing grounds, ...fight in the fields and in the streets, ...fight in the hills" (per W.C. ) had passed.

 

[Mk VII]

A larger portion of the more obsolescent and non-standard caliber ones seem to have gone to the Home Guard. Some of the more useful types seem to have gone to SOE for use in occupied Europe.

 

[Hondo44]

The Civilian purchasing comm cleaned out the Colt inventory of handguns at the time. Several brand new or almost new Colt single actions have showed up in possession of families whose ancestors were members of, or coordinated with the SOE like the French underground.

They're very proud of their American Cowboy guns.

 

[Hondo44]

Not exactly the same thing. There was a lack of Webleys because the government was driving Webley into the ground back then (and finally succeeded in the end).

Whatever the reason, the result as Muley Gil describes, was the same.
It's just that the British reason was more egregious being politically motivated and stupid.

 

[Kurusu]

Whatever the reason, the result as Muley Gil describes, was the same.
It's just that the British reason was more egregious being politically motivated and stupid.

And that was exactly my point.