Webley Revolver question

[Jack Flash]

This was my first shooting experience with a Webley revolver. Despite it's looks, I found the Webley a real pleasure to shoot, the big revolver has no recoil due to its size.

For me it felt like very much a point and shoot revolver, accuracy was excellent using Fiocchi's 262 Grain LRN ammo.

Though I don't own a Webley yet, I have began purchasing ammo and reloading supplies. One is definitely in my future. I really like the ones with the shorter barrels.

Due to this thread and others like it, I am now wanting a couple of Webleys to fill out my accumulation. I really like the looks of the Mark V but have heard the Mark VI is much more shootable.

 

[Baltimoreed11754]

I have a bunch and they are a great revolver. My WG has such a sweet trigger, it’s got a long pull though.

 

[Absalom]

.... I really like the looks of the Mark V but have heard the Mark VI is much more shootable.

I assume you are referring to the “bird’s head” style of the grip, without the shoulder. The Mk V is actually the one you’re least likely to find, because it was only produced for a couple of years 1913 to 1915, in the lowest numbers of any of these, when it was superseded by the Mk VI. Below my Mk III.

As for the grip style and barrel length, imagine a feel like shooting a Colt SAA, just a bit bulkier. The absence of the shoulder on the Mk II through V just means the gun rolls a bit in your hand. But since the .455 load isn’t exactly a .44 Magnum, the effect is neglegible.

The grip of the Mk VI with shoulder is a bit more “modern”.

PS: The Mk I did actually have a slight shoulder above the bird’s head. I don’t know whether that was possibly abandoned for the ease of production or why else.

 

[zeke]

Example of Mark I with the hump. Shot this once with very light loaded 45 ar.

 

[Jack Flash]

You see the Mark V on auction sites occasionally. It and of course the Mark VI had a strengthened cylinder for use with modern smokeless powder. My understanding is that many earlier Marks were refitted with the new cylinder. So I could possibly get a Boer War Mark IV (with however many *s) and have one to study and even shoot if I so desired.

Since the Brits were chronically deficient of side arms in The Great War, I would imagine many if not most of the earlier Marks got the improved cylinder and saw use in the war.

Even a Mark I would be fun to have, but I do like the bird's head grip of the Marks II - V. I've never shot one and would never expect to use one in a for real self-defense situation. All I know about shooting them is what I have seen on UTube.

 

[Absalom]

Since the Brits were chronically deficient of side arms in The Great War, I would imagine many if not most of the earlier Marks got the improved cylinder and saw use in the war.

I don’t think they needed to have the improved cylinders for that.

The important thing to keep in mind is that the .455 Webleys served concurrently, not consecutively. The Marks I through VI didn’t replace each other.

For example, the Mark IV is generally known as the “Boer War” iteration. It’s correct that it was first introduced in 1899 when the Second Boer War started, but by the time significant numbers of it made their way to SA, the “battlefield phase” of the war was largely over; the revolvers that saw use during it were mostly Marks I to III. My Mk III was issued to a Royal Artillery unit in 12/1899 and that unit was in SA by April 1900.

According to what Peter from SA told me once, the British “Instructions for Armourers” for 1931 still covered the Mk III, IV, and V, and the Army did not declare them obsolete until 1948