https://www.bing.com/videos/search?q=webley+mk+vi+review&&view=detail&mid=BBDABE782C5C914D7ADABBDABE782C5C914D7ADA&&FORM=VRDGAR
Just pretend he's using a Prideaux speedloader.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BZnWx97HwD4
I suppose I shall have to bring along my setup sometime and use it in the Expansion match ... ;D ...
(https://imagizer.imageshack.com/v2/781x725q90/923/DAmjde.jpg)
(https://imagizer.imageshack.com/v2/1250x627q90/924/qIFgdk.jpg)
(https://imagizer.imageshack.com/v2/1000x697q90/921/G9TaH4.jpg)
(The Pritchard-Greener bayonet and the Prideaux loaders are all reproduction ....)
Where do you get Repro Prideaux?
Every pistol needs a bayonet. :D
Slim
I began to modify this reply when no one had posted a response, before I had finished Ratlesnake Jack posted his reply below.
My original post referenced the Main Match rules where speed loaders are prohibited, not the EEM rules where I believe he's correct, they would be allowed.
I first thought Rattlesnake Jack was talking about using his loaders in the muster main that would have run afoul of the rules. Since they weren't invented until 1914 I guess that wouldn't have worked in any case.
I had suggested using the American U. S. Navy issue 1889 speed loaders in the main match and it was pointed out to me that the rules prohibited this ???
Unlike his loaders, I don't think anyone makes a reproduction of the 1889 loaders.
There used to be a specific exception to that rule for EEM side matches, allowing the use of period-correct loading devices ... which is all that I had in mind for possible use of this kit ...
Has that exception been eliminated? (I must say that, even as a Staff Officer, I can't keep up with the rule changes ... which to my mind means there are too many ongoing changes ... or we at very least need an up-to-date and easily accessible place to access the current rules!)
Quote from: Drydock on March 09, 2019, 03:33:21 AM
Where do you get Repro Prideaux?
https://www.worldwidearms.com/product/m410-455-prideaux-quick-loader-199 (https://www.worldwidearms.com/product/m410-455-prideaux-quick-loader-199)
These are presented as if they are originals (at least that is certainly the implication of their wording... and their price is quite high, accordingly ...) but, based on the markings and a few other factors, I am convinced these are merely quite good reproductions ... and I believe these people are actually well aware of that. As you likely know, original Prideaux loaders tend to go for at least $400 or $500 and are very rare, yet this outfit lists these at £125 and they seem to have plenty. Anyway, when I contacted them a few years ago, with an indication that I was of the view these are reproductions but would consider paying £125 for
two loaders (still way too much, in my view, but this is the only source of any kind I have ever been able to locate, and I
wanted them ...) they respnded with a rather weak assertion that they believe they are originals, but also made a counteroffer to sell me two for £150, postage included ... which I took them up on.
(Judge for yourself just how sincere they are in their belief in the originality of these loaders ... ;) ...)
Nope, no handgun loading aids for the Victorian match. The experimental and limited issue from that time would make your head explode. Rather than try to regulate that, best to just not allow them. The EEM however, is a different issue altogether, and period loaders are certainly allowed, nay, even encouraged!
Jack, what do you thing the "GAF Regulations" child board is? ;D And the rules have really changed very little, however, the NAMES of things have changed repeatedly, as some folks will insist on being confused . . .
Chuck, before posting the above I read through everything I could find on the child board, and on the GAF Website, looking specifically for the EEM exception for loading aids I was recalling, so I could quote it ... but could not find it anywhere ... :-\
Actually, Bat, the Prideaux loader was first patented in the United States in early 1894 ... a year or two before that in the United Kingdom -
(https://imagizer.imageshack.com/v2/960x800q90/922/DwKyAi.jpg)
Jack, look under "Expansion Era class structure" it's a bit down the list. EE is really Jerrys problem child! Didn't you use my MK V with moon clips last year? Damn that was fun.
MOD authorized the Prideaux for use in the 2nd Boer war as I recall. I wish someone would make a reasonable one: The few I've handled struck me as slicker than most modern speedloaders.
As an aside peeve: last year in "Handgunner" Mike Venturino (who has been oddly off lately . . .) commented how he thought the M1917 revolvers were superior to the Webley in the Great War, as they could be loaded with half moon clips, while the Webley HAD to be loaded one round at a time. There are other points that could be argued, but NOT that one, dammit!
Thanks Jack, you learn something new every day here.
US 1889 Patent
Nothing new under this or any sun! I'll bet folks were thinking of this as soon as the 1st S&W #3 rolled off the line.
Thanks for pointing out where it is, Chuck ... I looked under the "GAF expansion Era Match" heading in the child board ... after failing to find it there it did not occur to me it would be hidden under the "EEM class structure" heading ... also wasn't able to locate anything about it on the GAF website ...
I don't recall using your Mark V with moon clips. But I'm sure I have used my Prideaux loaders in the EEM before, and was set to do so again last year ... although I didn't get very far into the match. My rifle began to refuse to chamber rounds, so I didn't finish, even with a second attempt to run it. (This happened even though I had chamber-checked every single cartridge in advance of the match and, after the first abortive start, went back to my vehicle and chamber-checked them all again!)
Since we are talking about Webley's and far too many of them were shaved for .45 acp :'( :'(, does anyone shoot one? What do you shoot out of it? IIRC the .45 auto rim is actually too powerful for a Webley. Will the .45 Schofield cowboy loads work?
I have a bunch of martial .455 Webleys, Colts and Smiths, a few in original condition and others that have been shaved or rebated for .45 lc and a lone one for Schofeld?. As long as your lead bullet is .454 and loaded down to Webley pressures you should be ok. I shoot my Webleys and big .45 HE Smiths often. While I have a couple of .455 NS revolvers with decent trigger pulls I just like my .38 NS revolvers better. The .45 acp was successfully shot in shaved cylinders due to the undersized bullet which gave the excess pressure somewhere to go as opposed to blowing up the revolver. Still don't ever shoot ball .45 acp in them. Just to keep my .45 ammo somewhat organized I reload autorim brass for .454 Webley, my .45acp load is a universal load that works in my modern revolvers, 1911 autos and pcc's, my brass case .45 LC uses a 225/250 gr bullet for my Marlin rifles and nickel brass LC [and schofeld] for my revolvers is 200 gr [.452 or .454]. I've recently started back casting and have cast a bunch of the 265 gr hollow base pointy nose bullets and loaded these in my .455 brass. My unaltered Webleys like those.
Here are some of mine. A Metropolitan Police in .450, a Webley Green/Government in LC, a Webley Wilkinson 1910 in .45 AR and a Mk IV that was shaved but now has an unaltered .455 cylinder. Missing are my Mk I Navy, a Webley Wilkinson 1900, and my grail gun, a .455 Fosberry.
Nice collection!
I don't reload....is there anything off the shelf that is safe on a shaved Webley?
I would think that .45 acp target would be loaded down enough and be Webley safe, I don't know if there is such a thing as a commercial .45 AR target load. The other problem is the diameter of the bullet, .451 vs .454. That undersized bullet is not going to be particularly accurate in a .455 bbl. The simplest thing would be to buy some .455 components and prevale upon the kindness of a friend with a reloading set up to build some for you. You don't really need .455 dies, regular 45acp would work but you do need .454 bullets and a can of Bullseye, I use 4.0 gr.
45 Auto Rim (AR) 230 grain LEAD bullet loads are actually very close to Webley pressures, and can work in the MK V and VI. (V and VI have larger diameter cylinders) I have a shaved Webley MK V that I handload for, but I have used the above loads. BUt they must be lead bullet rounds! No JACKETED acp or AR is safe in any Webley. MK I-IV must be handloaded.
FYI the SAAMI for 45 AR is 15000 psi. AR LEAD rounds are rather less than this .455 Webley MK II Nitro-cellulose loadings service pressure were just under 14000, with Proof being around 18000. .45acp jacketed runs around 19000. (Note, these are standard rounds such as loaded by Remington. Specialty makers like CorBon and others may be loaded to higher pressures and should NOT be used)
The jacket friction and resistance to deformation is probably harder on any Webley than the simple pressure of the rounds. Common misconception: the "Ton" stamping on British arms is a reference to Service pressure, not Proof pressure. It's not an exact conversion, but multiply the ton number by 2300 and you'll get roughly the service pressure in psi. Yes, I know the imperial ton is 2240, but again, the conversion needs a fudge factor. The proof load is 1/3 again that number.
The Lee reload book has several .45 AR loadings listed with pressures below the .455 service pressure. If you find the 1st edition (Red) book it has a section for .455 Webley MK II, listing several common Alliant powders with pressure data for that short case. Unique, Red Dot and Herco seem well suited for this application.
Here is a picture of the ".455 Family" which I had in my personal arsenal in 2007 ... the family has been enlarged a fair bit since then, so I guess I should really get around to taking another "family portrait" ...
(https://imagizer.imageshack.com/v2/850x717q90/922/dkD804.jpg)
The revolvers in this photo are: left column, top to bottom - .450/.455 Webley R.I.C. New Model, .476 Mark II Enfield (documented NWMP revolver), .455/.476 Webley "W.G." Target Model, .455 Webley Mark V; right column, top to bottom - .455 S&W 2nd Model Hand Ejector (documented WWI Canadian government purchase), .455 Colt New Service, .455 "O.P." revolver (Spanish-made S&W clone, British WWI purchase for secondary issue), .455 Webley Mark VI (engraved private-purchase sidearm of a Lieutenant in the WWI Canadian Expeditionry Force).
If you happened to note that I called this my ".455 Family", you might be a bit confused by the ".476" calibere designation which crops up a few times in the above descriptions. In fact, despite the the differing nominal calibre designations of the 19th Century British breechloading service revolvers and their cartridges - i.e. ".450" (Adams revolvers), ".476" (Enfield revolvers) and .455" (Webley revolvers) - all of them were in actuality .455 calibre ...
Here are a few of the newer members of my .455 Family, added since the above group shot was taken -
(http://i73.photobucket.com/albums/i219/GrantRCanada/Webley%20and%20other%20revolvers/Adams/MyAdams02A.jpg)
The Adams (in three "Marks", i.e. models) was the first British metallic cartridge military service revolver, and was also the first standard-issue revolver of Canada's North-West Mounted Police from its founding in 1873. (This particular revolver is a commercial production example, and is thus referred to as a "Third Model" rather than as "Mark III".)
(https://imagizer.imageshack.com/v2/1000x634q90/924/ywcR4O.jpg)
Although Webley had been producing various models of double-action cartridge revolvers, as preferred by the British, for years, this is their first "top-break" model, first introduced in 1878.
(http://i73.photobucket.com/albums/i219/GrantRCanada/Webley%20and%20other%20revolvers/WGArmy_GaryD_02_sm2.jpg)
Despite the "Army" designation given to this model by Webley, it was not a "service revolver" model adopted by the British War Department. Rather, the designation was intended to convey the fact that it was chambered for the ".476' and ".455" military service revolver cartridges and that it would be a suitable revolver for private purchase by officers (who in fact were obliged to supply all of their own uniforms and kit, including weapons, at personal expense.
(https://imagizer.imageshack.com/v2/1000x583q90/922/5YYwv8.jpg)
This is one of two .455 Colt New Service revolvers I have added, both of the earliest model and manufactured in late 1899 or early 1900 (whereas the revolver in the above shot is a WWI-vintage revolver of the later configuration.) This particular revolver bears the "M&D" property marking of the Canadian Department of Militia and Defence, and is one of a batch purchased for Boer War service.
Looking thru this thread, I realized there is a common misconception here: one of the reasons .45 Auto hardball rounds are so hard on Webleys is that virtually all Webley throats are .449! This was a design rational of the British, who had a theory in the late 19th century that all velocity in a revolver was developed in the cylinder, thus a tight throat to maximized pressure utilization, with a larger groove diameter to minimize friction in the barrel.
True or not (not) it did help Cordite to burn more efficiently, and thus was never changed. Also makes an insistence on using .455 bullets rather useless. The need is for SOFT lead bullets, with .451 being just fine.
But shooting .451 Hardball in a .449 throated cylinder, at Proof pressures, is a VERY BAD idea! It is a testimony to the ruggedness of the Webley design, that Webley parts are not currently scattered across the landscape!
Drydock is quite correct - tight chamber throats were indeed a feature of British service revolvers of that era, and somehow the underlying theory he mentions does seem to work! For example, the standard bullet weight of the Enfield and Webley revolver loads was 265 grains, yet the specified propellant charge was only 18 grains of "rifled pistol powder" (a fine, high-grade black powder.) Compare this with the standard .45 Colt military load of 30 grains powder with a 250 grain bullet. Yet the British revolver loads developed similar velocities and striking power, because the added resistance of the tight throats ensures very efficient combustion of the powder charge, with comparatively little unburned powder.
Another critical feature of British service revolver ammunition was that all bullets were quite deeply hollow-based, ensuring efficient expansion to engage the rifling in the barrel ... i.e. bullet obturation alone was not relied upon.
(https://imagizer.imageshack.com/v2/1000x349q90/922/Ctb2Uj.jpg)
Such a hollow-base bullet design is best for use in the ".455 Family" of revolvers ... and I use that type of bullet in my loads -
(https://imagizer.imageshack.com/v2/600x542q90/924/s6YeOz.jpg)