British Constabulary Revolver

D

Doc Hoy

New member
Picked this thing up on the Gunbroker for 25.00 plus shipping (ten bucks)

The revolver is marked "British Constabulary"

The revolver is complete and appears to function pretty close to normal.

But if you look close at the photo, you can see the crack in the frame just forward of the hammer.





I do not intend to get it back to shootable condition but I want to get a good gunsmith to repair the frame.

It is a .38 which was build sometime around 1880.

The revolver is too small for the .38 Special case but in terms of diameter the case fits perfectly.

This is double action revolver which has an odd way of locking up. When the hammer is drawn back to full cock the hand and bolt lock the cylinder in battery. When the trigger is pulled to fire the weapon, the cylinder can move freely until the trigger is pulled back to about the half cock position. Then the bolt moves into the frame opening and stops the cylinder in battery. It may be that the half cock detent on the hammer is rubbed off. But the revolver really acts confidently.
 
Last edited:
Coupla additional remarks on this revolver

It is a dead ringer for a British Constabulary Revolver manufactured by Swinfen sometime around 1880. There is an "HM" inside an oval on the right side of the frame which is absent on photos of this style revolver I have seen. I can not find the serial number.

The revolver appears to be complete with the exception of a lanyard ring which is present in some of the photos of other revolvers.

This one is nickel plated but not all BCRs were plated.

The action has a strange way of locking up.

The photo I included shows the rest position of the hammer. Note that it appears not to e all the way forward and this appears to be right since if it were, it would contact the primer of the round in battery. The hammer is resting against some sort of positive stop to prevent accidental discharge from bumping the hammer.

In this position the cylinder turns freely. The bolt and hand are both withdrawn. There is no bolt ring on the cylinder.

when the trigger is about half way through it's travel.

I could not find a serial number on the revolver.
 
Last edited:
I removed the grip from the revolver

I am impressed. The grip is made of ebony or some other such very dark, very hard wood. It appears not to be colored unless it was carefully colored over every surface, even the rough unfinished surfaces under the frame.

The grip frame is marked with "MB" under the grip.

This does not appear to be a cheaply made revolver, but I stand by to be corrected on that score.

More reading to do.
 
"British Constabulary" was a name used on Belgian revolvers. If you look on the rear of the cylinder, you might find an oval marking with the letters, E L G, the Liege proof mark.

My opinion is that you would be better off NOT having that gun repaired. The reason is that broken it is obvious that it should not be fired, where if it is repaired, someone might try to fire it and be injured.

Also, that frame is cast iron; it really can't be welded and would have to be brazed; the odds are high that anyone trying to repair it will totally destroy it.
Call it an interesting paperweight.

Jim
 
James...

As you say, the proof mark is there.

I am going to have it looked at by a guy who has good knowledge of antiques

I think it is likely he will tell me as you did not to repair the frame.
 
Yes I think so...

And I also think I inaccurately said the revolver was manuf by Swinfen, but distributed is correct.
 
Looks very similar to the various "Bulldogs" I've had over the years.

Doc - I'm thinking it was on Proofhouse (may be wrong) where there were Belgium proof marks - or you could Google it. I have a Colt clone that was made in Belgium in 32 WCF that was my Great-uncle's - I was at least able to date it somewhat as if I remember correctly, the proof on it made it a post 1893 (or similar date). You might check that out and see if you can locate the proofs that are on your pistol - at least give you a pre or post date era.
 
Wrought iron, IIRC, is very brittle and should never be used in a pressure containment mode.

Ok for fences and patio furniture, but not guns.

I could be mistaken.

(Edit: See posts 11 and 13; I was mistaken.)

I agree with James K, a faux "repair" could lead to some future owner trying something stupid.
 
Last edited:
Wrought iron, IIRC, is very brittle and should never be used in a pressure containment mode.

Ok for fences and patio furniture, but not guns.
Click to expand...

Wrought iron is malleable and can be worked and welded, cast is brittle and cannot. Colt revolver frames were made out of wrought iron up until the smokeless period.
 
The caliber is more than likely .380 ( not 380 ACP ) British. A popular European round based on the 38 Colt.
 
Last edited:
Looked it up, and Hawg Haggen is correct that wrought iron was used in early firearms, such as using several rods and hooping and welding them together to form an early "barrel."

Bronze seems to have been safer to use, and more commonly used, prior to steel.

"Malleable" cast iron was commonly used, not too long ago, to make engine blocks and cylinder heads. Most cast irons are not "malleable" cast, and are more brittle than wrought iron.

Sorry for any veer, but I found this interesting. I still wonder what metal was actually used to make the OP's revolver.
 
Wrought iron was more expensive than cast iron, so the cheap guns were usually cast. I don't know of any non-destructive test to determine the character of the metal in that revolver.

Jim
 
Doc - the nice thing is that these are small and really display nice . . . keep making those nice display cabinets - you can fit a lot of 'em in one! :D
 
Cartridge

The caliber is more than likely .380 ( not 380 ACP ) British. A popular European round based on the 38 Colt.
Click to expand...
I cannot find a ".380 British" cartridge (not in Hoyem, not in Datig, not in There is the .380-200 which was a British version of the .38 S&W aka the .38 Colt New Police. Is that the cartridge being referred to? It was a common chambering in pistols of this sort.
The caliber is nominally .362".
It could be the ".380 Revolver" originating in 1868 and similar to the .38 Short Colt (and to the .38 S&W). Caliber is nominally .375.

Pete
 
My error, it is not labeled the 380 British, only the 380 Short and Long Revolver cartridge. Cartridges of the World, 10 Edition, revised, page 312.
 
I don't think the OP cares about ammo since the frame is cracked, but the old .380 revolver ammo can be made from .38 Short or Long Colt, .38 Special or .357 by trimming the case to .70" and thinning the rim from the front to headspace properly.

Jim
 
The big problem is bullets. The .380 revolver cartridges used a heeled bullet, and I don't know of anyone making molds for such these days.

Years ago a friend who was into all things British managed to gloam himself an early but relatively good condition double action in .380 Long by.... Tranter? Webley & Pryse? Exact make escapes me, but it was British and overwrought in a very Victorian fashion.

Nominally they were supposed to be about .372-.375 bore diameter, but this one was a lot closer to .380 due to years of age and wear. It was probably oversized to begin with given that it still had passable rifling in much of the bore.

He decided he wanted to reload for it just to try it out, and asked for my help since at that time he wasn't a reloader.

First we tried hollow skirt LWCs. It seemed like they were expanding enough to engage the rifling, but they were still tumbling like mad, and with no grease grooves, bore fouling became a real issue.


The next step was to try casting something more appropriate. We didn't have a hollow base mold in anything near the correct caliber, so we ended up casting pure lead 255-gr. bullets originally intended for .38-55 black powder cartridge rifle (think BIG grease grooves). They came out of the mold at something like .3755, IIRC.

We shortened them and cut a shank using the lathe and ended up with bullets around 170-180 grains. Very labor intensive, and until we got the hang of it, we ruined more than we created.

We hoped that the soft lead would upset enough to make up for the difference when they were fired.

Big. Fat. Failure.

It was pretty evident from a couple of recovered bullets that they were simply skidding down the bore and not upsetting.

So, we tried shortening the bullets and drilling a BIG, DEEP hollow in the ass end. I think those bullets ended up in the 140-gr. range because we chewed them out so much.

But, that was the ticket. Accuracy at 25 yards was still in the 20 to 30 inch range, but we could get all of the shots on the paper. Usually. :)

At 5 yards it was in the 4 to 6 inch range, which I found to be quite surprising, but on examining a couple of the bullets that we recovered from the trap, it was looking as if the skirt was blowing out unevenly when it left the bore and that was throwing the bullets for a curve.

It was a fun exercise, but man we wasted a lot of time on it!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top