Webley mk iv

T

tangolima

New member
I got an old webley mk iv revolver for $250. It has noticeable end shake, and it was the first thing I needed to fix. I eliminated the end shake but it induced other problems; inadequate headspace and cylinder timing. I managed to fix them one at a time. The timing issue took me some time. I needed to file away metal off the hand a little at a time.

I was looking for a replacement hand in case I screwed up. Then I noticed something different about this revolver.

Its hand has 2 stages like colt revolvers, while all the replacement parts I could find has only 1 stage like s&w revolvers. The 2 stage hand makes the action move more smoothly, but it requires more fitting.

Its recoil shield totally blocks the extractor tip from contacting the frame. I could have fixed the end shake easily, without having to refit the action, if I could find the same kind of recoil shield. I couldn't. The one I ordered from numrich has a window in it, so it doesn't keep the extractor from hitting the frame.

Perhaps this revolver is an early model? Your input is much appreciated. Meanwhile, I am ready to test fire it after one more fix. The crown is nicked and I am recutting a new one.

I loved them webleys.

-TL
 
A Webley with the cylinder cut down for .45ACP went for over $500 at a local auction this June, here. Your $250 is a good deal, even if you have to work for it.

I'm partial to the Fiocchi ammo for these, but am looking to cast my own bullets and re-use the brass forever.
 
Mine is shooting 38 s&w and I am hand loading for it. Not fans of the 45acp conversion. Wouldn't mind getting one in the real 455 cal, legacy of wwi.

Part of the reason I picked this one up is to practice on it. I'm a student gun Smith. I feel pretty good to fix her up, possibly have saved her from being parted out. The bore is still in good shape. Ranging is dead on. I hope this old girl can shoot, like she used to, in Her Majesty's service.

-TL
 
No Webley Mk IV .38 that I know of, own, or have ever seen, uses a recoil shield without a central window. Either somebody has "rigged" these parts to work in your gun, or you possibly have a Khyber Pass copy.

Reedit: I just figured out what you meant by a two stage hand, like a Colt. Yes, that is correct only for an Enfield .38. Jim is right; I looked at the IPB too hastily and had a brain fart.

Pics would be VERY helpful.
 
Last edited:
Which Mk IV? There was a Government Mk IV, made by Webley, in .455 caliber, and a Webley Mk IV in .38 caliber. Some of the latter were purchased by the British government in WWII as a substitute standard due to scarcity of the standard Enfield No. 2.

AFAIK, neither of the Webleys uses a double step hand, but the Enfield No. 2 does. Is your revolver actually a Webley, or is it an Enfield? The guns are similar but not identical and few (if any) parts interchange.

Jim
 
Ah ha. I did consider it was an enfield, but I didn't dig further. The previous owner claimed it was a webley, and I tend to take his words. It is my first webley, or enfield, so I don't know any better.

It would make sense as all sources of replacement parts sell only 1 step hands, and they all say it was webley. I will dig further to see whether I have a webley or an enfield.

Thanks. I will post some photos later.

-TL
 
A Webley should say "Webley" on the frame and on the grips. An Enfield will say "No. 2" and be marked either by Enfield or with the Albion Motors (later Coventry Tool) trademark. The few made in Australia by Howard Auto Cultivators are so scarce they can be ignored.

Jim
 
By golly it is an enfield! I just looked up the schematics. I can tell for sure by the way the cylinder axial is pined to the frame.

But the enfield schematic still show the recoil shield with an window in the middle. I will look closely again at my revolver. Chances are the metal has fused/rusted together that the window just disappears.

Thanks gentlemen.

-TL
 
Last edited:
Originally posted by tangolima
Mine is shooting 38 s&w and I am hand loading for it.
Click to expand...

I also load .38 S&W for my own Webley Mk. IV. These revolvers were originally intended to shoot ammunition loaded with either 200 gr LRN or 178 gr FMJ bullets and, as such will shoot low with commercial 145 gr .38 S&W ammo. I also found that, in my Webley at least, Remington factory 145 gr LRN displayed accuracy that was mediocre at best despite my revolver having a near pristine bore (mine is a post-war police trade-in).

I have worked up a load using 200gr LRN bullets that displays much better accuracy in my revolver. If you would like, send me a PM and I'll share my loading data. I won't post the data on an open forum because it's about 50% above current maximums for .38 S&W (current data for this cartridge is held very low in deference to older, weaker revolvers that chambered it).
 
I also load .38 S&W for my own Webley Mk. IV. These revolvers were originally intended to shoot ammunition loaded with either 200 gr LRN or 178 gr FMJ bullets and, as such will shoot low with commercial 145 gr .38 S&W ammo. I also found that, in my Webley at least, Remington factory 145 gr LRN displayed accuracy that was mediocre at best despite my revolver having a near pristine bore (mine is a post-war police trade-in).
Click to expand...

WebleyMkV a number of years ago I had a W&S Mk IV commercial gun that came with two front sights of different heights; One was marked with "145 gr." and the other was (IIRC) marked "200gr." In addition to the two front sights, it had the finest finish of any gun I have ever seen, with parts not blued polished to a brilliant sheen.
 
Many of the commercial guns did come with two front sights.

Apparently in the post-WW I period the .38 S&W cartridge was fairly popular in Europe, and the standard American loading was with a 145-gr. or so bullet.
 
FWIW, the specified bore diameter for the Enfield No. 2 was .352". The groove depth was .005", with an odd number of grooves (7).

And the spec for the British issue ammo of the WWII era was a bullet diarmeter of .357. So the whole setup was for a bullet diameter equal to that of the .38 Special, not the .38 S&W.

In truth, those guns were never intended to be used for target practice; a "minute of German" accuracy would have been good enough.

Jim
 
gyvel said:
Tangolima, if the gun has a sideplate, it's an Enfield.
Click to expand...
Yeah. It does have a sideplate. I am pretty sure now I have an enfield, instead of a webley.

I took a closer look at the recoil shield. It does has a window in the middle. It just kinda fused with the frame.

-TL
 
James K said:
FWIW, the specified bore diameter for the Enfield No. 2 was .352". The groove depth was .005", with an odd number of grooves (7).

And the spec for the British issue ammo of the WWII era was a bullet diarmeter of .357. So the whole setup was for a bullet diameter equal to that of the .38 Special, not the .38 S&W.

In truth, those guns were never intended to be used for target practice; a "minute of German" accuracy would have been good enough.

Jim
Click to expand...
I measured mine with pin gauge. The land diameter is between 0.350" and 0.351". I'm going to use the 0.361" cast bullets from Missouri bullets.

-TL
 
"And the spec for the British issue ammo of the WWII era was a bullet diarmeter of .357. So the whole setup was for a bullet diameter equal to that of the .38 Special, not the .38 S&W."

Yet standard .38 S&W ammunition works just fine in them.

In the early days of World War II, during the Cash & Carry phase, the British contracted with American companies to provide several million rounds of .38 S&W ammo loaded with 200-gr. lead bullets.

The British had never placed a very high priority on handgun ammunition production, and thus were absolutely flat-footed when the war started.

Although the lead bullets were technically a violation of the Hague Accords, the British were forced to issue the ammo because that's all that they had.
 
The British never issued much handgun ammo, which is why there was so little surplus at the end of WWII. That resulted in things like converting .455 revolvers to .45 ACP using half moon clips.

The standard issue for a British serviceman armed with a revolver was 12 rounds, with another 12 rounds in unit supply. "Leftenant Tommy" got his 12 rounds and was told to get on with the war. Contrast that with the pistol-armed American soldier, who generally could draw as much .45 ACP as he wanted, and the minimum was a 50 round box.

One reason for the scarcity of pistol (revolver) ammo was that the British SMGs used 9mm, so the .380 and .455 were used only in revolvers. The British also had a trick of center punching or crimping the rims of 9mm ammo to use it in the .380 revolver. Punching (with the round set into a STEN barrel) could be a bit dangerous, but what the heck, so is war.

Jim
 
If the Enfield is like the Webley inside, the lockwork is very Python like. Filing down the hand doesn't help. You're supposed to stretch the hand and then adjust the top portion by filing.

If all comes to worse, get yourself some steel and make a new one. I did for one Colt revolver.
 
It is kinda like a python. But no I should shorten the hand, instead of stretching it. The cylinder has been set back to fix the end shake. The cylinder start rotating before the bolt clears. The top of the hand needs to filed to retard the cylinder timing.

-TL
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top