webley 1892 loads

[ehsa]

When checking the Cylinder Bores, did you use the Ball you had 'Slugged'? Or a fresh .459 Ball?

You have chambered ( if not fired, ) a usual .45 Colt Cartridge? And, it's over all length did not prevent your Cylinder from rotating?

( .45 Colt OAL usually being about 1.6 inches, so...given the head space or Rim thickness, it sounds like it's Bullet would not protrude out of the front of the Cylinder ).

the rims of 45 colt ammo fit with no alteration needed. i have not fired any ammo thru this revolver as i worried i would damage or destroy the weapon.the 45 ammo i tried was georgia arms 45 colt with 230 grain jacketed bullet rated at 900 fps.also winchester and ultra max cowbow 45 colt loads with 250 lead bullets.the georgia arms ammo fit with no problem.i went out in the yard and cocked the hammer to rotate the cylinder thru all the chambers with no stoppage with the georgia ammo. the cowboy loads would sometimes stop the cylinder from turning. it seems even the georgia bullet are marginal at best. never the less with deeper seating of the bullets they would all work but i do not think it would be safe.also i did use the same ball so tomorrow i will reslug the barrel.john

[w30wcf]

The Winchester cowboy ammo is rated at 750 f.p.s. which is ballistically the same as the .45 Webley. The Ultramax is rated at 800 f.p.s. so, likely the pressure is a bit higher but still below the SAAMI max of 13000 for the 45 Colt.

The original smokeless velocity was around 850 f.p.s.

It could be that the variations in rim thickness might be causing the cylinder not to turn.

w30wcf

[Oyeboten]

the rims of 45 colt ammo fit with no alteration needed. i have not fired any ammo thru this revolver as i worried i would damage or destroy the weapon.the 45 ammo i tried was georgia arms 45 colt with 230 grain jacketed bullet rated at 900 fps.also winchester and ultra max cowbow 45 colt loads with 250 lead bullets.the georgia arms ammo fit with no problem.i went out in the yard and cocked the hammer to rotate the cylinder thru all the chambers with no stoppage with the georgia ammo. the cowboy loads would sometimes stop the cylinder from turning. it seems even the georgia bullet are marginal at best. never the less with deeper seating of the bullets they would all work but i do not think it would be safe.also i did use the same ball so tomorrow i will reslug the barrel.john

That exercise will also help you decide what brand of .45 Colt Brass to get for doing your own Loadings.

'Starline' is probably fine also, Brass wise.

There are also 'Trailboss' loads for .45 Colt, which would likely be entirely safe and sane for your Webley, and you could do a few 'googles' on that to find out more.

Trailboss is made to be used in ertwhile Black Powder Cartridges, and is fairly weak propellant compared to many 'Smokelss' kinds, and people like it for it being bulky and easy to safely load to gentle recoil and performance, so, it could likely be loaded in .45 Colt to be right on the money with the original BP Performance and pressure of the .455 Webley Cartridge...and I expect it actually develops lower pressure than a good grade of BP.

So, it might make for some pleasant 'Plinking' andpleasure Shooting Loads, with super easy clean up and no worries about pressure issues.

[Ballistics in Scotland]

something else. in the trigger guard behind the trigger at the very back there is something there comming down from the back of the trigger guard that looks like a small trigger. john

That is normal. It in effect is a kind of tiny auxiliary trigger, or sear, for single action. The main trigger acts upon it, and the top of the main trigger acts on the pawl in the front of the hammer for double action. It is a good system, for that sear is lighter and has about the same weight on each side of its pivot, and so is less likely to jar off if dropped. There is no undercut notch to break off, as it can in Colts etc., and they get out of the compromise between single and double action form for the same point on the hammer. I believe only the Webley-Wilkinson and the earlier solid-frame Webleys (like most other people's) had it. Here it is on the French M1873 ordnance revolver.

For your only Webley, you chose about the best of the lot.

[ehsa]

That exercise will also help you decide what brand of .45 Colt Brass to get for doing your own Loadings.

'Starline' is probably fine also, Brass wise.

There are also 'Trailboss' loads for .45 Colt, which would likely be entirely safe and sane for your Webley, and you could do a few 'googles' on that to find out more.

Trailboss is made to be used in ertwhile Black Powder Cartridges, and is fairly weak propellant compared to many 'Smokelss' kinds, and people like it for it being bulky and easy to safely load to gentle recoil and performance, so, it could likely be loaded in .45 Colt to be right on the money with the original BP Performance and pressure of the .455 Webley Cartridge...and I expect it actually develops lower pressure than a good grade of BP.

So, it might make for some pleasant 'Plinking' andpleasure Shooting Loads, with super easy clean up and no worries about pressure issues.

thank you for the tip about trail boss. for those 45 colt cases do the bullets need to be seated down on the trail boss powder and should i use a card wad to protect the base of the bullet.john

[w30wcf]

John,
I have used Trailboss in the .45 Colt and it works well. The bullet should be seated to the standard length....crimped in the crimp groove. Trailboss was designed to be a bulky powder so that a case could not accidentally be double charged.

Presently my favorite .45 Colt powder for cowboy loads is Titegroup.

Hodgdon Powder has online reloading data....
http://www.hodgdonreloading.com/data/pistol

Desperado bullets is a great source for bullets.
http://cowboybullets.com/45-Caliber_c_11.html
You can purchase 100 bullets to try.

w30wcf

[Oyeboten]

thank you for the tip about trail boss. for those 45 colt cases do the bullets need to be seated down on the trail boss powder and should i use a card wad to protect the base of the bullet.john

I think you can safely and happily throw away all those cardboard 'Wads'...they have no place really in any Revolver Cartridges, unless you are making up Shot Shells.

There is no need to protect the base of the Bullet for any Black Powder era Revolver, or for any other Revolver either...that sort of thing is only for very high velocity Cartridges...and even then, it is not necessarily needed unless striving for the last word in accuracy over long distance.

You would do best to refer to Trailboss' own Loading Tables for .45 Colt in order to determine what range of Powder Charge for what Bullet weight ( assuming a usual Lead Bullet, which is the only kind your Webley really was meant for ).

I do not believe the Trailboss Propellant fills the Case as Black Powder would, so, there is going to be some 'Loading Density', or Air Space between Propellant and Bullet Base.

Bullet would seat to normal depth as per standard Loadings for whatever Bullet is in question.

I just went to Hodgdon's Web Site, and under "Hodgdon" Propellants, I factored in a 250 Grain Lead Bullet for .45 Colt, using "Trailboss", and it provides then the figures for various Loadings/Pressures/Performance with that Bullet.

Viz

http://www.hodgdonreloading.com/data/pistol

4 simple steps, just elect the appropriate check box for each step, and it gives you the loading Table for those factors.


Their max loading with a 250 Grain Lead Bullet, is rated to 12,700 PSI.

I epect the late 1800s Black Powder Loadings for the .455 Webley or the .45 Colt or for 44 or 45 anything Revolver, were often enough running around 13,000 to 14,000 PSI, ( particularly with some of the better "Sporting Powders' of the Day)... and,"SAAMI" for .45 Colt remains at 14,000 today...so, very friendly then.

"SAAMI" Chart

http://www.lasc.us/SAAMIMaxPressure.htm

'Trailboss' is widely celebrated and used, and is a mild and very friendly Propellant, and probably ideal for any of the old BP Cartidge Arms, when one wishes to load for them for pleasure Shooting with no worries about being hard on them.

Much easier clean up also, ( one swipe with a Bronze or even Nylon Bore Brush and some light Oil, then a cloth patch ) than Black Powder tends to be ( where one uses hot Soapy Water, dries all with a hand held Hair Drier, then Oils and puts away ).

[ehsa]

I think you can safely and happily throw away all those cardboard 'Wads'...they have no place really in any Revolver Cartridges, unless you are making up Shot Shells.

There is no need to protect the base of the Bullet for any Black Powder era Revolver, or for any other Revolver either...that sort of thing is only for very high velocity Cartridges...and even then, it is not necessarily needed unless striving for the last word in accuracy over long distance.

You would do best to refer to Trailboss' own Loading Tables for .45 Colt in order to determine what range of Powder Charge for what Bullet weight ( assuming a usual Lead Bullet, which is the only kind your Webley really was meant for ).

I do not believe the Trailboss Propellant fills the Case as Black Powder would, so, there is going to be some 'Loading Density', or Air Space between Propellant and Bullet Base.

Bullet would seat to normal depth as per standard Loadings for whatever Bullet is in question.

I just went to Hodgdon's Web Site, and under "Hodgdon" Propellants, I factored in a 250 Grain Lead Bullet for .45 Colt, using "Trailboss", and it provides then the figures for various Loadings/Pressures/Performance with that Bullet.

Viz

http://www.hodgdonreloading.com/data/pistol

4 simple steps, just elect the appropriate check box for each step, and it gives you the loading Table for those factors.


Their max loading with a 250 Grain Lead Bullet, is rated to 12,700 PSI.

I epect the late 1800s Black Powder Loadings for the .455 Webley or the .45 Colt or for 44 or 45 anything Revolver, were often enough running around 13,000 to 14,000 PSI, ( particularly with some of the better "Sporting Powders' of the Day)... and,"SAAMI" for .45 Colt remains at 14,000 today...so, very friendly then.

"SAAMI" Chart

http://www.lasc.us/SAAMIMaxPressure.htm

'Trailboss' is widely celebrated and used, and is a mild and very friendly Propellant, and probably ideal for any of the old BP Cartidge Arms, when one wishes to load for them for pleasure Shooting with no worries about being hard on them.

Much easier clean up also, ( one swipe with a Bronze or even Nylon Bore Brush and some light Oil, then a cloth patch ) than Black Powder tends to be ( where one uses hot Soapy Water, dries all with a hand held Hair Drier, then Oils and puts away ).

thank you very much for all that info i will put it to use.john

[ehsa]

I think you can safely and happily throw away all those cardboard 'Wads'...they have no place really in any Revolver Cartridges, unless you are making up Shot Shells.

There is no need to protect the base of the Bullet for any Black Powder era Revolver, or for any other Revolver either...that sort of thing is only for very high velocity Cartridges...and even then, it is not necessarily needed unless striving for the last word in accuracy over long distance.

You would do best to refer to Trailboss' own Loading Tables for .45 Colt in order to determine what range of Powder Charge for what Bullet weight ( assuming a usual Lead Bullet, which is the only kind your Webley really was meant for ).

I do not believe the Trailboss Propellant fills the Case as Black Powder would, so, there is going to be some 'Loading Density', or Air Space between Propellant and Bullet Base.

Bullet would seat to normal depth as per standard Loadings for whatever Bullet is in question.

I just went to Hodgdon's Web Site, and under "Hodgdon" Propellants, I factored in a 250 Grain Lead Bullet for .45 Colt, using "Trailboss", and it provides then the figures for various Loadings/Pressures/Performance with that Bullet.

Viz

http://www.hodgdonreloading.com/data/pistol

4 simple steps, just elect the appropriate check box for each step, and it gives you the loading Table for those factors.


Their max loading with a 250 Grain Lead Bullet, is rated to 12,700 PSI.

I epect the late 1800s Black Powder Loadings for the .455 Webley or the .45 Colt or for 44 or 45 anything Revolver, were often enough running around 13,000 to 14,000 PSI, ( particularly with some of the better "Sporting Powders' of the Day)... and,"SAAMI" for .45 Colt remains at 14,000 today...so, very friendly then.

"SAAMI" Chart

http://www.lasc.us/SAAMIMaxPressure.htm

'Trailboss' is widely celebrated and used, and is a mild and very friendly Propellant, and probably ideal for any of the old BP Cartidge Arms, when one wishes to load for them for pleasure Shooting with no worries about being hard on them.

Much easier clean up also, ( one swipe with a Bronze or even Nylon Bore Brush and some light Oil, then a cloth patch ) than Black Powder tends to be ( where one uses hot Soapy Water, dries all with a hand held Hair Drier, then Oils and puts away ).

thanks and a question is the .454 bullet right for this gun.groove diameter was 0.4535 as best as i could measure.it has 7 grooves and lands.john

[Ballistics in Scotland]

thanks and a question is the .454 bullet right for this gun.groove diameter was 0.4535 as best as i could measure.it has 7 grooves and lands.john

Yes, that seems fine. The 7 grooves (if, and it is a big if with early firearms, the rule about the number of grooves in invariable) would make it an 1892 or 1905 model, not a 1911. There was a period of around a year when a 1905 could have had the 1904 proofmarks from new, but the straight rib sounds like an 1892. It could be that 1892 barrels lingered in stock, or were available as an option for individuals or dealers who thought they looked better. I know I do.

The Army and Navy Cooperative Society catalogue of 1907, the fattest book I possess, doesn't include a Webley-Wilkinson, probably because as general outfitters for the military and empire-builders they were Wilkinson's competitor. They do include a WS New Army model which is the only Webley the line drawing (though not the text) describes as .455/.476. This one is close to identical to the ordinary Army model with lowered rib they offer, except that it has a square butt and the Army (possibly MkIII but more likely the almost identical MkIV at the time) has a round butt. Both have 6in. barrels, but the New Army is cheaper (£4 11 shilling instead of £5 5 shillings!) and weighs 2lb. 5oz. instead of 2lb. 8 oz. Both cost and weight would be explained by its having dropped the sideplate construction of the MkII and IV, just ahead of the same change in the later Webleys.

Incidentally Webley reintroduced that sideplate in the improved .38 they designed for the government in the 30s, which is actually an extremely good military pistol, when well made, for the non-pistol shooting specialist. It eliminated the transverse slots in the rear of the cylinder, and caught up (again) with the French requirement of the 1870s for all the lock parts to be examined, cleaned and oiled without any coming out.

At first the government produced it at its own factory as the Enfield No2 revolver - to the annoyance of Webley, who assumed they would get the contract. At that stage it was well made. But amid a flood of other urgent contracts, the work was contracted out to firms who had never made firearms before. Being short of people like Mr. Egginton...

...they employed unskilled or differently skilled labour, and Webley may have passed on only the sort of dimensional drawings people like Mr. Egginton had enabled them to work with. The result was a miserably bad pistol. The tale told was that they made the late ones double-action only to eliminate the hammer spur which caught inside vehicles. But I think the reason was that the contractors couldn't achieve a good single-action trigger pull.

Webley later sued them for £2250 development costs, lost, and the government paid them £1250, probably on the basis that they had made a fortune with their own ordinary MkIV .38 during the recent war, when Enfield No2 production hadn't kept up, and soldiers didn't like it.

[ehsa]

Yes, that seems fine. The 7 grooves (if, and it is a big if with early firearms, the rule about the number of grooves in invariable) would make it an 1892 or 1905 model, not a 1911. There was a period of around a year when a 1905 could have had the 1904 proofmarks from new, but the straight rib sounds like an 1892. It could be that 1892 barrels lingered in stock, or were available as an option for individuals or dealers who thought they looked better. I know I do.

The Army and Navy Cooperative Society catalogue of 1907, the fattest book I possess, doesn't include a Webley-Wilkinson, probably because as general outfitters for the military and empire-builders they were Wilkinson's competitor. They do include a WS New Army model which is the only Webley the line drawing (though not the text) describes as .455/.476. This one is close to identical to the ordinary Army model with lowered rib they offer, except that it has a square butt and the Army (possibly MkIII but more likely the almost identical MkIV at the time) has a round butt. Both have 6in. barrels, but the New Army is cheaper (£4 11 shilling instead of £5 5 shillings!) and weighs 2lb. 5oz. instead of 2lb. 8 oz. Both cost and weight would be explained by its having dropped the sideplate construction of the MkII and IV, just ahead of the same change in the later Webleys.

Incidentally Webley reintroduced that sideplate in the improved .38 they designed for the government in the 30s, which is actually an extremely good military pistol, when well made, for the non-pistol shooting specialist. It eliminated the transverse slots in the rear of the cylinder, and caught up (again) with the French requirement of the 1870s for all the lock parts to be examined, cleaned and oiled without any coming out.

At first the government produced it at its own factory as the Enfield No2 revolver - to the annoyance of Webley, who assumed they would get the contract. At that stage it was well made. But amid a flood of other urgent contracts, the work was contracted out to firms who had never made firearms before. Being short of people like Mr. Egginton...

...they employed unskilled or differently skilled labour, and Webley may have passed on only the sort of dimensional drawings people like Mr. Egginton had enabled them to work with. The result was a miserably bad pistol. The tale told was that they made the late ones double-action only to eliminate the hammer spur which caught inside vehicles. But I think the reason was that the contractors couldn't achieve a good single-action trigger pull.

Webley later sued them for £2250 development costs, lost, and the government paid them £1250, probably on the basis that they had made a fortune with their own ordinary MkIV .38 during the recent war, when Enfield No2 production hadn't kept up, and soldiers didn't like it.

i appreciate your good help and information.i ordered some bullets to try as recommended by forum member w30wcf a soft 250 grain .454 bullet at 8-9 brinnel. also i will try a low charge of trailboss to start mabey 3.8-4.0 grains. hopefully next week. a question looking at the revolver this morning of course the firing pin is retracted into the frame but when i push it forward with my thumb it still doesnt project thru the frame. to test it i dropped a lead pencil down the barrel eraser first.the gun was cocked and i pulled the trigger and the pencil was shot out of the barrel but with no great force.if i do that with my colt 45acp it will fly half way across the room.so i am hoping it is hitting hard enough.i am hoping my wife can mabey take some photos as she has a smart phone but we will see how that goes.john

[Ballistics in Scotland]

Do you mean pushing the hammer with the trigger pulled? The 1911 doesn't have to let a cylinder rotate, so it doesn't have to withdraw the firing-pin from the primer and prevent it from reaching the primer until the trigger is again in the fired position, as modern or nearly-modern revolvers do. The 1911 firing-pin is small and floating, so it is hurled forward at high velocity, perhaps higher than a revolver hammer.

I think that is enough to describe what you have described, and popping a primed but unloaded case should prove it. I suppose there is a remote chance that someone has filed down the front of the firing-pin if the revolver was used as a den ornament. If this is the case the tip could be built up with weld and the hammer rehardened, or a new pin could be made and silver soldered or threaded into a drilled hole.

[Oyeboten]

thanks and a question is the .454 bullet right for this gun.groove diameter was 0.4535 as best as i could measure.it has 7 grooves and lands.john

That should be fine.

And, Pure Lead I think would be ideal, and or, the softer ( or the lower the BR rating, ) the better.

Do you have any means of measuring the diameter of your Cylinder Bores?

One can usually just press a pure Lead Round Ball of slightly larger size, down in to the front of a Chamber, then push it out again from the rear, and, measure it fairly easily with a Micrometer or Verneer Caliper.

Although it is not always easy to obtain only a few round Balls of appropriate size, to do this, since one usually has to buy a whole box of them.

[ehsa]

Do you mean pushing the hammer with the trigger pulled? The 1911 doesn't have to let a cylinder rotate, so it doesn't have to withdraw the firing-pin from the primer and prevent it from reaching the primer until the trigger is again in the fired position, as modern or nearly-modern revolvers do. The 1911 firing-pin is small and floating, so it is hurled forward at high velocity, perhaps higher than a revolver hammer.

I think that is enough to describe what you have described, and popping a primed but unloaded case should prove it. I suppose there is a remote chance that someone has filed down the front of the firing-pin if the revolver was used as a den ornament. If this is the case the tip could be built up with weld and the hammer rehardened, or a new pin could be made and silver soldered or threaded into a drilled hole.

i just did what you ask i cocked the hammer pulled the trigger and lowered the hammer then pushed on it and am delighted to say the firing pin projected out there like it should.before i didnt hold the trigger back.thank you so much.john

[ehsa]

That should be fine.

And, Pure Lead I think would be ideal, and or, the softer ( or the lower the BR rating, ) the better.

Do you have any means of measuring the diameter of your Cylinder Bores?

One can usually just press a pure Lead Round Ball of slightly larger size, down in to the front of a Chamber, then push it out again from the rear, and, measure it fairly easily with a Micrometer or Verneer Caliper.

Although it is not always easy to obtain only a few round Balls of appropriate size, to do this, since one usually has to buy a whole box of them.

i have the lead balls for my 44 cap and ball revolvers they measure 0.4590 and are what i used to slug the bore. i had dropped them in the cylinder and they fall through and stick at the end of the cylinder with half the ball hanging out. just a tap and they fall out. i didnt measure them at that point though.i have some 50 cal muzzle loading balls somewhere and i believe they measure 0.490. so i will get the 44 balls and measure one here in l little bit.john

[ehsa]

i got a ball which measured 0.4585 and dropped it thru the cylinder.sticks out about half way. but a light tap with a dowel rod and it fell out.so little pressure to do this that the measurement did not change at all.john

[Wayne Smith]

Are you in north western NC? If so, PM Blammer - he is just outside Ashville (by the Airport) and does great photography. Get together with him and you will have photos to post.

[ehsa]

Are you in north western NC? If so, PM Blammer - he is just outside Ashville (by the Airport) and does great photography. Get together with him and you will have photos to post.

am some miles to the west perhaps an hour and 15 min away thanks for the tip.john

[w30wcf]

ehsa,
If the throats in the cylinders are .458" there will be some blowby using a bullet smaller than that. The softer Desperado bullets may work aok but you might still get some leading in the forcing cone. I guess that's why the Brits used hollow base bullets that would expand out to fill and seal in the oversized throats.

An .06" poly disc under the bullet would pretty much eliminate any blowby and resultant throat leading .

Ballistics In Scotland,
Great info as usual.

w30wcf

[Ballistics in Scotland]

ehsa,
If the throats in the cylinders are .458" there will be some blowby using a bullet smaller than that. The softer Desperado bullets may work aok but you might still get some leading in the forcing cone. I guess that's why the Brits used hollow base bullets that would expand out to fill and seal in the oversized throats.

An .06" poly disc under the bullet would pretty much eliminate any blowby and resultant throat leading .

Ballistics In Scotland,
Great info as usual.

w30wcf

Thank you for that kind remark. That poly disc would have the same benefit as well-fitting card, and the same possible problem if it was combined with a hollow base bullet. The low-velocity Webley will cope with soft lead bullets better than most revolvers, and as long as it is soft, there is every chance that a flat-based bullet will expand to seal the throat.

It sounds like it is all systems go for the OP.