Webley ID?

D

dbuffington

New member
Hi Folks!

Once again, someone has brought an interesting gun to my office …

Webley1.JPG


Webley2.JPG


Please forgive the quickie photos. Here are a few details:

- Serial Number 12113

- The caliber marking on the frame is "455/476". The cylinder is marked "476".

- Other marks include:
- ENGLAND
- WEBLEY PATENTS
- Webley winged bullet stamp
- "WG" TARGET MODEL

Also, the backstrap is inscribed:
CAPT. GLYN GRENADIER GUARDS

Any help identifying -- or directing me to reliable references -- would be very welcome.

Thanks!
Dave
 
J

Jim Watson

New member
WG stands for Webley Green, a very refined version of the Webley & Scott British Army sidearm. A friend here has one and it gives up nothing to classic era Colt and S&W revolvers.

There is an article about them at:
http://www.nrvoutdoors.com/WG1894/WG1894.htm
and you can google up listings of WG Army and Target revolvers for sale.

The owner's name and regiment are a real treat.
Captain Glyn is shown as a member of the Grenadier Guards Club in 1907 and 1912 although I was unable to find his service history without joining the genealogy site that mentioned it.
 
M

Mike Irwin

Staff
I've seen Webley Greens going for the better part of $3,000 at shows.

Hard to tell exact condition, but that one appears to be in pretty good shape.

I suspect that it would fetch a pretty penny.
 
D

dbuffington

New member
Hi Folks!

> WG stands for Webley Green, a very refined version of the Webley & Scott British Army
> sidearm.

So, is it a Model WG? Or a Model 1896 given the WG treatment?

> A friend here has one and it gives up nothing to classic era Colt and S&W revolvers.

I haven’t had a chance to fire this one, but I’d agree with that assessment. The fit and finish is outstanding.

> Captain Glyn is shown as a member of the Grenadier Guards Club in 1907 and 1912 although
> was unable to find his service history without joining the genealogy site that mentioned it.

Which genealogy site?

> Hard to tell exact condition, but that one appears to be in pretty good shape.

Very good shape. I’d say the blue is 80 percent is better, mainly holster wear on the barrel, and everything works smoothly and positively.

Thanks!
Dave
 
M

mapsjanhere

New member
Dave, officers in pre-WWI armies usually bought their own sidearms in the official ordinance caliber. So Webley manufactured "high grade" guns based on the official army model for the private market. How closely your gun relates to the 1896 model needs an expert.
 
T

T. O'Heir

New member
That'd be ORDNANCE. However, there was no 'usually' about it. If you got commissioned, you bought all of your kit.
Didn't have to be in an official chambering either. Recommended, of course. Winnie Churchill carried an M96 at Omdurman, in 1898.
 
W

Webleymkv

New member
So, is it a Model WG? Or a Model 1896 given the WG treatment?
Click to expand...

It would be a Model WG as Webley, to my knowledge, denoted their revolvers with Marks rather than years. In 1896, the official Gov't-issued revolver would have been the Webley Mk. II which was adopted in 1895.

Also, the 455/476 marking denotes that the revolver can fire either the older .476 Enfield cartridge (the standard issue cartridge for the Enfield Mk. II revolver which was replaced by the Webley Mk. I in 1887) or the then-new .455 Webley Mk. I cartridge (despite the difference in nomenclature, both cartridges use .455" diameter bullets). It is worthy of mention that should you choose to fire this revolver, you should not do so with new-made commercial .455 Webley ammunition.

You see, commercial .455 Webley ammo is loaded to Mk. II (cordite) specifications, but the Mk. II cartridge was not introduced until 1897. The Webley Mk. IV, which was adopted in 1899 and not to be confused with the later .38 caliber Mk. IV, was specifically beefed up for the Mk. II cartridge, and even it is marginal for modern smokeless ammo. Personally, I would not fire smokeless ammo in anything but a Webley Mk. V or Mk. VI (adopted 1913 and 1915 respectively). As it seems your revolver was manufactured in 1896 (prior to the introduction of the Mk. II cartridge and the corresponding improvements of the Mk. IV, V, and VI revolvers), I recommend it be fired only with black powder handloads.
 
B

bdl2176

New member
Captain Arthur St. Leger Glyn

Hi Dave

I've sent you a private email concerning your query. Let me know if it arrives safely. I think you'll be surprised!

Kind regards

Brian
 
L

lewwallace

New member
I know this an old post but had to comment. WG DOES NOT stand for Webley Green!! This a misnomer seemingly perpetuated ad infinitum! The model WG is WEBLEY GOVERNMENT! Green was a designer/gun smith working for them and has been attributed to the guns design when in fact he merely made improvements to the working mechanisms. I too made this mistake till my study and collecting lead me to the facts. I have 7 Webley Governments in my collection!
 
Last edited:
9

9x18_Walther

New member
Webley Revolvers by Gordon Bruce and Christian Reinhart sums up the naming pretty well. I don't think this book is being published anymore.

During the period under review, Edwinson Charles Green was a well-known gunmaker with establishments in both Cheltenham and Gloucester. He had certainly designed improvements to firearms and also claimed the design of the bridle, or stirrup, latch in 1883. He contested its origins in correspondence published in The Field newspaper (25 may 1889), from which it may be assumed that there were differences of opinion between himself and the Webley Company. In view of this evidence, it seems unlikely that the Webley name would be so closely linked with that of Mr. Green on weapons produced at the time. Furthermore, no patent for a stirrup latch has been traced under his name, although the Webley company secured protection for the device in March 1885 (No. 4070)."
 
M

Mike Irwin

Staff
Lew Wallace is correct, it stands for Webley Government, but it's one of those things that has just sort of... happened... over the years, to the point where Webley-Green is likely more recognized that the proper nomenclature.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top