Printable View
A late .455 Smith and Wesson was in it, but doesn't fit well. Loose fit and the barrel is too long.
Some photos:
https://www.milsurps.com/images/impo...stuff023-2.jpg
https://www.milsurps.com/images/impo...stuff024-2.jpg
https://www.milsurps.com/images/impo...stuff027-3.jpg
https://www.milsurps.com/images/impo...stuff026-3.jpg
Don't know anything further. Insights would be most welcome!
Looks like it might fit a 1917 revolver. 5 inch?
It will probably be a perfect fit for a Webley Mark VI revolver
That holster is marked for the 292nd Company of the 40th Division, Army Service Corps - British Army.
http://www.1914-1918.net/asc.htm
Good info Niel.
Now jmoore has a valid reason to get another new gun! :thup:
Thanks, Amatikulu! Good link.
So 292 company was running supplies to the front for the 40th Division from April 1916 until the end of hostilities, if I read the secondary link to the 40th Division's history correctly.
---------- Post added at 03:10 PM ---------- Previous post was at 03:05 PM ----------
I reckon! Can't seem to keep a caliber modified Webley, and no good MkVI revolvers have turned up, lately. I've been running behind the price curve on those for too long! (I.e., too cheap to pony up for a good one.)Quote:
Originally Posted by cafdfw
It would seem that a Mk.VI .455" caliber Webley would be the correct weapon for this holster. It DOES allow a bit of muzzle to protrude, but otherwise it's a much better fit than a Smith and Wesson .455 2nd Model.
https://www.milsurps.com/images/impo...stuff002-2.jpg
The "sad" part is that the test revolver isn't appropriate for this holster, as it is a 1922 vintage Mk.VI ENFIELD!
So you still have viable justification for another new firearm! ;)Quote:
Originally Posted by jmoore
(Would you wife keep a new pair of shoes that didn't fit?) I rest my case.