

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
I posted my "tanker" several years ago on the Gunboards Forum and got some nasty responses from the Brits! The "Limey's" told me never to refer to it as a "tanker"!! LOLvandle wrote: ↑Wed May 22, 2019 5:49 pmThe " Tanker" model generally refers to the spurless hammer version which was designed so the hammer did not snag on clothing, equipment etc while in confined spaces. ie inside a tank.
I don't believe that was its official designation but is given by collectors themselves to differentiate the two versions.
Yeah, and they ain't partial to the term "Limey" neither!!luigi wrote:I posted my "tanker" several years ago on the Gunboards Forum and got some nasty responses from the Brits! The "Limey's" told me never to refer to it as a "tanker"!! LOLvandle wrote: ↑Wed May 22, 2019 5:49 pmThe " Tanker" model generally refers to the spurless hammer version which was designed so the hammer did not snag on clothing, equipment etc while in confined spaces. ie inside a tank.
I don't believe that was its official designation but is given by collectors themselves to differentiate the two versions.
Wow! A $thou+?728shooter wrote:I, too, have the same pistol, marked R.A.F. on the side, 1938 mfg. with hammer spur intact. Beautiful condition throughout, lucky enough to find it in a pawn shop about 6-7 years ago. American Rifleman did a "...this old gun" feature on one like this a few years ago, said the value at the time was around $1,150 I believe. Every time I pick it up, I can't help but visualize some bloke climbing into his Spitfire with it strapped in his shoulder holster, heading up to fight the Battle of Britain....
Also, so that no one misunderstands, these pistols were made in .38 cal. S&W, NOT .38 Special! Rather anemic by today's standards, however, the military round used back then was a 200 gr. bullet, stout enough to put two holes into anyone that got hit by one...
I'm going to try attaching some pics of my gun, along with a copy of that article in "American Rifleman", hope I did it correctly. My gun is probably 98+%, with a perfect bore, all matching numbers and no import mark. The Enfield article has an obvious error in it, picture shows a gun with a "bobbed" hammer rather than an unaltered hammer spur. Also, I was wrong on their valuation of the gun -- it was actually $1,250. BTW, this article was printed 5 1/2 years ago in March of 2014.lewwallace wrote: ↑Thu Dec 12, 2019 8:35 amWow! A $thou+?728shooter wrote:I, too, have the same pistol, marked R.A.F. on the side, 1938 mfg. with hammer spur intact. Beautiful condition throughout, lucky enough to find it in a pawn shop about 6-7 years ago. American Rifleman did a "...this old gun" feature on one like this a few years ago, said the value at the time was around $1,150 I believe. Every time I pick it up, I can't help but visualize some bloke climbing into his Spitfire with it strapped in his shoulder holster, heading up to fight the Battle of Britain....
Also, so that no one misunderstands, these pistols were made in .38 cal. S&W, NOT .38 Special! Rather anemic by today's standards, however, the military round used back then was a 200 gr. bullet, stout enough to put two holes into anyone that got hit by one...
They have been going up steadily in price the last yr or so but I haven't seen any, regardless of condition, bringing anywhere close to that kind of money!!
Even the Mk IV, 38 Webleys aren't seeing much more than $4-600 in great shape w/provenance!
Got pix of your gun?
Sent from my SM-J727V using Tapatalk
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests