Full Version: Stats for a Tommygun
Raygun would probably tell you not to get me started on that bitch of a weapon, but yes. If well maintained and the earlier version made for the French not the cheaper version forced on the Americans and used in perfect condions, it works very well. As a combat weapon it is a menace, but in an urban setting, it might work very well. The problem is the bullets are hellishly expensive. around $0.75 each.
Wow. What caliber is it?
The original French one? 8x50mm Rimmed Lebel.
The 8x50R Lebel Cartridge - IMR 3031 only has a 40 grain powder charge...that's pretty weak.
I'd hardly think a .45 ACP SMG in close urban quarters is ineffective...
The 8x50R Lebel (loaded for rifles) is pretty closely tied with the .303 British for energy, only it fires a heavier (and larger, obviously) bullet slightly slower. Keep in mind, the standard military loads in the World Wars weren't that hot: the two most powerful, the 8x57mm Mauser and the 7.62x53mmR, fired a 154gr bullet at 2,800fps for 2,682ft-lbs and 180gr at 2,660fps for 2,910 ft-lbs. Even the .30-06 only managed 150gr at 2,740fps for 2,500ft-lbs. Compared to those, the Hotchkiss MG load from 1948, firing a 234gr bullet at 2,343fps for 2,853ft-lbs, is pretty hot.
As for the amount of powder... It's not the mass that counts, it's how you use it.
As for the amount of powder... It's not the mass that counts, it's how you use it.
| QUOTE (Wounded Ronin) |
| I'd hardly think a .45 ACP SMG in close urban quarters is ineffective... |
Who is this addressed to?
Ooops, I'm an idiot. Nevermind. No one.
The chaucat fired an 8mm lebel. complaints were never about hitting power. accuracy and reliability sure, but not power.
The .303 Enfield was devistingly effective against bodies. It was used by the British from before WW1 through Korea. Until they stumbled upon the SA80, the british had a reputation for great infantry weapons back to the 1700's
The .303 Enfield was devistingly effective against bodies. It was used by the British from before WW1 through Korea. Until they stumbled upon the SA80, the british had a reputation for great infantry weapons back to the 1700's
Since this seems to be slipping in vintage firearms territory, how's a .455 Webley compared to a modern day .45? About the same, weaker/stronger?
Weaker.
The standard webley load seems to be a 255 grain bullet at 700-750 FPS, the classic .45 ACP loading is a 230 gr bullet at 800-850 fps.
The .303 really wasent a bad cartrage at all. Early Spitfires carried 8 of the little buggers, which (at least in the very early stages) out gunned the German aircraft of the era. Even into the late stages of the war, the Seafire F Mk.IIIb carried a pair of 20mm Hispano Cannon in addation to a pair of .303 Browning MGs.
| QUOTE (FlakJacket) |
| Since this seems to be slipping in vintage firearms territory, how's a .455 Webley compared to a modern day .45? About the same, weaker/stronger? |
Much more of a kick to the user.
| QUOTE (Arethusa) |
| Weaker. |
Excuse me? The .45 is easier to reload and has a bigger mag but the fire power of the .455 webley was impressive.
hold it and it's weaker sister, the .38 webley in my hands. The .455 is a gun to go after the boche with. The .38 is ,well, betterr than screaming for help.
.445 Webley pushes a slightly heavier, slightly larger bullet at rather noticably lower velocity. I have trouble seeing it substantially more powerful than .45 ACP. It's going to kick more because the Webley's a revolver an .45 ACP tends to stay in automatics.
| QUOTE (Snow_Fox) | ||
Excuse me? The .45 is easier to reload and has a bigger mag but the fire power of the .455 webley was impressive. |
To whom? The .455 Webley certainly wasn't much compared to the .45 Colt (255 grains @ 930 fps and 18 years the senior), and it might be a stretch to assume that it was ever on the same level as the .45 ACP (230 grains at 850 fps).
The .455 Webley may have been impressive to the average English officer of the day, but it was never anything to write home about over on this side of the pond.
And as far as recoil goes, they're about the same, considering blackpower loads for the Webley (smokeless loads recoil less). The M1911A1 is an automatic and has much better ergonomics, which might lead one to perceive the Webley as generating more recoil.
Webley Mk 1 Revolver (2.18 lbs)
.455 Webley MkI (265 HBRN @ 600 fps)
Blackpowder Recoil (28 grains): 5.2 fpe @ 12.3 fps
Webley Mk 6 Revolver (2.4 lbs)
.455 Webley MkII (255 HBRN @ 700 fps)
Blackpowder Recoil (28 grains): 6 @ 12.7
Smokeless Recoil (4.2 grains): 4.5 @ 10.9
M1911A1 (2.25 lbs)
.45 ACP M1911 Ball (230 FMJ @ 855 fps)
Recoil (5 grains): 5.9 @ 13
The webley was not so much penetrating power but the kenetic energy. I'll have to look up the brand name but they fired a bullet with a hollow base which expanded on impact, rather than just a solid slug.
Considering that .455 Webley is only slightly larger than .45 ACP and is pushed to a noticably lower velocity, its kinetic energy (mV) is going to be substantially less.
| QUOTE (Snow_Fox) |
| The webley was not so much penetrating power but the kenetic energy. |
Compared to what?
Webley MkI: 265 grains @ 600 fps = 211 fpe
Webley MkII: 255 grains @ 700 fps = 277 fpe
M1911: 230 grains @ 855 fps = 373 fpe
Colt SAA: 255 grains @ 930 fps = 489 fpe
| QUOTE |
| I'll have to look up the brand name but they fired a bullet with a hollow base which expanded on impact, rather than just a solid slug. |
Both the Mk1 and Mk6 loads were hollow base round nose (HBRN) non-jacketed lead bullet loads. Both were standard military loads made by various manufacturers in England, India, Canada, and Australia. Currently there's only one company I know of making loaded .455 Webley ammo today, and that's Fiocchi.
The hollow base of either load was not designed to expand on impact the way modern hollowpoint ammunition does. The hollow base was there for the same reason the Civil War-era Minnie ball had it. On ignition, gas pressure against the cavity forced the bullet to expand into the grooves of the rifling, making a better gas seal. That's about it.
There was a hollowpoint (MkIII) load made for the .455 Webley in 1898, but the Hague Convention of 1899 killed it and they went back to the MkII load.
Eley N0. 2, per A. C Doyle- "makes an excellent argument." It was intended as an expander like you said, like the minie ball, but the British found that it did an impressive amount of power in colonial wars through the Boer War.
I do not know if they kept it going threough WW1.
I like Fiocchi rounds in general.
I do not know if they kept it going threough WW1.
I like Fiocchi rounds in general.
This is a "lo-fi" version of our main content. To view the full version with more information, formatting and images, please click here.