Is this Webley Stingray a 'Brummie' Mk1 or Not?

[Gabby Hayes]

Hi again, 'guys'! I am trying to authenticate a supposed Webley Stingray, Mk1, pre 2006 [Cal .22], that I purchased last Monday [02-07-2018], after going through a check-list of items to help me authenticate the piece, as to it's country of origin / completion [England vs Turkey].

I've spoken to half a dozen Gunsmiths / Retailers [plus 'Chambers Gun Spares']; along with reading up on a couple of airgun forums, including AirgunBBS, in particular the thread: "The Webley & Scott Vulcan Air Rifle - A Vox-Pop History"; and others.

What I came up with before I made the purchase has since been brought into question - what I initially 'discovered' was:

• The serial number is apparently, a.) Of 'Brummie' Webley format - 914123, to be precise; and, b.) Lower [in number] than that of a Stingray which was reported on this site, to be a Brummie.
• "WEBLEY & SCOTT LTD, BIRMINGHAM ENGLAND" is engraved on the LH side of the 'breach block'
• The 'Moderator' & front sight seem right.
• The trigger is 'two'-staged.
• The rear sight seems right.
• The stock seams to conform.
• The barrel bluing is brilliant - second to none.
• "WEBLEY STINGRAY" is quite heavily stamped on the LH side of the 'Cylinder', with no 'paint'.

Which brings me to the only 'stickler' that I have found, so far: The Cylinder [and breech block] finish is a 'smooth / not shiny', mid-greyish colour. This has thrown three Gunsmith / Retailers [plus Chambers] into animated 'reaction' more or less saying that, as far as they know, "Without the famous 'Webley Bluing', maybe parts of it were made in this country; but it certainly was not totally completed in the UK".

That is until yesterday [07-07-2018] morning, when one Gunsmith*** said that he thought certain Stingrays had been "Parkerized" [or similar]; and, for sure he remembers seeing Xocets that definitely were.

I'm asking about this as I purchased it as a collectable / useable air rifle, so if it is not authentic, I will most likely be returning it to the guy that sold it to me [£!70.00]. Btw, it 'points / shoots' really well; and looks like it has never been used ['brown grease' at 'mechanically functioning points' / styrofoam beads along the spring in the 'cocking slot' and next to the rear-sight adjustment screw].

Your opinion(s) will be appreciated.

Cheers, Dave

PS: I'm not allowed to post attachments, yet - the pics show it all.

*** Edit / Update: 'Alan' [very 'down-to-earth-guy'] Bagnall and Kirkwood, Newcastle Upon Tyne [no affiliation].

[landymick]

It does sound like a Brummie MK1,it should have a manual safety on the left hand side & will have a 2 stage trigger.Though it could be a bitza it still sounds right as it has the name on the breach.

[piggy589]

Could it be an early Turkish gun assembled from parts made in Birmingham?.
I spoke to someone in the trade who claimed the majority of parts left over went to landfill.
The company refusing to sell him their remaining stock.

[Gabby Hayes]

. . . Which brings me to the only 'stickler' that I have found, so far: The Cylinder [and breech block] finish is a 'smooth / not shiny', mid-greyish colour. This has thrown three Gunsmith / Retailers [plus Chambers] into animated 'reaction' more or less saying that, as far as they know, "Without the famous 'Webley Bluing', maybe parts of it were made in this country; but it certainly was not totally completed in the UK".

That is until yesterday [07-07-2018] morning, when one Gunsmith said that he thought certain Stingrays had been "Parkerized"; and, for sure he remembers seeing Xocets that definitely were . . .

Either one of the two scenarios posted above could apply [based on 'evidence' to date]. All boxes for the 'Brummie Mk1 Stingray' appear to be ticked, especially the serial # / names & address on breach and cylinder - please refer to itemised list, above [btw, the safety 'catch' is definitely present].

So, were they 'Parkerized' [or similar] at the 'Brummie end', or in Turkey???

Cheers, Dave.

PS: A kind member has offered to post my pics!

[Geezer]

Definitely there were some weird hybrids made in Turkey during the early period after Webley folded. I’ve seen pics of an “Omega” that was actually a Longbow or Tomahawk, but made up with an “Omega” marked cylinder, for example (and the Omega had ceased production over ten years earlier).

So I tend to agree with your half dozen industry sources. Brum Webley parts, final assembly and cylinder finish at Hatsan, circa 2007-08.

[Gabby Hayes]

^ ^ ^ "Like"! ['Likes', etc, do not appear to have been switched on for me, yet .]

Cheers, Dave.

[Gabby Hayes]

^ ^ ^ "Thar she blows"! Thanks, Barry.

Cheers, Dave.

[averageplinker]

Definitely there were some weird hybrids made in Turkey during the early period after Webley folded. I’ve seen pics of an “Omega” that was actually a Longbow or Tomahawk, but made up with an “Omega” marked cylinder, for example (and the Omega had ceased production over ten years earlier).

So I tend to agree with your half dozen industry sources. Brum Webley parts, final assembly and cylinder finish at Hatsan, circa 2007-08.

I thought Hatsan reintroduced the name Omega for one of their FAC break barrels so maybe the cylinders you saw were not old stock??
Rich.

[Gabby Hayes]

Spent an hour with a fairly local Gunsmith, this afternoon [recommended to me, last week] - he said my Stingray is absolutely a 'Brummie', then went through the different components of the gun, talking about the design, commenting on some of the 'design-input' he provided to Webley; and the short-run batches of specialist versions of the Stingray, with which he was involved. He said that the finish on the cylinder of my Stingray was used for versions made for hunting. And the serial number looked close to those numbers in use, shortly before Webley folded.

That's good news for me; but does not close the issue, if anyone would like to add more / challenge the above.

Cheers, Dave.

[Gareth W-B]

Definitely there were some weird hybrids made in Turkey during the early period after Webley folded. I’ve seen pics of an “Omega” that was actually a Longbow or Tomahawk, but made up with an “Omega” marked cylinder, for example (and the Omega had ceased production over ten years earlier).

So I tend to agree with your half dozen industry sources. Brum Webley parts, final assembly and cylinder finish at Hatsan, circa 2007-08.

This ^^^^ 100%

[Gabby Hayes]

This ^^^^ 100%

Hi Gareth - was that finish never used by Webley on Stingrays, then? Or are there other things that you noticed on that particular piece, that lead you to that conclusion? I have to say that the Gunsmith that I met with earlier today, had pretty sound reasons why he was sure it was manufactured / assembled in Birmingham - as outlined by me above. But I am interested in any 'facts' that suggest that this piece was completed in Turkey, along with [as 'Geezer' mentioned] certain 'weird hybrids'.

Cheers, Dave.

[Gareth W-B]

Hi Gareth - was that finish never used by Webley on Stingrays, then? Or are there other things that you noticed on that particular piece, that lead you to that conclusion? I have to say that the Gunsmith that I met with earlier today, had pretty sound reasons why he was sure it was manufactured / assembled in Birmingham - as outlined by me above. But I am interested in any 'facts' that suggest that this piece was completed in Turkey, along with [as 'Geezer' mentioned] certain 'weird hybrids'.

Cheers, Dave.

Hello again Dave. It is both the poor finish to the tube (Webley Birmingham would have never sent out a gun with such a cheap looking finish to the tube) and the cheap badly machined bevel at the back of the tube: no QT Forman worth his salt at Webley Brum would have ever let such an unevenly machined component reach the assembly line, let alone let it leave he factory on a finished rifle.

[Gabby Hayes]

Yo, Gareth,

Maybe I owe you an apology - for the bad lighting and photo-quality, which do not do much justice to those subjects upon which you chose to focus. As certain pictures are not all that clear. I can organise some better photographs / lighting / angles ['proper' camera ], if you like. Perhaps that won't be necessary tho', after reading the paragraphs below.

To head further towards the 'heart' of things, I had lunch today with a retired Webley 'Finish-inspector' [shop-floor] - [the joys of retirement!]. I took my Stingray round to his house before we went out to meet-up with another ex- [W&T] Avery apprentice / 'reprobate'. He said that the surface finish of the cylinder and breach-block are 'well within tolerance'. Quality of the Back Block 'dome' / knurling [not bevelled], is definitely of satisfactory quality, he added. He had the gun in his hands as he spoke.

You didn't say what you think about what the [above referenced] 'local Gunsmith' said about my Stingray being an authentic 'Brummie', after he'd handled it. Today, I sent him a request for permission to use his name, regarding this. Have you discounted this input?

In addition to all the above, I entered into correspondence with Mr. Steve Pope, on the subject, ten days ago; and followed up with additional photographs, last weekend. Today [10-07-2018], Steve added to the 'equation', by saying: " Certain Stingray actions were 'Rumbled' - that is a process where the body tubes went into a tumbler, with stones and water. The finish on your gun is authentic".

So, I am now satisfied that my Webley Stingray is a bona fide pre 2006 'Brummie' [# 914123]. Everybody's input has been important / interesting. Nobody has been 'played-off' against anybody else. I put feelers out in multiple directions, more or less simultaneously; and the responses came back in, as and when each responder chose to respond.

Thank you, one and all.

Cheers, Dave.

PS: Bullet Proof Vest, now donned!

PPS: So, I guess you'll have to try 'head-shots'!

[landymick]

Glad you did some home work,i'd be happy with that just compare it to a MK11 to see the difference.

[Geezer]

Yo, Gareth,

Maybe I owe you an apology - for the bad lighting and photo-quality, which do not do much justice to those subjects upon which you chose to focus. As certain pictures are not all that clear. I can organise some better photographs / lighting / angles ['proper' camera ], if you like. Perhaps that won't be necessary tho', after reading the paragraphs below.

To head further towards the 'heart' of things, I had lunch today with a retired Webley 'Finish-inspector' [shop-floor] - [the joys of retirement!]. I took my Stingray round to his house before we went out to meet-up with another ex- [W&T] Avery apprentice / 'reprobate'. He said that the surface finish of the cylinder and breach-block are 'well within tolerance'. Quality of the Back Block 'dome' / knurling [not bevelled], is definitely of satisfactory quality, he added. He had the gun in his hands as he spoke.

You didn't say what you think about what the [above referenced] 'local Gunsmith' said about my Stingray being an authentic 'Brummie', after he'd handled it. Today, I sent him a request for permission to use his name, regarding this. Have you discounted this input?

In addition to all the above, I entered into correspondence with Mr. Steve Pope, on the subject, ten days ago; and followed up with additional photographs, last weekend. Today [10-07-2018], Steve added to the 'equation', by saying: " Certain Stingray actions were 'Rumbled' - that is a process where the body tubes went into a tumbler, with stones and water. The finish on your gun is authentic".

So, I am now satisfied that my Webley Stingray is a bona fide pre 2006 'Brummie' [# 914123]. Everybody's input has been important / interesting. Nobody has been 'played-off' against anybody else. I put feelers out in multiple directions, more or less simultaneously; and the responses came back in, as and when each responder chose to respond.

Thank you, one and all.

Cheers, Dave.

PS: Bullet Proof Vest, now donned!

PPS: So, I guess you'll have to try 'head-shots'!

Great detective work, which has added to the collective knowledge of the bbs.