Calling all you Warrior owners

[ccdjg]

I have two examples. The first, in .177 calibre, is no.4047 and has the semicircular trigger guard; the second, in .22 calibre, is no. 5017 and has the recurved trigger guard.
Very interesting post, this.

John

That is a surprisingly high serial number for the semicircular trigger guard, but it fits in with another reported example with the same type trigger guard which has the even higher number 4549. Currently the lowest known serial number with the second version trigger guard is 2065, so I think we can conclude that there was quite a long period of overlap between phasing out the large semicircular guard and introducing the neater recurved type, an overlap covering around 1500 production models.

[Binners]

No 3667 has the curved trigger guard and a .177 barrel.

[ccdjg]

No 3667 has the curved trigger guard and a .177 barrel.

When you say curved, do you mean the first type (semicircular) ?

[Binners]

When you say curved, do you mean the first type (semicircular) ?

Very similar to Brian's here -

https://www.flickr.com/photos/abasma...7625826379323/

[ccdjg]

Very similar to Brian's here -

https://www.flickr.com/photos/abasma...7625826379323/

So that's the second version. This fits in with the majority of the serial number data trend.

It seems that only serial numbers 4047 and 4549 are anomalous, having the old style guard, while others with serial numbers either side of these have the second style guard. Maybe Accles and Shelvoke ran out of the second style trigger guard for a short period and used some of the old ones they had lying around. It would be nice to know if any others in the serial number range 4047-4549 also had the old style guard.

[Binners]

When I say similar to Brian's, only in shape, not condition.

http://i1109.photobucket.com/albums/...psbjmuzeez.jpg

http://i1109.photobucket.com/albums/...psgibbmn7z.jpg

http://i1109.photobucket.com/albums/...psda38xzps.jpg

[pjbingham]

That is a surprisingly high serial number for the semicircular trigger guard, but it fits in with another reported example with the same type trigger guard which has the even higher number 4549. Currently the lowest known serial number with the second version trigger guard is 2065, so I think we can conclude that there was quite a long period of overlap between phasing out the large semicircular guard and introducing the neater recurved type, an overlap covering around 1500 production models.

Just got home and checked mine(see earlier post) ser/num "1943" .22 and it has the later style recurved guard.

[ccdjg]

Just got home and checked mine(see earlier post) ser/num "1943" .22 and it has the later style recurved guard.

Also very useful info, as this is the earliest serial number yet reported for the second style trigger guard. Serial numbers 1192 and 1550 have the first style guard.

Looking at the list of serial numbers acquired from this thread and from some other sources, out of 18 pistols, 12 were calibre .177 and 6 were .22. I know this is not exactly representative, but this is a surprisingly high proportion of .22 pistols considering how rare they are supposed to be.

[AC99]

My second series Warrior, s/n 2682, is in .177 cal and has the semi-circular trigger guard.
Aubrey

[ccdjg]

My second series Warrior, s/n 2682, is in .177 cal and has the semi-circular trigger guard.
Aubrey

Just when it all began to make sense along comes another spanner in the works

I am beginning to think that Accles and Shelvoke had a batch of semicircular trigger guards left over from when Frank Clarke made his first model Warrior, and they just mixed them in with their new design in a random manner until they were all used up.

[Abasmajor]

Just when it all began to make sense along comes another spanner in the works

I am beginning to think that Accles and Shelvoke had a batch of semicircular trigger guards left over from when Frank Clarke made his first model Warrior, and they just mixed them in with their new design in a random manner until they were all used up.

Hi,

I'm not sure if the the two types of trigger guard are directly interchangeable and may have been replaced with the alternative guard at some time.

We certainly know that the existing grips from Frank Clarke' final Titan design were used up on the Warrior. You can also see the clear visual likeness that the 7th series Titan had to the first Webley Mk1. Frank Clarke had a recognised influence on the final Webley product and I believe received royalties in recognition of his contribution.

Regards

Brian

[ccdjg]

Hi Brian, I can confirm that that the two types of trigger guard are perfectly interchangeable, so it was quite feasible for the old type of guard to be incorporated into late serial number guns if the manufacturer found it expedient to do so.

The various interactions between Clarke, Anson and Webley, all located within the same small area of Birmingham are certainly fascinating. There are all sorts of connections one can make between the Titans, Stars, Warriors, Britons and Webley pistols, and it is a pity that we will probably never know the true background to these. The important contribution that Clarke made to the design of the Webley pistols itself was one of the best kept secrets for many years before it became common knowledge.

One small correction: The leftover grips from Frank Clarke's Titan were actually used on the Anson Star, and as they fitted perfectly it must be assumed that the Star was designed with this potential money saving feature in mind. The Titan grips will not fit the Warrior as it has a different rake. However, Anson and Clarke probably did intend the Titan grips to be used on their Warrior in its early design stages, as there is an old Clarke catalogue with a sketch of a Warrior pistol fitted with the Titan grips. Something must have changed their mind before the Warrior went into production.

[AC99]

I have two Warriors - an earlier model with no s/n and with the characteristic chamfered cocking lever and a later model without the chamfer, s/n 2682 (this info I posted on here 22/7/16). However, looking at Hiller's book again he says a further means of distinguishing between the older and newer models is that on the early models, ".....the barrel protrudes about half an inch (about 1/8" actually) whereas on the later model the barrel was encased in a square projection and did not protrude.......".
On mine the reverse is true - the later, numbered, model has a slightly protruding barrel and on the earlier model the muzzle is recessed, so did Dennis get it wrong?
Aubrey

[ccdjg]

I have two Warriors - an earlier model with no s/n and with the characteristic chamfered cocking lever and a later model without the chamfer, s/n 2682 (this info I posted on here 22/7/16). However, looking at Hiller's book again he says a further means of distinguishing between the older and newer models is that on the early models, ".....the barrel protrudes about half an inch (about 1/8" actually) whereas on the later model the barrel was encased in a square projection and did not protrude.......".
On mine the reverse is true - the later, numbered, model has a slightly protruding barrel and on the earlier model the muzzle is recessed, so did Dennis get it wrong?
Aubrey

You are right that when the cocking levers are in the closed state, the barrel of the later model protrudes, whereas the muzzle of the earlier model is concealed in a recess and so protrudes not at all. However, I am sure that Dennis was describing the situation when the cocking levers are extended (although he does not exactly make this clear). In this state, the later model has a modified hinge block which encases the barrel, and the muzzle protrudes only a small amount. In contrast the muzzle on the earlier model is exposed by about 3/8 inches. .

[Binners]

Hi John,
You have the number of the later model, but I can not find any number on the later one to add to the list.