Why are Webley pistols so special?

[ptdunk]

I started thinking about this after I helped ccdjg make his 'Unrealised pistol prototypes' video.

When he asked the question 'why didn't they go into production?' the answer was invariably that they were no improvement on the Webley mk1 design, and by comparison were all very over complicated.

I can't think of another air pistol that was pretty brilliant in it's first iteration, and was steadily improved for 50 years, in a live marketplace, from the Mk1 to the E series Premier. (I'm not a fan of the Alloy mk1's but I'm sure they shoot well, I do absolutely love the later Tempest & Hurricane though.)
That kind of evolution seems rare in air pistols.

Doing my '100 years of Air pistol' series of video's, and getting to shoot whole era's worth of my favourite shooters in one sitting the Webley's stand out amongst their contemporaries as having got pretty much everything right. (maybe a bugger to zero in, but perseverance works.) Obviously there are match pistol's like the mod 6 & LP65 series but they are not as fun to shoot.

I also don't know how they get so much power out of such a tiny pistol, a lot of mine will happily do 3.5 ftlbs and shoot really nicely. My 1924 mk1 does 3ftlbs (!) compared to my Highest possible which does 2.5ftlbs. Both serviced to be shooting at there best.
I know power isn't everything but I think it's an indication of an efficient design.

People rave about the HW45 as a power house but my serviced non-deiseling .177 '45 does just over 4 ftlbs, and I see lots of accounts of them only doing 4.5 ftlbs.
They are so much nastier to shoot than a nicely serviced Webley. I think 3.5ftlbs must be a sweet spot for this sort of design.

Not to mention the magnificent build quality of the earlier ones......
Anyway, I think as a functional air pistol they got the recipe right almost 100 years ago.. crazy really.

I would like to look into this further, Gordon Bruce's book is brilliant, especially for what changes or improvements happened when, but it would be interesting to do an era by era comparison with what else was out at the time, and how they stacked up against whatever Webley was available.

I don't have any experience shooting some of the earlier contemporaries, like the Abas Major or the Akvoke, I've kind of avoided them as I'd read account's that they weren't particularly good shooters.
How do they compare?

Cheers,
Matt

ccdjgs prototype vid: https://youtu.be/VCr9RcVnslc
100 yrs air pistols 1 + 2 https://youtu.be/qt2zfenq4QI https://youtu.be/te6fFFAV1hE

[Garvin]

I think you're dead right Matt that the Webley's such a neat, compact, efficient design that it deterred and out-competed anyone who thought about trying to squeeze into the market. I guess German air pistols in the '30s only succeeded in getting a toehold in the UK market because importers were able to undercut Webley on price and meanwhile the makers could rely on their home market to provide baseline income.

I also agree the FWB65 was the postwar equivalent of unassailable market leader in the late late '60s and '70s that left only scraps for rivals and probably deterred some companies from entering the match spring pistol market altogether - Anschutz for instance.

[ptdunk]

I think you're dead right Matt that the Webley's such a neat, compact, efficient design that it deterred and out-competed anyone who thought about trying to squeeze into the market. I guess German air pistols in the '30s only succeeded in getting a toehold in the UK market because importers were able to undercut Webley on price and meanwhile the makers could rely on their home market to provide baseline income.

I also agree the FWB65 was the postwar equivalent of unassailable market leader in the late late '60s and '70s that left only scraps for rivals and probably deterred some companies from entering the match spring pistol market altogether - Anschutz for instance.

Cheers Danny, good points there.

A spring powered Anschutz match pistol?? How on earth had I never realised that before! The company that invented the recoiless spring powered match rifle never made a target pistol.
I would have loved to see a pistol version of the 220 or 250 rifles.
Having opened them up though I bet they would have been too complicated. Anschutz we’re operating on a whole other level to everyone else back then.

Cheers,
Matt

[45flint]

I totally agree that the Webley design produced the most efficient air pistol in a compact design and carried on so many years because of this and the quality of the build. But I think the Germans had a interruption in the early 1940’s that hampered their ability to continue with their designs? If I had to choose one prewar pistol masterpiece it would be the Haenel 28R. The best shooting pistol would be the Webley straight grip Senior.

[ccdjg]

It would be interesting to know exactly how much Frank Clarke contributed to the design of the Webley Mark 1. His reimbursement contract letter from Webley for his consultancy work says: "...in consideration of the assistance you have rendered us in working our the air pistol having a tip-up barrel, jointed at the muzzle, we hereby agree that during the life of the British patent ......we will pay you the sum of threepence per pistol........

It doesn't sound much, but that is equivalent to about £1.50 per pistol in today's money, so quite a nice earner for him.

[Biker_Bob]

I've just fallen into Webley land again. I picked up a very clean Premier E series in .177 from Newark Arms fair.
I think in answer to the question, a lot of it has to do with the sheer density of the thing.
For such a small object it's very heavy, being made as it is of steel and for me it's the thought of holding a small piece of proper British engineering - a reminder of a time before everything went to s**t.
And yes, they can shoot very nicely - interestingly for me the best hold is the exact opposite of the hold required with an HW45. With an HW45 I have to hold it in the standard 1911 combat grip style i.e. loosely at the bottom of the grip, whereas with the Webley I get the best accuracy with a very strong double handed interlocked thumbs hold. I wonder if the thinning of the grip at the top is intended to encourage you to wrap your thumb around there, because that's what it does for me.
The sights are simple, but I like the way that the windage sledge is slightly tapered, so that it doesn't move when you undo the screw which enables easy elevation adjustment without disturbing windage.

[Garvin]

It would be interesting to know exactly how much Frank Clarke contributed to the design of the Webley Mark 1. His reimbursement contract letter from Webley for his consultancy work says: "...in consideration of the assistance you have rendered us in working our the air pistol having a tip-up barrel, jointed at the muzzle, we hereby agree that during the life of the British patent ......we will pay you the sum of threepence per pistol........

It doesn't sound much, but that is equivalent to about £1.50 per pistol in today's money, so quite a nice earner for him.

Webley didn't know at the time just how successful the pistols would become. If they had, they may have paid Clarke rather less.