Now that I have had the chance to put a few rounds through it, I'm even more pleased with this revolver!
I only fired 15 rounds on Sunday because the small, old indoor range was filling up with more smoke than the exhaust system seemed able to handle ...
Also, frankly, I decided that my standard load for my other .455 revolvers (effectively the British War Department specs for the MK I cartridge - i.e. 18 grains FF black powder well compressed behind a long-nosed hollowbase 265 gr bullet) was simply too stout to be very pleasant in this little revolver. They produced very substantial recoil, stupendous muzzleflash ... and cylinder gap flash, for that matter ... and flattened primers, which also gave rise to some degree of safety concern.
However, other than those minor details, it was an absolute
blast ... both literally and figuratively!
It seemed to want to print reasonably well - i.e. likely quite sufficient for CAS-type shooting - but a more definitive test of accuracy will have to await another opportunity with some downloaded cartridges ...
A bit more detail, now that i've had the time to investigate further: this particular version of the R.I.C. - i.e. the .455 Center Fire New Model - was introduced in 1883. It had a longer cylinder to accomodate lengthier cartridges, and the cylinder flutes were introduced at this time (I assume as a weight-reduction measure to compensate for the elongated cylinder.) In fact I learned that, with this version, even .44-40 and .45 colt chamberings were manufactured! A .45 Colt round will chamber and seat
almost all the way in my .455 revolver. If a .45 Colt would seat fully - it's only about 1/32" short of doing so, as it is - the bullet nose would be nearly flush with the chamber mouth ... I can only imagine the excitement of firing one of those cartridges in this model of revolver - considering how it
roared with .455 Webley!
Finally, a fellow who has copies of many of the Army & Navy Co-operative Society Ltd. firearms sales records, tells me that he was able to locate serial numbers 6596 and 6598 (i.e. flanking my serial number) in the sales records for 1886 - although mine did not show up on his review .... (He did mention that a review of these records show that the sales were quite jumbled up, serial number wise. I suppose that may reflect a purchaser's preference for some feature of one revolver over an earlier serial numbered one, so that the later number sold first ... or something of that nature.