WRACO Pistol Dummy Rounds-Salesman's Samples?

I recently picked up a set of WRACO dummies that all have two small holes in the case directly opposite each other. Most are Revolver rounds and there are duplicates in both the 32 Colt NP and the 41 LDA. The headstamp 38W.H.V.M-92 is very cute and I don’t recalling seeing it before and it is not a revolver round as far as I know. Is it other than ordinary???

These dummies were found in a batch of assorted cartridges and there was no sign of a display wallet or box. I did not have either the 9mm or 7.65 Luger dummies. The 7.65mm Luger is a HP bullet.

My guess on the dates would be Mid-1930s based on the headstamp and the CN bullets on the two Luger rounds. Those of you who know revolver ammunition could provide a more accurate dating of this set.

Does anyone have a salesman’s sample set that could confirm or disprove that these are perhaps sales samples?

Opinions Welcome!

Lew

1 Like

No sales sample kit here to verify but just to remark the 38 W.H.V. M-92 (.38-40 W.C.F.smokeless for the M-92 Winchester rifle) is relatively common. Dan Shuey lists it from 1903 to 1929. Have it in a proof & 6 ball variations.

If you have an extra of the dummy, I could use it…

The .38 WCF in this instance would only be considered as a rifle round. The M’92 on the headstamp indicates it was made specifically for Winchester Model 1892 rifles, intimating that it is NOT for Model 1873 rifles. The Model 92 is a much stronger action. My favorite lever action rifle, by the way, not that it matters.

The .38-WCF (aka .38-40 Winchester) was normally one of the combination rifle and revolver cartridges popular in the last part of the 19th Century, and for some uses, still popular today. Again, though, the “M92” headstamp would, for me, preclude using it in most revolvers - perhaps all revolvers.

Nice bunch of dummy rounds. They look to me like dummies from a Salesman’s sample kit; commercial action proving dummies were generally tin-plated, and with holes in the case and primer, contemporary to the rounds you show. Proof loads were with black case. I don’t know the year, but they eventually reversed those identifications, with the dummies being black case and the proofs being tinned.

The only sample set I have is a very small one for shotgun ammo. However, I have seen my share of them and your rounds, again, were likely from one. No money-back guarantees with that assumption, however. At les on one, the .44 WCF, the hole is somewhat irregular, but I detect wood fillers in many of the rounds, and that would usually mean “factory”, not something done to inert the rounds for a collection, or whatever purpose.

John M.

1 Like

Hi John
If I might respectfully disagree on a small point, the proof round I have has a tinned case.
Otherwise I agree these are very likely sale samples, and definitely factory.

Pete - we are not in disagreement at all. Some contracts likely required tinned cases, especially military ones, like the Winchester 7.62 x 54R Russian round. I am speaking only of basically commercial cartridges, and agree whole-heartedly that the ID for proofs and dummies was a “mixed lot.” That is why I said “generally” and also “contemporary to the rounds in the set.” There are always exceptions.

I should have been clearer in mentioning that, though, and thank you for adding that finishes varied on both types of ammunition in question.

John

Hi Lew.

Get in touch with Paul Molans. He might be able to give you a better date based on the style of the W on the primer.

Not that it matters, but I agree with Pete and John. These are factory and probably from salesman’s samples. I have seen these 2 hole Win. dummies before over the years. Nice set.

Cheers,
Will.