“... not exactly a premier firearm, ... like those old Webleys we used to see in .38 S&W Short years ago. One click above Starter’s Pistol. ...(if it ain’t got matching numbers, it ain’t a Luger..)
To judge by the items that crossed my bench when I was employed in gun repair, Soviet firearms may have been several notches below premier, but were not of low quality - just as good as they needed to be, and no more.
And a number of starter pistols were not terrible. H&R’s blank-firing revolvers were solid items, fashioned from the same materials as their counterparts firing live rounds. Budget arms certainly, but neither cheap nor weak.
Never seen a Webley IV that was poorly or cheaply made. Badly treated and miserably maintained, yes. What led the British to choose that caliber is still a head scratcher. Not nearly the equal of their earlier Webleys, chiefly Mk VI, in 455. If I had to choose a revolver today, I’d not feel poorly armed with one. And those were all well-made also.
Lugers - matched or not - are a cut above. Few examples of gun manufacturing can equal them. Steyr, possibly.
Can't fault your points on the Nagants and Soviet weapons and Webleys. Nonetheless, if I'm going to own something for myself, I tend to go for the Colts, Smiths, Walthers, and the occasional Luger or Mauser C96.
That way, if they're taking it off my dead body, they'll know they killed a guy with excellent taste in firearms - and money to burn!