[Checkman]

These are just a few of the photos that are part of this thread on the S&W forum. The poster/owner also has the history of these registered magnums.
Amazing. There are RM's with 5.5,6.5, and 4.5 barrels. I've never seen any of those before. Wow!

http://smith-wessonforum.com/groupee/forums/a/tpc/f/540103904/m/291109496

[sgt127]

That hurts...I have one (1) Registered Magnum...Now, amongst commoners, like me, its pretty cool to boast that you even HAVE a RM...but, compared to that....sigh...

[TonyB]

Drooling........

[TODD3465]

IIRC about any barrel length within reason could be had with these.

[P95Carry]

*SIGH* - one can but dream!

[Checkman]

P95Carry *SIGH* - one can but dream!

Yeah that was my thought as well when I looked at the photos. Nevertheless I knew that folks here would be able to appreciate the view, even if it's through a green tint. And to think that there are collections of registered magnums out there that would make this one look tiny by comparison. Amazing. :what:

[Missourigunner]

yes they are beautiful. The owner of this magnificent collection, goes by the handle of lowriderfix, on the S & W fORUM.

[AnthonyRSS]

What, exactly, is a registered magnum?? They look good, and I want one.

[thatguy]

When S&W introduced the .357 Magnum in 1935 the guns were custom ordered. All started with 8 & 3/4" barrels but would be cut in 1/4" incriments to any desired length. Stock and sight options galore. Each came with a certificate bearing the "Registration Number" of that gun (also stamped on frame, ie REG 5501). Hence the Registered Magnum moniker.

S&W was overwhelmed with orders (many from cop shops) and after around 5,500 units they dropped the registration numbers. Another 6,000 or so were made before WW II and these are called Pre-War Magnums (some of these appear to have been stamped with the registration number even though no certificate was included).

The RM is king on the S&W Forum. It seems to be the most desired gun amongst the collectors who post there. The guns are rare and very pricey, as are the accessories. An original screwdriver that came with these will sell for $1,200. The guy who owns the collection pictured above paid $4,000 for the correct box to go with one of guns. He says the cost was justified in the increased value of the set but I don't play in the league so it's beyond me. I can't imagine the monetary value of the revolvers in the pictures posted above. More than I make in a year, for sure.

[BluesBear]

With any barrel length from 3½" to 8¾", the availability of several different sights and other options I seem to recall there were over 500 variations possible with a Registered Magnum.

Even after they stopped registering them most of the variations were still available.

After The War they pared them down to just a few versions and when the numbering system started they became known as the Model 27. The Model 27 was, even up until the end of it's life, considered the flagship of the S&W line.

[Rinspeed]

Where does he live? Do you happen to know the combination to his safe :)

[Peter M. Eick]

If you have not shot one they are truly unique guns. The fit and finish is superb and I don't know if it is the excellent trigger, the quality of the gun, or whatever, but it tends to bring out the real marksman in a person.

Here is mine in action. Mine is a 1939 6.5". Great gun, truly hard to describe.
http://pages.sbcglobal.net/eickpm/single_action.jpg
50 shots, single action, stout charge of 2400, 158 grn Lasercast, 15 yards.

http://pages.sbcglobal.net/eickpm/double_action.jpg
50 shots, double action, stout charge of 2400, 158 grn Lasercast, 15 yards.

I shoot mine becuase it was refinished by S&W in the summer of 1944. You have to wonder what strings its prior owner pulled to get it refinished during the middle of the war. I lettered the gun and all I know is it was shipped to Saginaw MI in October of 1939 on custom order.

[P95Carry]

Peter - excellent results. A query tho - in that first pic - to my eye - the cylinder and ejector rod appear out of parallel.

My crop out has a line overlayed - not quite perfect with the eject rod but - does seem to show up the disparity. Hard to see it as an optical illusion only.


http://www.thehighroad.org/attachment.php?attachmentid=27826

[Peter M. Eick]

Great eyes! Give that man a try with it!

Yep it is bent. It was that way when I got it and yes it does bind up the double action a bit. I have investigated getting it fixed several times, but I don't want the gun to leave my possession until I have another Registered to take its place or I may drive up to cylinder and slide and ask them to do it "on the spot".

I know it is an easy fix, but I am just not going to let just anyone try and fix it. Parts are to hard to come by to fix it otherwise. I have bought several 38/44 heavy duties just for replacement ejector rods and heads (just in case).

In Single action you never know it is a problem, thus I single action it mostly.

[P95Carry]

Well - at least my eyes weren't playing tricks (this time) :D. I shot years ago with a guy who had an early M27 - with a similar mis-alignment - he like you was only SA shooting and it did fine. I guess as long as you still have enough clearance on cyl/barrel gap it'll perform and the forcing cone will ''adjust'' the small amount needed.

Be nice tho - one day - to get a full and expert fix - the gun deserves it :)

[BluesBear]

It's a crying damn shame that the Registered Magnum, and the New Century (Triple Lock) without a doubt the finest guns S&W ever made are two of the models that S&W refuses to work on. It seems S&W considers them too old.




It makes you wonder about their so called Lifetime warranty they now offer.

Is that the lifetime of the gun or the lifetime of their spare parts box?
But then, I am not really worried about a 2005 produced S&W lasting into the next century.

The current practice of S&W seems to be to offer the customer a new gun instead of fixing an older one.
I feared this was going to happen when they started dumping their stockpiles of spare parts.
I guess the accountants who really run the show deemed it a better financial strategy to replace guns than to have to worry about storing all of those hungry extra parts. As well as having no further need to replace those people trained in the art of hand fitting parts.

[thatguy]

Did someone mention the Triple Lock? I just picked this guy up but I can't recall what I paid. Odd, I usually remember. Seems like around $350 or so. Anyway...

http://www.fototime.com/ACFA5751F17B3C0/standard.jpg

[BluesBear]

You stole it.

Even if it does have the wrong grips.

[denfoote]

Yup!!!

The registered became the M27 and it became M28, which was found in almost every cop's holster up until the early eighties!!

I have a 28 and I think it's the cat's meow!! I can't even imagine owning a registered magnum!!

Nice guns!!

[thatguy]

Did somebody mention the Model 28? I grabbed this one for $290 (included shipping) from a WA dealer about a month ago. It's a first year (maybe first month) production pre-28. I replaced the old Herrett's with a correct set of Magnas I got off eBay for $18. Gun is about 95%. Haven't shot it yet because going to the range is out of the question in July and August.

http://www.fototime.com/5EB346A9818A6DF/standard.jpg

[Malamute]

"The registered became the M27 and it became M28,...."

The 28 was made concurrantly with the 27, not a replacement of it, and was intended as a lower cost version, not finished as nicely, for duty use. The 27 has a much higher polished blue, and the entire top of the frame, rear sight, and barrel were finely checkered.

Having had several 27's and 28''s, they both function and shoot well, but the finish of the 27 is head and shoulders above the 28. The 27's are a true work of art.

[355sigfan]

I wish the custom shop would re issue the Registered magnums in its heritage series. I would buy one in a heart beat. My Grandad had one and my oldest brother inherited it. He did not know what he had he took it hunting and allowed it to get soak in a holster. It became baddly pitted so he refinished it. :what: When I found out I wanted to strangle him. I inherited a nice Winchester 53 Target rifle. But I wish I had the Registered Mag.
Pat

[Brian Williams]

just a collage of a REG MAG I nuts around with
http://www.gunpix.com/gallery/Handguns/Double_Action_Revolvers/regmagcollage.jpg

[denfoote]

The 28 was made concurrantly with the 27, not a replacement of it, and was intended as a lower cost version, not finished as nicely, for duty use. The 27 has a much higher polished blue, and the entire top of the frame, rear sight, and barrel were finely checkered.

Thanks!!
I didn't know that!! I thought the 28 replaced the 27!!
My bad!! :evil:

[Malamute]

No biggy, just a little Smith trivia.

The 28's I've had and handled were very smooth, just not finished as finely as the 27's. I regret selling all the 27's and 28's I've had. May luck into one again someday.

[BluesBear]

...which was found in almost every cop's holster up until the early eighties!! After 1960 the Model 19 which had been introduced a few years earlier was the most commonly found S&W .357 Magnum in police holsters.

By 1980 there were very few Model 28s in duty use.

However those cops who still carried 27s and 28s were usually experienced shooters who loved and understood the advantages of the big N-Frame and wouldn't settle for anything less.
I knew more than a few officers who carried them until either they retired or they were forced to switch to autoloaders.

The "satin blue" finish used on the Model 28s (and on the later Model 58s) was still a beautiful finish.

[thatguy]

Well, you could say that the 27 led to the development of the 28 in that the latter was designed to be a less expensive version of the former. The 28 really did evolve from the 27.

On the Registered Magnums, the most valuable one of all might be the special order .22 Long Rifle RM that was made and sold. Or would it be the 1st one made and given to Doug Wesson? Or perhaps the 2nd one made and given to J. Edgar Hoover?

BTW- I just looked up what I paid for the Triple Lock. It was $295.

[355sigfan]

BTW- I just looked up what I paid for the Triple Lock. It was $295.
END QUOTE
WOudl you take $600 for it? lol
Pat

[Old Fuff]

You guys paid way too much for a Triple Lock. My .455 to 45 Colt ran me $16.95 plus sales tax, and no FFL charges. :what:

Of course this was in 1954 ... :evil: :D

[Old Fuff]

Peter M. Eick:

While the Registered .357 Magnums were custom built, most of the internal parts were identical to those used in the .38/44 Outdoorsman and Heavy Duty, .44 Military Model, and the 1917. You should be able to purchase a center pin and extractor rod for one of these that would cure the problem with the bent one without costing a mint. You could check by switching out those parts from one of your .38/44's and seeing how things worked in the Magnum.

If you purchase an ejector rod be sure that it has a RIGHT HAND thread.

[GunGoBoom]

I can think of an easier way to obtain a collection of registered magnums - just move to Illinois.

[Peter M. Eick]

Old fuff, I already picked up 3 pre-war heavy duties with that exact idea in mind. Each one is of "donor" quality. One of these days I will get adventurous, but since it works well, I just enjoy it the way it is. Someday I will get the gun and its "donors" up to someone like cylinder and slide to do it right.

[Peter M. Eick]

Also, every time I read that the 28 was less well finished then the 27 I think of the following. Here are my pre-28 and pre-27. You tell me which is which..... (I don't think the finish was that different actually).

http://pages.sbcglobal.net/eickpm/28-27.jpg

ps: a good S&W collector should be positive in about 10 seconds.

[Old Fuff]

Peter M. Eick:

Don't wait too long on fixing your registered .357. Or at least don't wait when it comes to buying a new extractor rod and center pin. With the exception of the 1917 model, production of the other guns that used similar parts was limited by the Great Depression. They are slowly getting harder to find, and of course they are getting more expensive.

While I agree that it would be a good idea to have C&S do any gunsmithing, there is no reason you couldn't simply make a temporary switch of parts to see what the possibilities might be. I often do this with older guns while trying to identify the reason for a problem.

[Checkman]

I would say that one of the most valuable Registered Magnums would have to be General Patton's. But that belongs to the Army and probably won't be coming up for sale for.......okay it will never come up for sale. But still, can you just imagine the bidding war for that Registered Magnum? :what: :what:

[thatguy]

Peter- Some of the early 28s (from the 1950s) did look pretty good. But all of the ones I have seen from the 1960s and 1970s clearly... clearly... were inferior to contemporary 27s in finsih quality.

[BluesBear]

After exhamining the photo I'd say the pre-27 is on the left and the Highway Patrollman is on the right.

The Hoghway patrolman wasn't actually less finished as much as it was a different finish.

The Highway Patrolman models were just not surface polished as much as the early 27s. That made the blue a little more satin looking, which enabled it to hold a thin film of oil a little better.

In later years S&W actually used a slightly different blueing process on the Model 28 and Model 58 which actually gave them a different colour.

The factory blueing on 28s & 58s is still better than what most other companies ever did.

[Malamute]

I thought the Highway Patrolman (28) was on the left, the 357 Magnum (27) on the right.

[Peter M. Eick]

Malamute is right. The pre-28 is on the left and the pre-27 is on the right. Look at the front sight. Dead give-away as the pre-28 has a ramped sight and the pre-27 has an undercut front sight.

Thanks for the advice Old Fuff. I was thinking the same thing, but due to work load I have just a "fixin too" and have not got it done yet.

Checkman, my opinion is the most valueable would actually be the one and only .22 LR Registered magnum assuming it is in reasonable shape. There is only one of them. There are several General's who owned Registered's along with a bunch of politicians/actors and the like. But to a collector a one of a kind would be the thing to have. (Although registration number 1 would be nice also).

[Malamute]

Peter, I can't see the front sight of the right hand gun, the image is cut off just before that point. The pins for the front sight of the Highway Patrolman are visible tho, another clue. On Magnums they are polished off flush, and are difficult to see, even when looking at it in good light.

The higher polish of the blue was what gave it away to me.

[Rinspeed]

Peter, I can't see the front sight of the right hand gun, the image is cut off just before that point. The pins for the front sight of the Highway Patrolman are visible tho, another clue. On Magnums they are polished off flush, and are difficult to see, even when looking at it in good light. The higher polish of the blue was what gave it away to me.

Well I can't see the front sight either and I can't really see a difference in the polish. They look very close in age to me, when were they born?

[BluesBear]

Since I can't see the front sight blade on the revolver on the right. And since many pre 27s came with ramp sights as well as the most commonly encountered Patridge blade (which is not undercut) I went by barrel length.

The one on the right appears to be a six inch while the left one appears to be a five inch.

[Peter M. Eick]

Interesting. The pre-28 is a S1193xx which should be about a 53 gun (I did not look it up) while the pre-27 is S1570xx which should be late 55 (again by memory, I did not look up the dates in the standard catalog). Both are 6.5" barrels. The pre-28 is a very early one, but certainly not one of the first "couple". I should probably letter it some day.

I have never seen a pre-28 that does not have the ramped sight. Interesting. I did not know that the undercut sights came on them.

Thats what I love about collecting. If you keep an open mind you learn something every darn day. I had no idea that the pre-28's came with anything other then a ramped sight.

:)

[BluesBear]

had no idea that the pre-28's came with anything other then a ramped sight. They didn't. That's just my dyslexia kicking in again.

However many, many 27s and pre 27s had ramped sights.
As I recall even as late at the 1980s S&W offered in their catalogues, in addition to the standard plain Patridge front sight, a plain ramp, a red insert ramp, a gold bead Patridge, and a red square Patridge for the Model 27.
I could and probably am wrong, but I don't recall seeing any sort of undercut sight offered except by special order.

My 5" 1954 pre-27 had a plain ramp.

[Rinspeed]

Interesting. The pre-28 is a S1193xx which should be about a 53 gun (I did not look it up) while the pre-27 is S1570xx which should be late 55 (again by memory, I did not look up the dates in the standard catalog). Both are 6.5" barrels. The pre-28 is a very early one, but certainly not one of the first "couple". I should probably letter it some day.


Peter,

I guess the only other question I have for you is how much cash do you need to have for the pair :)

[Peter M. Eick]

I can't in good faith sell them. I guess as a collector, these guns are part of my "seed" collection and will stay with me because they are the first ones of that type I found.

Besides, my Daughter (only 5 right now) likes the pre-27 and I like the pre-28.

[Malamute]

Peter, the Highway Patrolman is a 6 1/2" barrel? I thought they had always been 6" even? Just curious. The older one I had was an even 6".

[thatguy]

Peter- The first Highway Patrolman was built in March of 1954 and started at around S103,000 so yourr HP number S119,000 can't be from 1953.

[Peter M. Eick]

Ok, someone checked the age. It must be a 54 then. I should letter the guy someday.

I did measure it. 6" 5/16" from the front of the barrel to the rear of the forcing cone. I would call that 6.5" for all practical purposes over 6".

I saw a recent thread on the S&W forum (or maybe it was SWCA) saying that the factory in this time frame made them nominal lengths. 1/4 to 3/8" either way was acceptable.

Anyway, its a good shooter and has a nice DA pull. The previous owner did not carry it a lot (the grip panels look good, but it did see some holster wear. My bet is yearly qualification since it was one of many that was available and the story I got is it was a police trade in.

[Malamute]

Thanks Peter, you have expanded my knowledge.

Nice pistol regardless of precise length.

[Old Fuff]

Back in the dark ages S&W used to make long barrel forgings and then cut them to shorter lengths when needed. Then the front sight ramp was attached to the rib via. a slot and pin. If you look closly you can see the pin(s) in the rib. Six-and-one-half barrels as well as others were made in this way. Later they changed to making the barrel forgings in 4, 6, and 8 3/8 inch lengths with the front sight ramp part of the forging, and pined the blade to the ramp. Now get out those model 27's and 28's and look-see ... :D