[Pendragon]

I sold a gun to someone today and after we were done, I checked out the consignment shelf.

I saw the most beautiful Smith and Wesson - it was so shiny, I thought it was actually either nickel or chrome in low lighting - but it was just that amazing blued finish that the old ones have.

This gun was in excellent condition. It had a ring around the cylinder, but it was clean and tight and had the box with the blue velvet and a rod and maybe some papers.

I was at the book store later and found a pricing guide that said $450 NIB - this guy is asking $1100.

The thing is, you probably will not find another one like this in CA up for sale so I think that if one was to stay here, it might almost be worth it.

High dollar guns tend to move pretty slow at this dealer so there is a chance it wil still be there in two months when I sell my house.

I have had to sell all my guns except my Valtro to hold on to the house with the understanding that I can buy a few replacements when the dust settles.

I was thinking I would offer $900 to the guy if its still there in late July.

Any input?

BTW - it was a 6" model and I would use it for hunting and load my own ammo - no problem there.

Is the .41 mag stronger than the .44 due to more metal to support it?

[Mike Irwin]

I know the California situation is completely screwed up, but no way in the world do I think that a Model 57 is worth $1,100.

[JohnBT]

That is steep. I thought the guns here were expensive.

I saw 2 blue Pythons at a local shop Saturday - both with 6-inch barrels. They were very, very, very nice sitting there under glass on their boxes.

One for a grand and the other for $1200.

I didn't even ask to see them because I'd already used up all of willpower looking at a basic Cooper .22 for $1050.

John

[KPersimmon]

<<<<I was at the book store later and found a pricing guide that said $450 NIB - this guy is asking $1100.>>>

The cynic in me says: In a free market it doesn't matter what an item is actually worth, but what some fool is willing to pay.

[Pendragon]

absolutely true.

its extremely difficult to get the classic revolvers around here - pretty much if you see one, it might be the only one you will ever see.

since availability is so tight, you can't really worry about te price as much.

Maybe I will offer him $700 or so - a new N frame is going to cost near that much anyway.

My situation is - I will have the money, so I just want to get a really nice gun and I like the fact that its not that common...

[braindead0]

They've got a beat up winchester .22lr gallery gun at a local shop, price tag is $750.

Heck, I've got a winchester .22 WRF octogon barrel at my Dad's house...that must be worth millions! ;-)

[Pendragon]

Wow, so in Ohio, you have very few restrictions if any on what hand guns you can buy and how.

Apples.

Oranges.

The ONLY way to get a handgun that is not "listed" (as in, a current model that the maker has had tested) is to buy it from another individual in CA or to find in on consignment (more or less the same thing).

It is not legal for gun shops to resell older used guns that are not on the magic DOJ list. Currently, there are some 800+ handguns available, but if you like classic Smith and wesson revolvers, you are pretty mush SOL.

Imagine you could never again buy a used car that was not already in Ohio. If you wanted a classic Corvette - maybe its only $8000 in the rest of the country - but you can't buy those Corvettes, you are stuck with what is already in Ohio. Not many Vettes, fewer for sale and even fewer are in cherry condition.

Supply and demand baby.

You have unrestricted supply.

At least I will have a CCW pretty soon :neener:

[Standing Wolf]

I'd like to find a model 57 in tip-top shape myself, but $1,100 is plain old-fashioned price gouging.

[tex_n_cal]

:p try www.cccfirearms.com up in Walnut Creek - they had a 6" M57 the last time I was there, and it was $550 - $600 or so, if I recall correctly. They usually have a few Smith N frames

Of course, if you want to find a blue .44 in CA, you might visit our handy handguns for sale forum. (that's a hint);)

[Ala Dan]

NO WAY, JOSE! This price is way too high!:rolleyes: :uhoh:

Let the dust settle upon it, and then make him an offer.


Best Wishes,
Ala Dan, N.R.A. Life Member

[BigG]

To answer your second question, I would guess the Mod 57 would be marginally stronger than the Mod 29 because of slightly more metal due to the smaller caliber.

I think $1,100 is plenty much, but as a buyer myself I know I have bought things that I wanted without regard for price. It can't hurt to make an offer when the dust settles, in the mean time you can keep your eyes peeled for a better deal.

[Target Shooter]

Damn thats high, I bought a 4" Model 57 in the presentation case with the cleaning kit and old style screwdriver from an individual two years ago for $300.00. It was in 98% condition in a blued finish. I wouldn't give over 400.00 for one. But that is in Texas though. Good luck.

[munk]

I would never pay 1100 bucks for a 57 or 29 or 27 or 28 or 58: you get the idea.

btw- the N frame is a match made in heaven for the 41. For those who question whether or not they last longer, I remember what Dean Grennell said in the Nosler #3, that his 41 was as tight and sound as the day he took it out of the box, many years before, but he'd gone through several model 29's in the same period of time.


munk

[Byron Quick]

A couple of years ago I bought a S prefix 57 4" barrel for $450 here in Georgia. Appeared to be unfired.

I'd move, guy.

[munk]

Saxonpig; Almost forgot, the 57 and 29 cylinders are NOT the same size. For conversions to 45 Colt the choice was usually to use the 41 cylinder as a start. It was a little bigger around- don't remember by how much



If today's CNC S&W has the 41 and 44 cylinders the same size it wouldn't surprise me for 657 and 629.


munk

[munk]

I'm not wrong. I knew an Engineer and gunsmith in Idaho Falls Id. He used to do the conversion. He'd measured the cylinders of course to establish this. There was enough difference to make using the 41 cylinder usefull for more strength. I have seen the finished product and observed as he measured two cylinders in front of me. He thought it was pretty funny. The difference would have nothing to do with interchangability. Of course you can swap cylinders. Index the same and as I said, the difference was slight.

It is just one of those quirks. I'm curious to see if the cylinders are standard today. I bet they are.


munk

[JShirley]

Hell, why would one want a 6" .41? :D

If it was a beautiful 4" 57 or 657, I still can't see paying over 550$, max.

John

[munk]

Have you ever heard the theory that no all around handgun barrel should be longer than 6"?

Sounds like a thread topic.



munk

I have a nickel plated 57 4" that will shoot golf ball size holes round after round, really, until the paper is gone at 25 yards. I paid 275 for it 6 years ago in pawn.

[JShirley]

Good to see you, munk.

Let me know if you ever wanna offload that 57.

John

[munk]

Saxon Pig, let me introduce myself- my forum name is munk. I'm not particularly an aggressive poster, and am something of a pure gunnut- of the old, excited-like-a-little-kid, variety. I have no reason to lie, or exagerate, or infer more knowledge than I have. I want the truth, like you. There are many people here far more knowledgeable about firearms than I.

I'm just getting this out of the way- there is nothing I have to gain by putting on any airs or communicating something that isn't true.

I can certainly be wrong. I am well aware, ad infinitum and nausea, that there is extra metal between chambers of the 41 vs 44 because of the diameter of the holes.

My late late friend was a teacher of physics, engineer, gunsmith. He worked at the nuclear site in Idaho for many years. He worked at Los Alamos, and tested atomic bombs for the Govt. He made this conversion many times. I saw the miked cylinders and final product. Was this only a limited range of years of Smith and Wesson that this was true? Was this true of pinned barrel Smiths only? I don't know. I've called his former shop manager anticipating just such an objection from you, but haven't reached him yet. By all means mike your 41 and 44. I just did my 41 Smith, made in the 80's, and it is 1.720 Another friend just miked his, and it is 1.715 I don't know about my friend, but depending upon how I held the caliper I could jostle the reading a little.

As far as you know, munk and his 'engineer' friend are loons, living out in the desert somewhere, eating stolen radioactive waste from X-ray machines in anticipation of building up a tolerance for the 'Big One". We watch re-runs of Lassie constantly and often dance with hoola hoops.

At any rate, the difference was very small, but enough so my friend wanted the extra margin of safety.

If I am wrong my friend purchased 10 41's for this conversion for no reason. He could have purchased 44's and cut less metal. He miked them all. I saw one 44 and one finished 45 Colt cut from 41 that backed his assertion.


munk

[munk]

I reached the shop manager and this is what I learned. ( I hope you appreciate this sacrafise as my 9 month old son threw his tray on the floor waiting for me to get off the phone)

The cylinders were bored by Bod Dunlap. They were the largest N frame cylinders. No one could figure out why. This was not normal manufacturing varience. They were pinned gun Smiths- the manager thinks.

My late friend's name is Warren Madsen. Some of his patents are still overhead in f-16's and satellites. He has testified before Congress. He was a friend of the late Elgin Gates and family. He would not bother, nor would the well known gun smith Dunlap, with mere individual varience.

I understand you don't believe me and that's fine.

The former shop manager laughed- just like my late friend had. "It was loopy, there was logical reason for it, but they were bigger.:"

munk

edit; Thanks to the measuring we've done today, I will no longer say the N 41 has a bigger cylinder. However, I have no doubt during the period of time my friend did these converesion, that Smith made them bigger. I am a little sad- my friend made the mistake of assuming all N frame 41's were always bigger, and that is not the case.

[Pendragon]

Well, I might just try to find a nice 657 instead.

I would like a nice magnum for hunting - .357 seems like almost but not quite, a .44 is nice, bo so... over used.

I like the rarity of the .41 mag - I am being sucked into the cult of the .41!

WOW!

The only .41 currently available in CA is the 657-5 with 7.5" barrel!

Of course, I could go with an SA - those do not have to be listed if they are over 7.5 inches long (OAL).

[munk]

for all the talk of the old handcrafted Smiths, the new CNC items are very well done.


I had a 657 that I liked very well.



munk

[makarov]

With all this talk about .41's... I was in my local shop today and they had a MINT 57 with the long barrel 8 and 3/8 I think. It had the wooden box and the cardboard sleeve too. Really nice shape. I don't need a .41 and I don't know how practical the long barrel would be. Asking price was $399... Lots of other guns on my list, but still I feel it calling me back. I don't know why but wheelguns just don't sell well in that shop. They have several model 28's and 14's, 686's and GP 100's, 66's you name it. The monster model 57 just kind of stuck out though. Glossy blue and bigger than anything else in the case. I might have to take up reloading though. $20 a box for ammo.

[munk]

What State is that in, Makorav?




munk

[makarov]

Washington. Reading about the $1100 model 57 is really sad. I actually prefer calibers that are cheaper and easier to find. I don't have any big magnum calibers. I have a 27-2 6" that would like a pal though.

[munk]

I've a friend who lives across the Puget sound from Seattle.


I told him not to move there but did he listen to me?

I almost bought a Smith 27 with the long barrel, nickel plated, and old enough for the hatch marks across the sight ramp. It was so beautiful.

munk

[munk]

I had to attend a graduation ceremony last night and didn't get around to measuring my .41 but I will ASIGH. (As Soon As I Get Home.) I still can't believe the .41 cylinders are routinely larger than the others.>>

I don't think they are- I think you're right. Certainly before I ran into my buddy that is what I believed- cylinders the same diameter.

Bob Dunlap was/is ? a Master Gunsmith for Smith and Wesson. He was an authorized warranty repair center. He alerted my friend and gunsmith that the 41 cylinders were large and did the conversion to 45 Colt. This was apparently around the time Bangor Punta had the company.

I think the cylinders were large for a short time. Bangor Punta was not known for qualtiy control. Someone must have done a run of overlarge cylinders. A Smith reference book we consulted last night had no mention of this.

munk

[Phil in Seattle]

I don't know why but wheelguns just don't sell well in that shop. They have several model 28's and 14's, 686's and GP 100's, 66's you name it

Where? Where? Where?

Please divulge! Idovote@aol.com

What's that sound I hear? Oh damn it's the M1A fund shrinking again.

[Hkmp5sd]

If you think the gun is worth $1100 and you are willing to pay $1100, it is then worth $1100.

It's the same with virtually any purchase. Someone will know of one cheaper or of a better one for the price and the moment you walk out the door with it, the market will be flooded with them and the price will drop through the basement.

It all depends on how bad you want this particular gun.

[munk]

Saxon, you were absolutely correct about size standard with the cylinders. My friend and I erroniously assumed all 41 cylinders were larger because of the conversions and the size of cylinders at that time.

However, Bob Dunlap was a S&W master gunsmith, and authorized warrenty repair. He alerted my friend about the oversize cylinders at that time and the two men did the conversions to 45 Colt. There is no doubt in my mind that Dunlap or Madsen were not dealing with standard manufacturing varience. You keep bringing up this variance as if Dunlap- Smith's own gunsmith, and Madsen, an engineer, would not have known that.

If I knew what I know now- I would not have mentioned it as it is only a piece of esoteria.


munk