[Arkady]

Researching this one for a friend:

5-Screw gun, no property or ordnance markings, chromed. No caliber information (or anything else) engraved on the barrel, which appears to have been shortened at some point (ends 1/4 inch past the tip of the ejector rod). Front sight has been reattached and filed down a small amount. The only writing on the entire pistol is the S&W crest, "Made in USA" and the serial number. At some point, a hideous set of faux-stag grips were added.

Serial number range is 734xxx, no prefix.

Definitely not .38 special chambers, so I assume .38 S&W.

[Jim K]

Since the normal M&P production was in .38 Special, I would assume any gun in .38 S&W was for British or other contract and could be called a pre-Victory model. Prior to Lend Lease, the U.S. was not involved in those contracts; it was not until the U.S. began paying for the guns (around Sept. 1941) that the ordnance markings and USP were added.

The gun you have was one of thousands sold as surplus by the British or some other country and modified, mostly by Cogswell & Harrison in England, for the U.S. market. Some were left in .38 S&W, others were reamed to take .38 Special. (Contrary to some alarmists firing standard .38 Special in those guns results in nothing more than slightly bulged cases, not an explosion that will wipe out the county.)

The work is generally well done, with the front sight neatly remounted. Shortening the barrel eliminates the front ejector rod lockup, but that also is not a great cause for alarm for a reasonable amount of shooting.

Jim

Jim

[Arkady]

I appreciate the information, Jim. That sounds like exactly what my friend needed to know.

It also fits, for the most part, with what my research had indicated. (.38 S&W is a guess, by the way--.38 Special will not fit all the way into the cylinder, so it seemed reasonable)

I found some .38 S&W for him locally, so we'll likely take it out and run a few rounds through it some night this week. Have you ever run into a case where the hammer obscures the front sight when firing DA?

[rcmodel]

Something odd going on there.

The hammer spur should never obscure the rear sight notch, anywhere in its travel.

If it can't obscure the rear sight notch, it's hard to understand how it could possibly obscure the front sight either.

Unless someone bent it up higher or something.

Does the hammer spur look like this?
http://www.collectorsfirearms.com/admin/product_details.php?itemID=30140

rc

[Arkady]

The issue is that when aligning the front and rear sights (across the tops, standard sight picture), the top of the hammer obscures the rear sight groove, and by extension, the front sight.

[Ron James]

If it was in England, then it came home in someones dulffle bag, other wise it would have numberous markings. The British loved to stamp markings on import and export firearms.

[Arkady]

I hadn't considered that, actually. I'll try to get some pictures of the pistol.

[Ron James]

I'm thinking they were buffed out when it was plated.

[Arkady]

Were the stampings shallow enough to be buffed out like that? Because I found absolutely no sign of any other markings on the pistol.

I own several S&Ws, but the oldest of them is an early 70's model, so I'm not too familiar with manufacturing/marking techniques prior to that.

[Jim K]

Most of the British markings were fairly shallow and could easily have been polished out or covered up when the gun was plated. The barrel markings were heavily stamped, but would have been removed when the barrel was shortened.

As a rule, the original front sights were cut off and silver soldered back on (the sights were part of the barrel). Since they would be too high (the people who had the work done wanted to sell guns, not accurize them), it could be possible for the gun to point down so much that the firing pin nose obscures the rear sight notch.

Jim