Smith & Wesson .38 Special Pre Model Ten

It is a .38 Hand Ejector Military and Police. There are no free year by year listings of S&W serial numbers, and they did not ship in serial number sequence. A student of the type could get close on the year by bracketing the serial number and by physical features like the "mushroom" ejector rod head and the markings.
You are right so far, it was made between WWI and WWII, the sight has been filed from a "half moon" into a ramp, and the replacement Magna grips are later than the "service" grips it originally came with.

It is not a "pre model 10" as collectors use the term. It is mechanically different from the guns made between 1950 when the short action became standard and 1957 when model numbers started being used.

tjoh42

This is my S&W M&P .38 Special to give you an idea what it looked like when it left the factory. It was made sometime during WWII. It was not a "Victory" model as there is no V prefix before the serial number and there are no government acceptance marks on it. Most likely it was made for a government agency that was in charge of domestic security as in providing arms for guards at banks, defense plants, and non-military installations.

tjoh42 said:

I inherited a S&W .38 Special pre-Model Ten. The gun has been used, but fires nicely and is in good, but worn, condition. I'm trying to ID when, exactly it was manufactured and determine, roughly, it's value. I am certain it was fabricated between WW1 and WW2. A knowledgeable friend thinks the sight was filed-down, and the handle may have been replaced. Can you ID this gun?

Click to expand...

From my research in the 3rd Edition of Standard Catalog of Smith & Wesson the best fit to the description of the revolver makes it a .38 Military & Police Model of 1905 - 4th change. The time era is narrowed down to between 1915 and 1942. (It seems S&W products did not come off the assembly line in serial number sequence and they didn't keep track - at least not for public consumption - years of serial number issue.) The grips have been replaced with later versions, the original grips were likely the really tiny 'service' style and were frankly hideous to shoot.
It does not look like it's been refinished - but that can be hard to detect from good pictures. The large ejector rod head is an older affectation, but I cannot find a reference for the date of change from "large" to "small".

Yes, the front sight has been altered. The originals were called 'half-moon' sights, looked much like the upper half of a nickel with no impression on either side. They were famous for glinting in the light. The shape alteration was performed likely by the user for that reason. Nice old revolver. Possibly worth something as a collector, but it has been altered and there were a lot of them made. Due to the vast array of financial ditherings and the eccentricities of taste, I would not presume to value the old dear. You should keep it in memory of from where it came. Shoot it on the Fourth of July and such. (At a range or other safe location.)

Technically, this weapon is NOT a pre-Model Ten. The lockwork is somewhat different than the 'new' (at the time) lockwork of what was to become the Model Ten. But most everyone will understand what you mean.

They are fine pistols, and the five-inch barrelled versions are some of the best looking, IMO. The sights and grips would have looked like this from the factory-

The collector value on yours is not terribly high, perhaps $400 +/-, so refinish it if you want to, no real harm done.

Refinish it, YES, you will enjoy the gun even more.

I have a prewar Ithaca pump that was reblued (very poorly) that I had reblued,
refinished the stocks. Now the gun looks like new and in 20 gauge handles like a dream.
When I show it I explain what was done to it.
I like it and love shooting it, as far as value lost or gained, that is for someone else to determine.

tjoh42 said:

I inherited a S&W .38 Special pre-Model Ten. The gun has been used, but fires nicely and is in good, but worn, condition. I'm trying to ID when, exactly it was manufactured and determine, roughly, it's value. I am certain it was fabricated between WW1 and WW2. A knowledgeable friend thinks the sight was filed-down, and the handle may have been replaced. Can you ID this gun?

Click to expand...

Post a message in this thread: https://www.thehighroad.org/index.p...-date-of-manufacture-of-s-w-revolvers.372213/
Include the following and the guys who monitor it will hit the books and see if they can help.

We'd need to know :

a) caliber
b) bbl length (from cylinder to muzzle)
c) grips shape (round or square)
d) number of shots/cylinder bores
e) type of sights.
f) serial number, and if there is a letter in front of or anywhere near the s/n on the bottom of the grip
g) Model number if it is under the crane.
That number, if it is the s/n, should come from the butt of the grip (or under the barrel or face of the cylinder).

A picture or two is worth A LOT of words in this case...

Click to expand...

This revolver can fire if dropped on the hammer, should be carried with the hammer down on an empty chamber

dagger dog said:

This revolver can fire if dropped on the hammer, should be carried with the hammer down on an empty chamber

Click to expand...

I would say that this S&W revolver can fire if the trigger mechanism is packed with grease (or something) to the extent that the rebound slide's spring cannot function properly and it is then dropped on the hammer. I may be being too specific there, but you get the idea. That is the condition that caused a fatal accident with an S&W Military & Police revolver in US Navy service in the Second World War, which caused S&W to redesign the safety mechanism and rebuild the Navy's revolvers so that this particular accident cannot happen.

Given the large number of these revolvers which had been made before WWII, which were never rebuilt to the new standard and which still exist today, if this condition was common enough to warrant carrying the gun with an empty chamber under the hammer, there would have been a LOT of accidents over the past 75 years, and the advice would be as common as that for carrying a Colt SAA with an empty chamber.

Obviously, carrying ANY revolver with an empty chamber under the hammer enhances safety to a degree. The question is whether that degree is great enough to be significant, bearing in mind that significance, like beauty, can be in the eye of the beholder. So consider this whole comment qualified with "In my opinion".

PS - dagger dog is a gentleman. I appreciate that.

Could we get better pictures of the questionable front sight? The base seems awfully wide in one of the shots and I wonder if it is not a ramp and blade sodered on in place of the original front sight

-kBob