Harrington & Richardson Top Break Pics

Status
Not open for further replies.
F

Foto Joe

Member
Joined
Jan 13, 2010
Messages
1,378
Location
Cody, WY
I've gotten a couple of requests for pics of this gun and I finally got around to taking some. I'm interested in finding out exactly what model this is. My research has not turned up a definate model with these Patent Dates on it although I think it might be a "Premier Auto Ejecting" which if I'm correct was designed for Black Powder cartridges NOT smokeless.

Anyway, she's fun to shoot and easy to clean.

Click Here for pics.

I should have clarified the Patent Dates originally. The top of the barrel is marked: Pat. May 14 & Aug. 6, '89 April 2, 1895 April 7, 1896
 
Last edited:
I have a very similar gun that I believe to be a Model 1880. Unfortunately, it needs repair and I am unable to find parts ... or a gunsmith that will work on it. :(
 
You don't really need replicas of H&Rs and Iver Johnsons, you can get a nice one of either for $150. Replicas would only be good if they were made with modern high quality steel and in modern calibers.

You can get a Schofield replica by Uberti though, for the tube of $800 and up.
 
Nice looking Revolver Foto Joe.


I wish I knew more about the "H & R"s.


I have a pretty good reference Book covering the Iver Johnsons though.


Your 'H & R' may even have been made well into the Smokeless Age.

Often, the last Patent Date shown was retained for about 17 years, untill expiry of the Patent, then omitted from the roll Stamp.


Iver Johnson revamped their whole Line up in 1913, using new Steels, and making everything stronger, to feel sure all would be good with where things were headed with the Smokeless Powders of the day, as well as using that opportunity to just introduce small improvements they wanted to do anyway.


I have not been able to learn anything about the various other makes, including H & R, H & A, S & W, in this regard, as for their small frame Break Tops.



Post # 3 has some info ( might be more info further on too ) -

( I guess there is a 'Book' ! Post # 3 sig line, apparently this guy is the Author, Book to come out Spring of 2010 )

http://www.thefirearmsforum.com/showthread.php?t=46795
 
Last edited:
b.goforth said:
H&R PREMER SECOND MODEL SMALL FRAME TOP BREAK R.F. & C.F. ----------1905-1941
Small fame double action top break revolver with double top post barrel latch; calibers and cylinder capacity, 22 rimfire-7 rounds, 32 S&W, 5 rounds; automatic cylinder stop; standard finish Nickel with case harden hammer and barrel latch; standard barrel length 3 inches, with 2, 4, 5 and 6 inches available as optional; HAS CALIBER MARKINGS ON LEFT SIDE OF BARREL WAS MANUFACTURED FOR SMOKELESS POWDER CARTRIDGE PRESSURES.
There has not been enough data gathered on serial number to try to come up with a serial number range for the different variations.
First Variation, model name & caliber marked on left side of barrel, patent dates 5-14-89, 4-2-95, 4-7-96---------------1905-Only
Second Variation, model name & caliber marked on left side of barrel, patent dates 4-2-95, 4-7-96-------------------1906-1908
Third Variation, caliber only marked on left side of barrel, patent date 10-8-95-------1909-1913
Fourth Variation, caliber only marked on left side of barrel, no patent date, state not spelled out in address (MASS)---------1914-1915
Fifth Variation, caliber only marked on left side of barrel same as 4th except different font used in barrel markings----------1914-1915
Sixth Variation, caliber only marked on left side of barrel. State name in barrel marking spelled out (MASSACHUSETTS)-----1916-1924
Seventh Variation, new grip frame, there is no step down for the grip panels to fit into-----1925-1942
After 1930 listed in catalogs as; PREMIER No. 30 .22 Rimfire 7 shot & PREMIER No. 35.32 S&W 5 shot
VALUE: 100%=$265 60%=$75 Add 10% premium for blue finish; 20% premium 4”, 5” or 6” barrel; 20% premium for 22 rimfire caliber; 10% premium for 7th variation
Click to expand...

Oyeboten
Great Information!! I've pretty much determined from the above quote that this H&R was manufactured in 1905. If this is correct then I'm going to deduce that "If" the gun were purchased "New" then it probably would have been bought by my Great-Grandpa which would have passed down to Grandpa upon Great Grandads death. Who ever made the original purchase, it's pretty cool.

HandR02.jpg
 
H&R PREMER SECOND MODEL SMALL FRAME TOP BREAK R.F. & C.F. ----------1905-1941
Small fame double action top break revolver with double top post barrel latch; calibers and cylinder capacity, 22 rimfire-7 rounds, 32 S&W, 5 rounds; automatic cylinder stop; standard finish Nickel with case harden hammer and barrel latch; standard barrel length 3 inches, with 2, 4, 5 and 6 inches available as optional; HAS CALIBER MARKINGS ON LEFT SIDE OF BARREL WAS MANUFACTURED FOR SMOKELESS POWDER CARTRIDGE PRESSURES.
Click to expand...

I was under the impression that the revolver in question is a .38, not a .22 or .32.

The pictured revolver is an "Old Model," rather then a "New Model," and can be identified as such because the latter one had a positive cylinder lock that prevented the cylinder from rotating when the trigger was forward. The change was made around 1905 - 07, But it took H&R some time to use up the older parts that were still on hand.

Positive identification of these older top-breaks can be critical when it comes to shooting them with modern ammunition, and unfortunately there isn't a lot of information available. When the exact age cannot be determined, any Iver Johnson (IJ) or Harrington - Richardson (H&R) revolver that does not have a positive cylinder locking system should be considered, "black powder only," and given the materials used when they were manufactured, shooting them at all can be questionable.
 
Good mention Old Fuff...

I think the presence of a Cylinder Incicing notch would be a good Rule of Thumb for in effect, dividing the Modern 'Smokeless' era from the 'Black Powder' era for these Top Breaks whatever their make.


Even with this in mind, I think if one does one's own Loading, some of the Bulky 'Cowboy Action' oriented Powders/Propellents could be carefully evaluated for use in the .38 S & W Cartridge.


But, Black Powder we know is suited, and it is definitely fun and satisfying to use, it always has a nice Report and Recoil in any Cartridge application, and is 'fail safe' in these applications, so there is not a lot of reason to look any farther anyway..!


Nor is it that the 'SAAMI' Blessed Loadings for approved Smokeless charges for the .38 S & W Cartridge would necessarily make any more pressure than BP...they might make the same pressure faster, or, they might make less pressure even, I do not know.

But if over-charged, and not a bulky kind of Smokeless to prevent it or to allow an easy visual cue when loading Cartridges, a mistake making too much pressure too fast, could ruin the Revolver of course.


"777" used carefully, is about the only option from BP which I would consider for myself, thus far, for loading Cartridges for my couple of old Top Breaks.


And, given that a BP charge would be compressed, and a '777' charge not compressed, and with the small Volume the Case allows, the difference between the two Ballistically, for this Cartridge, might not be much at all.


I will find out of course, eventually and report in the details and Chronograph readings.


Since the original Cartridge Cases held maybe 10 or 15 percent more Powder...I think we can say that when using modern Cartridge Cases, we will be slightly under-loaded when having got all the BP into a Case we can, unless the Bullet is held out to allow 10 or 15 percent more Powder, and I do not know how much room there is to hold a Bullet out to try that, since one does not want to block the Cylinder from turning.


I do not know if my guess of 10 or 15 percent is correct, either, it is just a casual guess.


Learning learning learning...and so much to learn, too...
 
If you were living in 1909 and reading the latest catalog from Sears-Roebuck, you would discover that you could order the exact same H&R .38 pictured above for $3.50 (pearl stocks were $1.10 extra :D). A similar Smith & Wesson (without pearl stocks) was $12.00. Obviously there was a difference, although they both look about the same.

The difference that matters most is the materials that each was made of, and the quality of the respective lockwork used in each. While the S&W was made from steel forgings, the frame and barrel of the H&R started life as an iron sand casting. Both made cylinders from rolled steel bars, and neither heat-treated anything beyond case hardening the hammer and trigger.

Black powder loads didn't require they do more, although the S&W would stay tight and outlast an H&R. But H&R's market was those who didn't want to spend the money on a S&W, and were more inclined to leave the gun in a drawer, "just in case...." Today they are sometimes found still new in the box because "just in case" never happened. However time did not improve their quality, and the maker's believe that they only had to be good enough for light duty, or better yet, no use at all. For that reason they were made to match a low price point.

Today's smokeless loads are supposed to not exceed peak black powder pressures. The problem is that they reach peak pressure faster, and therefore put more stress on the cylinder and cylinder latch area of the frame.

I will note that it is my understanding that 777 powder produces higher pressures then the same volume of 3f black powder... :uhoh:

So is use of current ammunition (factory or handloaded) likely to blow one of these 19th century revolvers up? Possibly but not likely, but use of anything other then the black powder that they were made to use can stretch the frame, if the gun is shot extensively. Considering that they seldom offer anything better then marginal accuracy, and the sights are almost impossible to see, even under the best of conditions, I see little reason to go to the trouble and expense of shooting them.

On the other hand certain models of Smith & Wesson and Colt revolvers are a different story.
 
Nice H& R !!!

WHEN THE BARREL IS STAMPED 38 S&W CTGE. the pistole was produced to shoot smokeless rounds,,,,although black powder rounds can still be fired.
 
Bill Goforth said:
This is a large frame "auto-ejecting" model not a Premier.

starting in about 1890 H&R began production of the second model large frame auto-ejecting model and found it to be a popular handgun and made many hundred of thousands of them. they use a letter code prefix and up to 5 digit serial numbers to help keep track of their production (changed letter codes every 100,000). this stopped in 1905 and after that there was only one serial number series up to about 700,000.

when the third model auto-ejecting was introduced in 1905 it had the caliber and sometimes the model name on the left side of the barrel but always the caliber. this revolver is a third model auto-ejecting first variation manufactured in 1905 (second year G letter code was used) and about as early a third model as you can get.

AUTOMATIC EJECTING THIRD MODEL
(SMOKELESS POWDER) ------------------1905-1940
Auto-ejecting mechanism, Calibers 32 S&W Long, 6 shot cylinder capacity, 38 S&W caliber 5 shot cylinder capacity, hard rubber grip panels with Target Logo, nickel finish (blue optional), barrel lengths of 2½ (rare), 3¼ (standard), 4, 5 & 6 inches available, top of barrel markings include company name and address and early production has patent dates, the one recognizable difference in the Second and Third Models is the caliber is marked on the
left side of the barrel on the Third Model
“IF IT HAS A CALIBER MARKED ON THE LEFT SIDE OF THE BARREL THEN IT WAS MANUFACTURED FOR SMOKELESS POWDER”
First Variation 4 patent dates (5-14 & 8-6-89, 4-2-95, 4-7-97) model name and caliber on left side of barrel------------1905-1908
Second Variation 2 patent dates (8-6-89 and 10-8-95) model name and caliber on left side of barrel ----------------------1909-1912
Third Variation no patent dates the name of the state is marked as MASS----------------1913-1915
Fourth Variation no patent dates the state name of Massachusetts is spelled -------------1916-1924
Fifth Variation new grip frame, it is now the same size as the rest of the frame with no step down for the grip panel—1925-1941
After 1931 listed in Catalogs as: AUTOMATIC EJECTING No. 10 .32 S&W LONG CALIBER 6 shots
After 1931 listed in Catalogs as; AUTOMATIC EJECTING No. 25 .38 S&W CALIBER 5 shots
After 1932 listed in Catalogs as: AUTOMATIC EJECTING No. 20..38 S&W CALIBER 5 shots
VALUE: 100%=$235 60%=$85 For all Auto-Ejecting 3rd Models; add 75% premium for 2½” barrel; add 25% for 4”, 5” & 6” barrels; add 15% for blue finish;

bill
__________________
Author:
Iver Johnson's Arms & Cycle Works 1871-1993
H&R Arms Company 1871-1986 (due spring 2010)
Click to expand...

This is the source for the information that I have gathered so far about this gun.

Old Fuff,

I respect your knowledge and opinion, but remember when it comes to collecting firearms such as this, beauty is in the eye of the beholder. Historically it might not be such an important piece but as far as I'm concerned any such weapon of the period deserves our respect and protection from those who would do away with all weapons.

Besides, it is a fun little gun to shoot and believe it or not, I can actually hit a bullet with the broad side of a barn with the thing.
 
Well...with all this in mind...


My own thought, is that if one have say, a latter era S & W, or, a 3rd Model Iver Johnson, then it is pretty certain these are the strongest of the offerings of the day, or of prior.


I have been interested in how the Modern .38 S & W Cartridge cases have a smaller Volume than did the earlier 'Folded Head' era ones.


With a full charge of BP, such as the Case and Bullet seating depth allow, maybe this is just as well, that the charge would be a little reduced from the original, given the unknown effects over time, stresses or other factors, a .38 S&W Cartridge firing Revolver may have acquired along the way.


The strongest latter versions, according to one's considered judgement and conscience, probably could abide '777' alright, given that '777' is about 15 percent more powerful than BP volume for volume, for a charge of BP...where, unless I am confused, the '777' then would about break even, for the smaller Case and the reduced charge of BP it will hold.

Thus acheiving the equivilent ( if burn rates are the same, and they may not be ) of what the original BP Loading was.

Now, if the '777' had a faster flame front or conflagration and pressure realization, it might be more of a strain to the Arm than the original full charge of BP was...but, probably, only slightly, I would guess.


Olf Fuff knows an aweful lot more than I do about all this, and about the Arms of the Day, and the materials used in their manufacture.


My own situation, is one of finding all this very interesting, and, of learning, brooding, reviewing, and trying to organize and manage what I have so far gathered about a very large and endlessly detailed broader subject matter.


One can get Vertigo sometimes!


Lol...
 
Last edited:
Old Fuff,

I respect your knowledge and opinion, but remember when it comes to collecting firearms such as this, beauty is in the eye of the beholder. Historically it might not be such an important piece but as far as I'm concerned any such weapon of the period deserves our respect and protection from those who would do away with all weapons.

Besides, it is a fun little gun to shoot and believe it or not, I can actually hit a bullet with the broad side of a barn with the thing.
Click to expand...

Boy did I get put down! :neener:

Well it's this way. Over the years I have owned, and sometimes shot, a number of pre-war Iver Johnson and Harrington & Richardson revolvers. I know much more about those company's history then most, and I consider them to be historically important. From a sales point of vew, both companies ran Colt and Smith & Wesson into the ground when it came to pocket model revolvers, at the turn of the 20th century. Few people know it, but during World War Two, the Army's OSS bought a number of Iver Johnson small-frame .32's with 2" barrels; supposedly to arm radio operators and agents working behind German lines with a last ditch hide-out pistol. They were not loaed with black powder ammunition.

Which brings up the point I'm trying to make. It is unwise to shoot black-powder era revolvers with smokeless powder ammunition because the burning rate is faster and puts more strain on the cylinder then they were made to handle! The easy way to tell is to look at the cylinder stop notches, and also see if the cylinder can be turned while the trigger is forward. If it can that revolver should be considered to be a black-powder model.

If one want's to shoot one of these guns (and I have) get one with a positive cylinder stop system, that was unquestionably made to shoot smokeless loads.

I'll gladly leave it up to anyone and everyone to make up their own minds about what they want too do.
 
Old Fuff said:
Boy did I get put down!
Click to expand...

Quite the contrary sir, believe me. If it wasn't for folks like you on THR, I'd be much more ignorant than I used to be.

We may have a little bit of mis-communication going here though. I'm one of those people who have gotten bored with most modern firearms. Not only that, I think it's a shame that cartridges that were originally designed for use with "Gun Powder", that black nasty stuff we know and love are commonly loaded nowadays with smokeless propellent. We, our kids and our grandkids are missing out on an important history lesson. That lesson being that some of the weapons used in the 19th century were spectacular in performance even compared to todays modern equivalents. Myopinion is that if Colt or S&W designed the cartridge using BP and it was good enough for them, then it will probably work for me.

A perfect example is the 45LC's I've been loading. It just ain't the same using smokeless, those BP babies are haulin' when they leave the barrel.

I guess what got me started was almost ten years ago I got the chance and took it to shoot a Gatlin Gun in 45-70 loaded with BP cartridges. I still have to wipe the smile off my kisser when I think about that one.
 
My forays into re-loading so far, have been almost entirely Black Powder.

This for .38 Special, and, for .45 Colt.


Both Cartridges in BP perform very well by any standard, and, have a much nicer recoil and report than Smokeless Loadings do.


Black Powder Metallic Cartridge Loadings for Revolver will indeed put a Smile on your face!


They sure have mine anyway.


I am also VERY fond of my couple of Cap & Ball Revolvers.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

MuayThaiJJ
  • Locked
Antique Break-Top .32 revolvers - ADVICE for cartridges?
Replies
5
Views
420
TTv2
TTv2
G
  • Locked
Help Identifing H&R .38 S&W Cal. Top Break
Replies
6
Views
3K
Gun Master
G
J
  • Locked
Question on a H&R top break revolver..
Replies
2
Views
585
Johnboy55
J
T
  • Locked
Harrington & Richardson Arms Company revolver
Replies
14
Views
6K
Old Fuff
O
J
  • Locked
H & R id. Help
Replies
12
Views
2K
dagger dog
dagger dog
Back
Top