Discussion in 'Handguns: Revolvers' started by Sneakshot92, May 28, 2020.
Buffalo Bore DG loads.
Ahh. Close. Should have known with you.
I forgot these in the pre-1957 blued 38s:
38/44 Heavy Duty. Shipped in 1931.
38/44 Outdoorsman. Shipped in 1933.
A couple more blued 38s that I forgot about:
Flat Latch Model 36 Chiefs Special 38 Special. Shipped 1961.
Model 36 that shipped in 1969.
Ooops, forgot another one.
Model 14-3. Shipped 1974.
OK, let's move on to the 357 Magnums:
Model 19-3, bought it brand-spanky new in 1975 for $125. Still have the box and all the goodies.
Model 13-2 Shipped sometime around 1979.
Model 27. Shipped in 1959.
Model 28-2, shipped around 1973. Note, this one has been refinished, the matte finish is a bit duller than the original finish on a Model 18.
Another Model 28-2. This one shipped around 1964. That is what the finish on a Model 28 is supposed to look like.
I think that's it for 357 Magnums.
Nest, on to the 44s.
DJ did you show a nice Malloy/ Reed model 15?
And what do we have here??
She looks like she wants me to find a range and give her some lovin.
Unless I missed it, no blued Triple Locks yet. Here's a Target Model that shipped New Year's Day 1918.
Oops, see below
And here's another Registered Magnum; one was posted earlier by someone else. The last photograph depicts the original lanyard ring, which is a rare feature. IIRC, only 5 Registered Magnum revolvers shipped with this feature.
Not a K-22. The hammer is a center fire hammer. And the tiny rear sight adjustment screw says it is not a K-38.
I would guess it is a 38 M&P Target Model, the precursor to the K-38, which was in turn the precursor to the Model 14.
On to the 44s.
2nd Model Russian. Shipped in 1875. Caliber is 44 Russian.
44 Double Action. Caliber is 44 Russian. This one has been reblued at some point, as can be seen by the blued hammer and trigger. The original front sight was gone so I had a smith replace it with an old dime. Shipped around 1881 if I recall correctly.
New Model Number Three. Caliber is 44 Russian. Shipped in 1895 as part of a large shipment to Japan. Interesting to speculate about how it got back to the USA, perhaps in a GI's duffel bag after WWII.
44 Hand Ejector, 1st Model (Triple Lock). Almost no blue left on it at all, which allowed me to get it for a bargain price. Very early, very low SN. Roy Jinks says it shipped in 1907, even though SCSW says they did not ship until 1908. Notice the caliber marking. It simply says 44 S&W CTG, nothing about Special. Speculation is that the stamp saying 44 Smith and Wesson Special CTG had not been made up yet.
44 Hand Ejector, 1st Model (Triple Lock), Target Model. 44 Special.
44 Hand Ejector, 2nd Model. 44 Special.
44 Hand Ejector 4th Model. 44 Special.
That's it for the blued 44s.
I didn't know you had a Triple Lock Target Model. When did you acquire it? Any more details, are you willing to provide the serial number or any details about how and where you came to acquire it, and have you lettered it?
Not sure exactly how much actual blue/bluing these are (maybe more blue black) but it's what I have....
Where do I start - 6 or 7 nickel ones mixed in there!
These two are my favorite rimfire revolvers. Both .22s. The first picture is of my S&W model 18 no dash. It was made in 1958, the first year S&W started giving their guns model numbers. They only made model 18 no dash revolvers for a couple years. This one is in excellent condition. Has some of the prettiest blue I have ever seen. The grips are Culina, English walnut. I have the box, papers and tools for it. I like the pre model number name they called these. The .22 Combat Masterpiece. In my opinion they were true masterpieces. Firearms from that period of time were built and put together like they never will be again and the rimfires from that time were not just truck or knockabout guns. As much effort went into the rimfires as the centerfires. It is just the perfect size for carrying in the woods. Not too heavy, not too long, it is just the right size and weight. You know it’s there but it is not in the way and has enough weight to it to be a good shooter.
The next revolver is a S&W .22/.32 Hand Ejector, Heavy Frame Target. Some of the earlier made ones, were called Beakeart models, after Phil Beakeart, the dealer that talked S&W into making them. This one was made in 1940, not a true Beakeart. It is an easy 90% revolver. It is an I frame revolver. A bit smaller than a J frame. I always liked the looks of these, the two screw extend grips, gives them a neat look. They are just neat revolvers, you don’t see many of today. I found this one in a gun shop, I Houston, last summer while on vacation. I wish they still made revolvers like these two today. I heard an old timer tell me, years ago, every time S&W added a dash and the number hater the dash went higher, most of the time S&W found away to build them cheaper. I remember a lot of people saying they were done with S&W when they stopped pinning the barrels. I guess I was done with the new S&Ws when they added the lock and put it on the side of the frame. To me the New S&Ws doesn’t look the same and don’t feel the same as older revolvers. I bought a couple with the locks but sold or traded them off. I couldn’t get used to the way the hole, stuck right on the side of the frame. I am glad there are nice older S&Ws to be found in the used market.
Model 19 , got it around 1970.
A few more...
My first, a 27-2:
Here it is with the 28-2 I picked up a little while back:
I now need a 29-2 and an early model 586.
Old crappy pic of my Model 29, sorry. I bought this around 76/77.
If you happen to bump into that Old Timer again, tell him Smith and Wesson has ALWAYS looked for a way to make them cheaper. All the way back to 1857 when they made their first revolvers. (yes, 1857, not 1957). Any company that wants to stay in business must look for ways to cut the cost to manufacture, and S&W is no different than any other successful manufacturing company in that aspect. I could probably site you examples of engineering changes to drive down the cost to manufacture back in the 1860s if I sat down and thought about it.
By the way, nice 'Bekaert'. I have one just like it. Mine shipped in 1940 too. At the top of the photo is a K-22 for size comparison. The 22/32 Heavy Frame Target at the bottom of the photo shipped in 1923.
I realize every firearm manufacturer has had to find was to cut.cost, to stay in business. If you think about it, Ruger caused the end of the Colt Woodsman. Colt just couldn’t make the woodsman at a price to complete with the Ruger auto 22. Glock, in recent times, has cause them all to have to change their ways. We have gained a lot, but we have sure lost a lot. I much rather have the old stuff. Firearms made back in the day, were some fine stuff. You have a very nice 22/32 yourself. To me they are neat little revolvers.
It is a never ending cycle. Remington dealt a death blow to the Winchester Model 12 with their Model 870 pump shotgun. They used stamped parts instead of the Winchester machined parts and the Model 12 could not compete in price.
I prefer the old stuff too.
"Firearms made back in the day, were some fine stuff"
It's all relative. I'll bet you a donut if we could go back to 1892 there were guys saying how much better the Winchester Model 1873 was than the Model 1892. The Model 1892 was stronger, lighter, and less expensive to produce than the Model 1873, but us humans tend to not like something new.
Separate names with a comma.