My new (old) CCW, did I do good?

Status
Not open for further replies.

B BRI

Member
Joined
Sep 4, 2003
Messages
115
Location
Douglas County, Colorado
Picked this up recently . . .

SmithWesson.jpg
[/IMG]

I think its a 3rd Model New Departure Safety Hammerless, serial number 684##. Real close to the antique cutoff. Not sure though. Came with a real nifty shoulder holster. I think this was CCW'd long before there were any laws making us jump through hoops to pack.

smith.jpg
[/IMG]

all original finish . . . good bore . . . no rust . . . tight action . . . a little carry wear on one grip . . . definately carried far more than shot.

Paid $180 for it . . . came out of a local estate. Did I do good ?:D
 
I'm no expert, but I think this old S&W was based on the Number 2 frame, made from 1887 to 1940. Granddad carried one, and I always wanted one. Most of them I've run across for the last 20+ years have been rode hard and put up wet. This was is a keeper.

Now it has a cherished place in my safe next to another antique hand me down. This old 45 would be a little tougher to CCW. ;)

0924081251.jpg
[/IMG]
 
B BRI, all I can give you is what is in the Standard Catalog of S&W. You have a .38 safety Hammerless 3rd Model, these were manufactured between 1890 & 1898, in a serial number range 42484 to 116002. I would be fairly confident that yours would fall well before the 1898 cut off date for consideration as an antique by the BATF, but to find out for certain you would need to contact Roy Jinks at S&W. For a $50 fee he will look up the shipping date and address of your particular gun.
 
The .38 Safety Hammerless was made from 1887 to 1941 (or thereabouts). I think the one you have was probably made around 1892. That would make it a federal-legal antique, but it's also on the borderline for use with smokeless powder. The shoulder holster was made much later then the revolver, and yes - the price you paid is well below market.

I sometimes carry a later one, made during the mid-1920's. As a rule of thumb those that have the "T" barrel latch (.38 Safety Hammerless, 5th model) made after 1907 (or serial number 220,000) are good to go with smokeless loads. Those between those between 200,000 and 220,000 are probably O.K.

You are in good company. Besides the Old Fuff, a U.S. president named Teddy Roosevelt carried one. :D
 
It looks like the Smith and Wesson No. 3 model. The trigger has me thrown though. :confused:
 
that is one cool revolver, if it is safe to fire smokeless modern cartridges why shouldn't he carry it if he wanted to?
 
Smith & Wesson advertised that this revolver was designed for close-up work, and more intended to be pointed then aimed. I’ve found this to be the case. It is also totally ambidextrous, and can be fired, unloaded and loaded without any handicap so far as which hand is used. Most .38 Special J-frame speedloaders will work, and you don’t have to worry about getting hung up on the left-side stock.

While carrying one that was made over a century ago might be questionable, the model was still in production as late as 1940 or 41, so it isn’t necessary to tote an antique. Just for grins, I might point out that the Military & Police model (aka “model 10”) is still around and going strong, although it first saw the light of day in 1899.
 
I don't really intend to ccw this old S&W, but I would think it would be up to the job if called on. Thanks for the all information guys!

If this is on the border for smokeless, would you consider light smokeless loads to be acceptable in it? (I actually have dies for the 38 S&W) Or should I stick to something like Pyrodex?

I really have an itch to shoot her, but I don't want to do anything that might loosen her up. And I'm not real exciting about cleaning off the BP residue from Holy Black or the likes.

That's interesting about TR carrying one, even makes it a little neater!

By the way, that Colt 1878 pictured above, was carried by my gr gr gr uncle in the Battle of El Caney & San Juan Hill . . . he was with the 22nd Infantry . . . chewed some of the same dirt that day as TR . . . and yes I have pictures of him and the Colt in Cuba . . . :D
 
New .38 S&W ammo is loaded down a bit when compared to the original stuff. I have a couple of antiques like yours and Mag-Tech ammo works just fine, whether in S&Ws, Iver Johnsons or my Webley.

If I had your gun, I'd be shooting it.

BTW, my opinion is just my opinion. It is not a prod to action. Ahem.
 
The problem with smokeless loads isn't so much that there are loaded to higher pressures then a black powder charge, but that the smokeless powder burns faster so the pressure is greater in the chamber area, rather then more distributed through the chamber and barrel.

The next issue is the possibility of a seam in the barstock the cylinder was made from, and no - they weren't heat treated.

The chance of expanding a chamber or worse is remote, because S&W used the best steel that was available, at the time. But that was over a century ago.

But If I tell you to go ahead and shoot it, whithout actually examining the gun, and something did go wrong - well then we'd both feel pretty bad.

If it makes any difference, I know a number of people that do shoot smokeless loads in black powder era revolvers of this kind and so far none of them have and any problems. But I also know of one case where the cylinder split, although it didn't blow up.

It comes down to making a hard choice. I will say this... If you want to shoot a Safety Hammerless on a regular basis get another one with a serial number at or over 200,000. And another tip. Don't dry fire it unless you have snap-caps or empty cases in the chambers. Otherwise you will likely break the firing pin.
 
Thanks for the sage advice Fuff . . . I think this one will stay in the safe for now . . . until I can't stand it anymore and load up some mild black powder cartridges . . .:evil:

Now where can I found a late model lemonsqueezer . . . :D
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top