School Me, 32-20 S&W Hand Ejector

[BigBlue 94]

Im looking at a S&W Hand Ejector in 32 Winchester. Barrel has 32 Winchester Ctg. stamper on the left side. Last patent date is 1906.

The finish is worn but it looks in good shape. Are these difficult to repair if need be?

It will pair nicely with my 1873 in 32 WCF...

Any tips, pointers, etc?

 

[GooseGestapo]

Pre K frame. .32-20 is synonymous with.32 Winchester.
Pic’s ?

 

[BigBlue 94]

Pre K frame. .32-20 is synonymous with.32 Winchester.
Pic’s ?

I am familiar with the 32-20/WCF. From what i read last night, how it is stamped determines the year range it was made.





I am not concerned with exterior appearances. In fact, i like the worn look. Currently the price is right, but if it goes much higher, ill pass. I just dont know much about S&Ws. I only own two. One is a 14-4 and quite a shooter.

 

[GooseGestapo]

I’ve got two I frame Hand Ejectors. Both are .32S&WL. 2nd a 3rd models.
Both were nickel plated, but now mostly bare metal.
Both are excellent shooters in spite of pitted bores.

If price was right, I’d jump on it!

 

[.455_Hunter]

Make sure to check the barrel for bulges- very common in this chambering due to squibs from the long case and small smokeless factory charge. My first .32-20 Hand Ejector was a victim of this issue, which I missed during my pre-purchase checkout. S&W was also still perfecting the DA lockwork in this early timeframe, and I would probably just keep 5 in the cylinder and rest the hammer on an empty chamber. The rebound and hammer block systems were better by the mid teens, and of course changed to the very safe modern configuration (like your Model 14) at the end of WWII.
.

 

[NIGHTLORD40K]

Just the usual, check for timing, lockup, and end shake. Not drop safe.
Ive got a 1905 in .32-20 and its a sweet, though pricey, shooter.

 

[BigBlue 94]

Its on an online auction, which happens to be in my town. Ill have to see if i can go look at it.

Is there a particular spot they like to bulge at?

EDIT: looks like i can schedule a preview time. They have a Spanish Destroyer 9mm Largo carbine too but the price is getting close to too high imho

 

[.455_Hunter]

Its on an online auction, which happens to be in my town. Ill have to see if i can go look at it.

Is there a particular spot they like to bulge at?

EDIT: looks like i can schedule a preview time. They have a Spanish Destroyer 9mm Largo carbine too but the price is getting close to too high imho

With the 6" example that I owned, the bulge was at the approximate 4" mark. The problem isn't necessarily the squib itself, it's the subsequent round fired without clearing the bore obstruction.that causes the bulge. The .32/20 case has about the highest length to diameter ratio of any standard cartridge that bridged the BP to smokeless era. The tiny pinch of smokeless powder could lay against the back of the bullet and not get properly ignited by the far distanced primer, resulting in a "pffffft" instead of a bang. I am fortunate that my current Model 1899 .32 WCF Hand Ejector with the 6.5" barrel has escaped this problem.

 

[DR505]

If you have the serial number you can check the revolver's shipping date in The Standard Catalog of Smith and Wesson, 4th Edition. That will give you an approximate timeframe of when the revolver was manufactured. Another great source of info is to pop over to the Smith and Wesson forum...very knowledgeable folks hang out over there (and I see many of them here that frequent the S&W forum).

 

[BigBlue 94]

With the 6" example that I owned, the bulge was at the approximate 4" mark. The problem isn't necessarily the squib itself, it's the subsequent round fired without clearing the bore obstruction.that causes the bulge. The .32/20 case has about the highest length to diameter ratio of any standard cartridge that bridged the BP to smokeless era. The tiny pinch of smokeless powder could lay against the back of the bullet and not get properly ignited by the far distanced primer, resulting in a "pffffft" instead of a bang. I am fortunate that my current Model 1899 .32 WCF Hand Ejector with the 6.5" barrel has escaped this problem.

Thanks!
I have some 32-20 smokeless rounds, but plan on some loaded with the Holy Black for the 1890 mfg 1873. They should work just fine in this too i assume.

 

[.455_Hunter]

Thanks!
I have some 32-20 smokeless rounds, but plan on some loaded with the Holy Black for the 1890 mfg 1873. They should work just fine in this too i assume.

Genuine BP or appropriate smokeless with bulkier powder loads are generally fine, understanding the cleaning requirements of BP. You are in Idaho, so humidity is not a big issue with regards to instant cleaning. My before mentioned 1899 (made in ~1901) and my 1908 production Colt New Service in .38/40 both have a BP fouling cup cut into the underside of the top strap above the cylinder gap. I wonder if the example you are looking at does too? This feature was soon eliminated in most guns as smokeless took hold of the market.

 

[BigBlue 94]

Genuine BP or appropriate smokeless with bulkier powder loads are generally fine, understanding the cleaning requirements of BP. You are in Idaho, so humidity is not a big issue with regards to instant cleaning. My before mentioned 1899 (made in ~1901) and my 1908 production Colt New Service in .38/40 both have a BP fouling cup cut into the underside of the top strap above the cylinder gap. I wonder if the example you are looking at does too? This feature was soon eliminated in most guns at smokeless took hold of the market.

Im in Kansas... Idaho would be nice too though! We have terrible humidity in the summer here. And i usually just use warm soapy water for BP. Interesting about the fouling cup. I wonder if my 1895 Colt has it.

I have no interest in hotrodding it either. Ive got better guns for that.

 

[.455_Hunter]

Im in Kansas... Idaho would be nice too though! We have terrible humidity in the summer here. And i usually just use warm soapy water for BP. Interesting about the fouling cup. I wonder if my 1895 Colt has it.

I have no interest in hotrodding it either. Ive got better guns for that.

Sorry- I thought your profile said Idaho. I spent an extended period in Kansas at Fort Riley, and that was the first time in my life I had to worry about my guns and humidity.

 

[BigBlue 94]

Sorry- I thought your profile said Idaho. I spent an extended period in Kansas at Fort Riley, and that was the first time in my life I had to worry about my guns and humidity.

Im an hour east of Fort Riley. I dont really have an issue with the humidity. The safes have golden rods in them and they are in a climate controlled room.

 

[Driftwood Johnson]

Howdy

Something does not compute.

There is no such thing as a 1903 S&W Hand Ejector.

If we are talking about 32-20, it has to be either the 32-20 Hand Ejector 1st Model, which was made from 1899 until 1902, the 32-20 Hand Ejector Model 1902 (32-20 Hand Ejector 2nd Model) made from 1902 until 1905, 32-20 Hand Ejector Model of 1902 1st Change made from 1903 until 1905, or the 32-20 Model of 1905, 1st Change, 2nd Change, 3rd Change, or 4th Change.

The 32-20 cartridge is too long for an I frame revolver, so no I frames were ever chambered for 32-20.

The 32-20 Hand Ejectors were pretty much identical to the 38 Military and Police series of revolvers. Built on the same size K frame, only chambered for 32-20 instead of 38 Special.

This 32-20 Hand Ejector 4th Change shipped in 1916. The 1905 4th Change (changes simply denotes minor mechanical changes not worthy of a newer model designation) was the most produced of both the 38 M&P and the 32-20 Hand Ejectors, produced from 1905 to 1940. 78,983 32 Hand Ejectors Model of 1905 4th Change were produced from 1915 until 1940.









The suggestion to check the Standard Catalog of Smith and Wesson for the manufacturing date of the serial number may or may not be helpful. There were so many 4th Changes made that the SCSW does not specify years for that model, only a very broad range of serial numbers produced from 1915 to 1940.

If the photo you posted is of the revolver, it is not a 1st Model, because that model lacked a lug under the barrel to fasten the front of the extractor rod.

I do not have a list of patent dates handy, but I suspect the revolver in question is not a 32-20 1st Model, or a Model of 1902 because they stopped being manufactured in 1905 and I suspect they would not have a 1906 patent date on them.

This is good, because the 1st Model, and the two models of 1902 had a different mechanism and parts would be very difficult to find.

I am familiar with the 32-20/WCF. From what i read last night, how it is stamped determines the year range it was made.

Not really. Although the style of the marking varied over the years, that is not a very reliable way to determine when a Smith and Wesson revolver was made.


Any way you can post the Serial Number so we can get to the bottom of this? The Serial Number will be stamped onto the bottom of the butt. If you do not want to post the entire Serial Number, you can substitute Xs for the last two digits, but make sure you have the correct number of digits.

These revolvers were designed to shoot Smokeless ammunition. I would not bother shooting ammunition loaded with Black Powder in one. I shoot Black Powder cartridges all the time in antique revolvers, but the tolerances on a S&W Hand Ejector made from 1905 on are pretty tight, and it will bind up quite rapidly with Black Powder ammunition.

 

[BigBlue 94]

@Driftwood Johnson

Dont get too hung up on the 1903 part. I put that there because i thought it was the first year of that basic model. I knew it was not a 1903 due to the 1906 patent. I read somewhere that S&W marked them 32 Winchester, then 32 WCF, then 32-20 as the years progressed. I dont know squat about S&Ws.

Those pics are of the gun in question. They do not show any others except for each side of the barrel.

 

[BigBlue 94]

 

[BigBlue 94]

Lol guess i should have read the description closer. SN is listed...

Item Description:
Very Good to Fine condition - revolver - 4"rnd, pinned barrel - white checkered plastic stocks with diamond around screw escutcheon; both grips show shrinkage - patina - retains traces of blue in few protected areas balance to soft grey patina - Markings: crisp & legible- right side of barrel has 3-line barrel address with last patent date of Feb. 6 .06, right side of frame S&W trade mark, left side of barrel caliber marking, & serial number on grip butt - fixed sights; round blade front sight/notched rear sight - double action - 6-shot fluted cylinder - bright bore however lightly frosted - mechanics are in working order with crisp action - Yr. Mfg.: 1906-1907 - SN: 40576 - C&R - 79425

 

[Mosin77]

These are good revolvers. The downside is the chambering which is almost a handloading-only proposition these days. But if you already have a rifle in .32wcf… in for a penny, in for a pound, eh? Hopefully the aftermarket grips put off some of the other bidders and you can get it cheap!

 

[Jeff olson]

It appears you have a hand ejector model of 1905 2nd change. This is my 1905 1st change. When it comes to these old S&W revolvers, Driftwood is a living encyclopedia of knowledge.

 

[Driftwood Johnson]

What you are looking at is a 32-20 Hand Ejector, Model of 1905, 2nd Change.

It has what is known as a Round Butt, rather than the Square Butt my 32-20 HE Model of 1905, 4th Change has.

The Serial Numbers used for that model in 1906-1907 ran from 33501 through 45200. So that puts you near the tail end of production in that series of Serial Numbers.

A much smaller range of Serial Numbers than the 32-20 Hand Ejector, Model of 1905, 4th Change, which mine is.

Yes, S&W varied how they marked their revolvers over the years. Detailing the various changes would take a book. Beyond my field of study.

This is the way S&W marked their name on the barrel of my 32-20 HE.






This is the way the caliber is called out.






Here are the patent dates, which appear on the top of the barrel on my 32-20 HE. As you can see, the last patent date is 1914, which jibes with the information I have that this one shipped in 1916.






The only other markings on my 32-20 HE is the large S&W trademark stamped onto the side plate. These are also the correct grips for this model, and they have the serial number on the inside indicating that this revolver shipped with these grips. These are known as Service Grips. The correct grips for the 32-20 you are asking about would have been very similar, except they would have lacked the 'gold' S&W medallions pressed into the top of the grips.

Very Good to Fine condition - revolver - 4"rnd, pinned barrel - white checkered plastic stocks with diamond around screw escutcheon; both grips show shrinkage - patina - retains traces of blue in few protected areas balance to soft grey patina - Markings: crisp & legible- right side of barrel has 3-line barrel address with last patent date of Feb. 6 .06, right side of frame S&W trade mark, left side of barrel caliber marking, & serial number on grip butt - fixed sights; round blade front sight/notched rear sight - double action - 6-shot fluted cylinder - bright bore however lightly frosted - mechanics are in working order with crisp action - Yr. Mfg.: 1906-1907 - SN: 40576 - C&R - 79425

I am not really up on current ratings for condition of firearms, but I have to question whether a revolver that does not have any of the original blue on it would be considered Very Good to Fine Condition. Sounds pretty optimistic to me. My 32-20 HE on the other hand has almost all the blue it left the factory with, and strong Case Hardening colors on the hammer and trigger. Smith and Wesson always Case Hardened their hammers and triggers, they even acquired a trademark on their Case Hardened hammers and triggers for a while. I do see a trace of colors on the hammer and trigger in question, but they have faded with time, along with almost all of the blue. I am assuming the notation C&R refers to the fact that this revolver can be sold as a Curio and Relic, since it is more than 50 years old, however C&R requirements can be quite strict, the substitution of after market grips would disqualify it from being a C&R firearm according to most dealers. Slap the correct grips back on it and it becomes C&R again. No idea what 79425 refers to.

The Serial Number should appear in four places on a S&W revolver of this vintage. The number stamped at the bottom of the butt is the SN of record. The same SN should also appear on the flat on the underside of the barrel, the rear of the cylinder, and the underside of the extractor star. This last one is difficult to see without a strong light. If the SN on the bottom of the butt jibes with the numbers in the other three locations, the revolver left the factory with those parts. If not, the part with the different Serial Number did not ship with the gun.

So you have a fair idea of value, I paid $800 for my 32-20 back in 2013. I considered that to be a very fair price, considering its condition.

 

[NIGHTLORD40K]

Ya, with no original finish remaining and those grips, theres little to no collector value- except maybe as a placeholder- and the chambering kinda removes it from the casual shooter catagory.
I wouldn't pay over $400 for that.

 

[GBExpat]

BigBlue 94, during my .32-20 Insanity 6-7 years ago, I acquired (via Gunbroker) 6 of the vintage .32WCF revolvers (4 Colt and 2 of the S&W 1905 HEs). The Smiths are nowhere near as nice as Driftwood Johnson's but they look a whole lot better than the one you are bidding. Mine cost me $350 & $380, both 6" Blue, one/ea 3rd & 4th.

FWIW, I only shoot Trailboss handloads, topped by lead (100 or 115), in them in a nod to their age. They are very accurate and fun to shoot, even for the Timid.

Good Luck!

 

[Driftwood Johnson]

Just for the fun of it, here are a couple of photos of a Colt Police Positive Special chambered for 32-20 along with my S&W 32-20 Hand Ejector.








Here are the same two revolvers with a Winchester Model 1892, also chambered in 32-20.






This is the caliber marking on the Winchester. 32 W.C.F. for 32 Winchester Centerfire.






This is how the caliber is called out on the Colt. A little bit redundant.

 

[Speedo66]

double post