Anyone else out there have a New Model 3, later in the series (above 25,000 or below) with a weird 9 in the serial number ?

I have 2 that have 9s in the serial number that look fat and weird. In this instance the number stamping die for the 6 and the 9 are unique. The 6 is not an inverted 9 nor vice-versa.

At a glance sometimes the 9 appears as if a double or rebound stamped 0 but is in fact NOT a double nor rebound stamp but a " 9 ".

__________________
ANTIQUESMITHS
LM1300 SWHF425

Does it look like the one in this thread: Attic find .38 safety and .32 DA

Do you have a closeup photo?

I am guessing that the font used back then had a 9 with a dot or circle type shape at the tip of the bottom. When this is stamped into metal it sometimes mushrooms the metal to the point that it almost seems to merge with the upper circle shape of the 9 making it almost look like an 8.

I tried to copy and paste an example from the interweb but cannot seem to do it. If you do a search on the net for the number 9 in different fonts you will see the one I am trying to describe.

__________________
James Redfield
LM #497

I bought a NM #3 at one time which was later deemed to be bogus (completely rebuilt/refinished) by Dave Chicoine (via his authentication service) and subsequently by Roy----both of whom commented upon the number stamps used---noting no such style had ever been used by the factory. My (admittedly) dim recollection is the 6's and 9's (the primary culprits) were the same stamp (albeit different sizes were used for the numbers applied in different places).

The good news is both were very complimentary about the quality of the workmanship, opining the work had likely been done by a S&W employee---albeit off the books.

The moral of this story is if something seems to be too good to be true-----watch out!!

Ralph Tremaine

Ralph, A new discovery to me ... only upon doing a thorough inventory of my collection which include approximately 25 New Model 3s of all calibers. All are original finish and condition, except one that had either been a .32-44 or .38-44 that was later converted to .22LR but not refinished and one other in the 12xxx range that is a .44 Target cut for stock that has been refinished that I thought may have been a special order Australian but letters as being shipped to a dealer in Massachusetts, as a Target model.

Mind I had purchase these over the past 35 years, one at a time. Being as such I only examined them one at a time over a long stretch of years until recently when inventorying them ... one at time but consecutively where I was able to pick up on this ornate " 9 " issue.

Every one of my NM3s that include a 9 in the serial number have this ornate and unique " 9 " that I describe. It is, without a doubt, the original number(s) and more pronounced in the later serial numbers but in either case, older or newer ... the 9 is NOT an inverted 6.

Until I can take some close up pictures, the 9 has a very broad circular area in the hollow of the " 9 " with the lower arm being shorter, curling back up toward the broad circular area but no quite touching with a "bead" or ball at the end of the lower loop.

Without magnification the 9 might be confused for a " 0 " but upon closer magnification and checking against cylinder, barrel & latch numbers ... it is, in fact ... a " 9 "

__________________
ANTIQUESMITHS
LM1300 SWHF425

As a collector of only target guns (from beginning to end----the real beginning, my end), I had three NM #3's---up until not too long ago---and was satisfied I had all those that fit my definition of target gun. Those are #2163, a NM #3 Target, 32-44, shipped May 28, 1894; #1610, a NM #3 Target, 38-44, shipped May 13, 1893; #30261, a NM #3 with target sights, .44 Russian, shipped October 18, 1896. All those 6's are the same---nothing odd/unusual----look like 6's---or upside down 9's---and could not be confused with a 0.

Then along comes #3914, a NM #3 Target, "38 WINCHESTER CTG" (stamped right on the numbers matching barrel); shipped October 25, 1902. There was no sound reason to snap up this odd duck other than odd duck----and snap it up I did. It's 9 does not look like its cohort's 6's. To quote one who has forgotten more than I know about these things: "Without magnification the 9 might be confused for a "0" but upon closer magnification and checking against cylinder, barrel & latch numbers ... it is, in fact ... a "9""

In the for what it's worth department, the 9 (or 6 or both) on the bogus gun didn't look anything like this one on the 38-40. It/they were what I'll call highly stylized-----fancy. It/they were fancy enough to jump right out at you----and (clearly) cause me to note it/they were different---and to remember them/the experience.

And lest I be chastised for assuming 6's and 9's would be the same stamp (aside from orientation), I just now went out to my shop to check my set of number stamps. There are nine of them, the 6/9 clearly expected to do double duty---which proves beyond a shadow of a doubt---absolutely nothing.

Ralph Tremaine

Ralph, they don't make ANYTHING the way they had in the yester-years of master craftsmen. I believe the old timers also made their own tools and dies. My oldest set of mechanics' number stamps (which could never be mistaken for S&W numbers) is about a 1970, and yes the 6 and 9 are one and the same stamp but I own too many really NICE old guns to clearly state ... that is NOT how it had been back in the old days. I wonder on a Roman Numeral set that the 9 and 11 were the same stamp, too. IX / XI ... LOL !!!

__________________
ANTIQUESMITHS
LM1300 SWHF425

Sal, I haven't looked at my NM#3's but I noted a .32 Safety, 2nd, as having an "extra" curl to the nine.

__________________
Mike Maher #283