|
|
09-18-2018, 05:53 AM
|
Member
|
|
|
Join Date: Sep 2018
Posts: 2
Likes: 0
Liked 5 Times in 2 Posts
|
|
Inherited top break model 2 (I Think)
Want to make sure I am identifying this correctly, so far I believe it is a s&w model 2 3” single action too break 5 shot .38s&w the Serial nos. Match (11506) single action it appears to have been the nickel finish originally. The barrel lines up with the cylinder for the most part. My grandfather had it in a glass case on his wall my entire life. I’d really like to shoot it, so any suggestions as to the proper loads to use would be appreciated, As would any corrections to my research so far! Thanks
|
The Following 3 Users Like Post:
|
|
09-18-2018, 07:58 AM
|
|
US Veteran
|
|
|
Join Date: Apr 2014
Location: South-Central PA
Posts: 3,917
Likes: 19,212
Liked 6,515 Times in 2,037 Posts
|
|
Welcome to the forum from Pennsylvania!
Those that know something about these will be along shortly.
|
09-18-2018, 08:44 AM
|
|
US Veteran
|
|
|
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Michigan Western UP
Posts: 12,976
Likes: 3,048
Liked 14,369 Times in 5,476 Posts
|
|
Welcome to the Forum. You have what is best known as a 38 Single Action, 2nd Model revolver, made from 1877 to 1891. The term Model 2 is often confusing, since there was a famous Civil War tip-up S&W that has always been called the Model 2.
There were over 108,000 made and yours would have left the factory in 1877 or 1878. As for condition, that one is rough and you need to be very careful in your inspection of the workings of the revolver. Currently manufactured 38 Smith & Wesson ammunition is fine in these guns if they lock up, index properly, are not at all loose, have no hammer push-off, and show no damage or cracks in the steel. I do not know what the issue is with the front of the sideplate, but it looks like the plate is not properly seated in the frame and there is something white smeared there??
__________________
Gary
SWCA 2515
|
The Following User Likes This Post:
|
|
09-18-2018, 09:49 AM
|
|
SWCA Member
|
|
|
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: Massachusetts USA
Posts: 9,596
Likes: 3,711
Liked 8,952 Times in 3,558 Posts
|
|
I agree with GLOWE's assessment. I also noticed that the extractor star looks off slightly but that may be a non issue. With any of these older firearms, if you are not capable of checking them for proper function then you absolutely need to take the gun to a gunsmith and have it checked before shooting it.
__________________
James Redfield
LM #497
|
09-19-2018, 06:08 AM
|
|
Member
|
|
|
Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: PA
Posts: 609
Likes: 2,337
Liked 683 Times in 291 Posts
|
|
Definitely have it checked out. It looks a little rough.
Walt
|
The Following User Likes This Post:
|
|
09-19-2018, 07:37 AM
|
|
SWCA Member
|
|
|
Join Date: Jul 2012
Location: AL Wiregrass
Posts: 7,224
Likes: 34,866
Liked 10,790 Times in 3,676 Posts
|
|
welcome01 to the forums from the Wiregrass! From the looks of the screw heads, someone has been inside that gun a lot. But the sideplate also appears to be raised and may indicate bubba did something wrong in there. So, I'm with other posters about having it checked out before shooting it. Also, it appears the "smear" that Gary refers to is residual nickel from the original plating.
__________________
Guy
SWHF #474 SWCA LM#2629
|
09-19-2018, 08:34 AM
|
|
Member
|
|
|
Join Date: May 2018
Location: Kansas
Posts: 720
Likes: 1,919
Liked 1,143 Times in 454 Posts
|
|
Welcome Shadilay. Did your grandfather ever tell you how he got the gun or anything about it? What's the back story? Just curious.
|
09-19-2018, 08:54 AM
|
Member
|
|
|
Join Date: Sep 2018
Posts: 2
Likes: 0
Liked 5 Times in 2 Posts
|
|
Thanks for all the input everyone! Here’s a close photo of the side plate that appears to be not seated. It seems like it’s where it needs to be,however the top screw on it is pretty thrashed if that is related. And like wiregrassguy said the “smear” is what remains of the nickel finish.
The only story I ever got was that it was a family member who bought it new and then never really shot it. It was mounted next to the powder horn in the image I attached. Not sure why as I don’t believe it was used on this gun. The gun locks up okay and indexes acceptably, it is slightly loose but I can easily nudge the cylinder the last 32nd of an inch to be totally aligned. Again thanks you all for your responses they have all been helpful!
|
The Following 2 Users Like Post:
|
|
09-19-2018, 02:32 PM
|
|
Member
|
|
|
Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: PA
Posts: 609
Likes: 2,337
Liked 683 Times in 291 Posts
|
|
Take care of the powderhorn, it is worth more than the gun.
Walt
Last edited by Jtown; 09-23-2018 at 06:19 PM.
|
The Following User Likes This Post:
|
|
09-23-2018, 07:12 AM
|
Member
|
|
|
Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 225
Likes: 2
Liked 93 Times in 56 Posts
|
|
Most collectors refer to this simply as a "Single Action" top break. Made in both .32 and .38 S&W center fire chamberings. It has also been called the Model 1&1/2 CF ( CF for Center Fire).
I have heard it called the Model 2 before , and I think that is a reference to it being like a second version of the Model 1&1/2 which was a rim fire chambering.
S&W's second produced revolver was the Model 2 Old Army and was a rim fire gun.
The bottom line for me is that calling it a Model 2 has no bases in fact and is the most confusing of its true identity title. That's my opinion and or 2 cents worth.
|
09-23-2018, 09:26 AM
|
|
US Veteran
|
|
|
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Michigan Western UP
Posts: 12,976
Likes: 3,048
Liked 14,369 Times in 5,476 Posts
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by mnrivrat
Most collectors refer to this simply as a "Single Action" top break. Made in both .32 and .38 S&W center fire chamberings. It has also been called the Model 1&1/2 CF ( CF for Center Fire).
I have heard it called the Model 2 before , and I think that is a reference to it being like a second version of the Model 1&1/2 which was a rim fire chambering.
|
Not exactly to both statements.
Collectors call these revolvers specifically what they are. The OP's has a 38 Single Action, 2nd Model to note a major change made from the 38 Single Action 1st Model revolver made. That change was the re-engineering the extractor system, resulting in shortening the extractor housing any less parts required to do the task.
Second, the factory referred to the 38 centerfire revolver as New Model 2 in their period publications, which had nothing to do with it being like a second version of the Model 1 1/2 which was a rim fire chambering. In my mind, the new names were an obvious attempt at aligning the new improved centerfire revolver to the original 32 Model 1 1/2 and Model 2 tip-ups. The New Model 2 was referring to the original 6 shot 32RF Model 2 and the New Model 1 1/2 was named after the original 5 shot 32RF tip-up.
The factory made no differentiation between old and new models. They never gave any tip-up or top-break an issue or model change number, likewise, they made no attempt to identify the 38 SA changes. The change and issue numbers were invented by early collectors to note engineering changes.
__________________
Gary
SWCA 2515
Last edited by glowe; 09-23-2018 at 09:28 AM.
|
The Following User Likes This Post:
|
|
|
Posting Rules
|
|
|
|
|