Originally Posted by Oyeboteb

. . . I just checked mine - Chambers are .465, and Bores are .442 ~ . . .

Originally Posted by glowe

What you call bore, is it a measurement of the front of the cylinder? Is the cylinder 1 9/16" or 1 7/16" long? This revolver came in a lot of calibers and .442" is too large for either a 44 Russian or a 44-40?? 44 Colt bullet diameter was .443"??

Originally Posted by model3sw

Constructive criticism: Seems original configuration but side plate has been off and likely touched up or refinished but that doesn't make it a bad thing.

Most important thing I see here, from years of repairing Model 3 variations, there is a rather obvious, tell tale, double-wide drag line that has been touched up. Means the cylinder has been floating forward and rearward while cycling.

This usually means the axis shaft tube and / or the inside liner of the cylinder is (or has been sometime in the past) damaged.

Other than that, looks OK.

Have it checked over by a good mechanic / gunsmith before you shoot it.

Neat shooter there, Oye. Best Regards, Sal Raimondi

PS: Just for G.P. size a .44-40 cartridge in the cylinder at all 6 positions. Would be odd if chambered in .44-40 with factory target sights. The inside of the cylinder bores are not making me feel all warm and fuzzy, like, perhaps, reamed out or heavily cleaned inside at one time. I don't see a prominent chamfer inside a few of those cylinder bore but could be an optical illusion from the light (or lack there of) when photographing.

IIRC .. (Ralph or Ed will jump in here, I think, to add comments) if chambered for .44-40 a .44 Russian will drop into the cylinder as well but if so the .44 R would not be the proper round to shoot. Very speculative, though. I can only tell so much from a few photos.

Originally Posted by mrcvs

Looks like an authentic New Model No 3. Serial number markings are fine/delicate as, unfortunately, this one has been reblued.

Originally Posted by BMur

Let’s see now, it’s a 1 7/16th cylinder not the longer 1 9/16th? A 44 WCF fits but sticks out? The bore measures 442?. Wow? Off the hook!
The head diameter of a 44 WCF is identical to a 45 cal colt. But the original 44 cf Colt was actually an outside lubricated 45 cal conversion cartridge that was designed for the converted 44 cap and ball 60 Army Richard Mason conversion ( short lived) so the case is too small in diameter for this chamber and the bullet is too big since it was originally .454 in diameter. The 60 Army was actually a 45 cal when the bore is measured. The 442 caliber was a British caliber for the Bulldog and Webley type revolver. Very odd! Unless our measurements are off? Which is very likely since the first post claimed a 44 Russian chambered perfectly? Huge difference between head diameter of a 44 WCF and that of a 44 Russian? Our measurements are off folks! It’s either that or we have a miss matched cylinder / barrel? Which wouldn’t be the first for me that’s for sure!

Originally Posted by rct269

Speaking of barrels, is this one numbered to the gun/frame?

(On the rear of the barrel, inside the recess where the latch lives----right side.)

Ralph Tremaine

Originally Posted by mrcvs

Odds are, it's a .44 Russian. If it walks like a duck and quacks like a duck... Plus, it's the most common clambering in a New Model No 3.

Mention was made of returning and getting money back. Let's start with asking what you have into this one. Even a reblued revolver has some value, but we have to know what you have into it to decide whether or not it makes economic sense to keep or return.

Originally Posted by mmaher94087

My guess in the "double-wide" drag line is that the barrel latch was not held up while the cylinder was removed (unscrewed) and that resulted in the 'screw thread' look of the cylinder. Interesting front sight.

Originally Posted by model3sw

Oye,

You have to send off for a letter to determine what caliber it shipped with. I'll stick with my original evaluation of (perhaps) the cylinder bores were either heavily cleaned, polished, or slightly reamed (for a clean up of old black powder crusties that form in there when not cleaned and left to lay over time)

During a repair process, if cleaning with a brass brush didn't clean up the crud, I had often used a 44 cal cotton swab with 3M 400 wet/dry coated with WD-40 to clean out the crud as my most aggressive procedure but I'd never re-ream the cylinder bores.

Originally Posted by bibain

Hello
I am surprised to see this type of extractor housing on a n3 new model (not target )of this series (3721).

For me it was more like the picture.
So I ask myself this question, is the barrel at the same numbers as the frame and barrel? and what is its bore?
the cylinder chamber (the ring) seems worn

Originally Posted by mrcvs

As stated above, a factory letter would provide the answer as to what the calibre really is.

Since you have bought from this seller before, I would see if he would be willing to wait until the factory letter arrives and let your decision be based on that. Current turnaround time is about 4 weeks for a factory letter. If it's a rare calibre, it might be worth keeping. Otherwise, perhaps not. I still think refinished because of the wear to the grips exceeding that of the rest of the gun, the mottled appearance to the sideplate, and the weak serial number markings. A photograph of the barrel markings could prove useful. Also, the finish appears slightly "dull" relative to one with original finish
Whomever did the reblued did a good job and knew which components should not be reblued. I might be inclined to pull the grips and see if there are any numbers stamped inside, such as "06.13", indicating a trip back to Smith & Wesson in June 1913 for repair and/or refinish, although given the slightly dull appearance and mottled appearance to sideplate, I suspect that is not factory.

I bought a New Model No 3 last November, a Target Model in .38-44, in similar condition to yours, but if reblued, it was done at the factory in June of 1913. It looks good, so I suspect the return to the factory in June 1913 was for reasons other than a refinish, bit the quality of a factory refinish is so good back then, it's hard to tell for sure. I bought this one from a large retailer of antique firearms, of all things, which is surprising for me as I have gotten too cheap to pay full retail anymore, which means I think it was significantly underpriced. My total cost was $1516. You can take it or leave it. Please note the fact that this was returned to the factory can depress values by about 15%. One more thing...I would also pay more for mine with the fresh, bright appearance to the bluing than one that appears to have dulled, refinish or otherwise, and the "otherwise" part is probably related to refinish.

I hope this helps!

Originally Posted by glowe

Doesn't matter where, when or why the 44 Colt was used since there were NM3s chambered in that caliber, as well as 14 other odd-ball calibers. If the cylinder has no steps inside the chambers, it could also be a 44 American?? Being that this revolver could have been made very early, when 44 American was still a well used and available caliber, it is another possibility. With a bore that is over .43", a heeled 44 American did not need a step in the cylinder and would have the perfect sized bullet for the barrel at .434" bullet diameter. Very unlikely that it will properly handle 44 Russian cartridges, since the bullet would not touch the rifling in the barrel. I have shot 44 Russian in my 44 Americans, but it either splits the case or enlarges them so much that the cases will not even go into the resizing dies. If the gun was not altered, it would not have been a 44 Russian.

Could the cylinder have been modified? Absolutely. The factory letter will tell you the exact caliber, the exact configuration, and the time your revolver left the factory. It will not tell you if the chambers have been modified. Remember that all the odd-ball calibers are uncommon to rare in this model, so the money spent on the letter is nothing compared to the potential upside of having a rare caliber gun. On the other hand, there is always a chance that you would uncover the fact that the gun could have been modified, and that will have the opposite affect on value.

Good luck and let us know when you get that letter.

Originally Posted by BMur

So if we focus on what is historically documented? See attached photo of authentic antique bullets? It seems that this gun was likely modified or over machined unless our caliber is off? You mention that you corrected your statement regarding the 44 Russian now fitting loosely? But the 44 WCF fits “like it should but sticks out”? The 44 WCF head diameter is documented at .471 but your measurements find your chamber to measure .465? So something isn’t right there. ( see my actual measurements below that very closely match yours)
The 44 American and 44 Colt case diameters are even smaller than the 44 Russian? So they would rattle inside even more than the 44 Russian.

So I decided to actually mic' the antique cartridges in my collection and compare them to book reference;

Caliber Bullet diameter Case mouth Head diameter above base

44WCF .427 .442 .468

44 Colt .449 .452 .462

44 American .448 .436 .436

44 Russian .429 .455 .455

44 Webley .420 .445 .455

So, My conclusion is that this Model 3 was converted from the 44 Russian caliber to the 44WCF by modifying the cylinder. I know the original round sticks out but you can seat the bullet deeper to make up the difference. I have also seen "Many" converted cylinders in Colt SAA that converted the original 44 Rimfire to the 44WCF and the Smith & Wesson Double action 44 Russian converted to a 44WCF by simply machining out the cylinder. Again, I know the cartridge sticks out? but hand loading can adapt the cartridge to this cylinder. I also would not get a factory letter for this example? Just my opinion but it is likely to come back as a 44 Russian which would not help in the least.

** The more I look at the photo of the back of the cylinder the more I'm seeing evidence of machining. Several of the chambers appear slightly oval and the star extractor does not fit correctly on several of the chambers.!!!

Originally Posted by glowe

Well I guess you don't need to investigate further, since you just got the answer. Just put it on the shelf, lick your wounds over the price paid for a modified NM3 and move on . . . or . . . get the letter and answer the question instead of guessing forever.

As for the barrel extractor housing, it is longer than most NM3s, but the export guns like the Austrailian, the Japanese Navy guns, and the 44RF Turkish guns are seen with the longer extractor housing. For the OP, did you check the serial numbers on the rear of the barrel top strap, up between the locking latch? Also, while we are speculating, is the gun a centerfire or rimfire revolver?

Originally Posted by BMur

I’m not sure if you are able to mic the chambers for out of round or caliber change? But since you have confirmed that it is all matching with the original barrel and cylinder and obviously an original and desirable target variation, a qualified machinist can sleeve the cylinder back to its original caliber if it was in fact altered? The work they can do now is nothing less than amazing and you can’t tell it was re-worked without XRay. Just a positive suggestion and definitely a viable option!

Originally Posted by redwagon32

I know this has been mentioned before but at least some 44-40 shot cartridges were made in a standard length case with an overshot card and a roll crimp so I am thinking -shotgun type front sight, shallow rifling--would this type of 44-40 cartridge fit properly in this cylinder and could the factory have done this?

Originally Posted by bibain

There are 4 numbering series on the NM3
The 38/40 n 1 to 74
The 44/40 n1 to 2072
The target models (38/44 & 32/44) n 1 to 4333
Standard models n1 to 35796
The first three are excluded: numbering less than 3721 and caliber (32 & 38)
For the standard model, the extractor operating systems type 1 (+/- sn 1 to 13600), Type 2 (+/- up to sn 23000/24000), Type 3 (+/- after 24000)
The extractor housing types 2 and 3 are of the same size, only type 1 is longer (Contracts japonese navy, austalian, Argentinian often have serial numbers lower than 13600 so they have a type 1 extractor housing)
it does not help in the identification of the caliber but this detail intrigues me .
What is the length of the cylinder’s chamber, ( from the rear chamber to the ring in the cylinder )?

Originally Posted by BMur

The photo attached is from a modern drawing from SAAMI of the 44 WCF. The wonderful earlier reference that Bibain just provided I suppose proves there was a minor change to the case dimensions at some point in history since the earlier drawing shows the case diameter at the base being .471. Same as my old reference from the 1880’s. The modern sketch shows a .468 Case diameter. The difference is clearly a case change from the old ballon head black powder case and the modern solid head case. The latest measurement provided by the collector is .462? The antique case that I have in my collection is one of five that are black powder original non head stamped cases that are Pre- 1883. Therefore ballon head and period to this gun. All of them measure between .468-.470. So I’m thinking that the 44WCFs you are using are not as old as you might think? I’d still-like to hear the results of the chamber measurements at the entry point of each chamber. 5 measurements at 45 degree angles. Pretty easy especially if you don’t see any changes to the readings? If you see any changes it has been altered. If the reading is under .468 it was altered to meet the modern solid head case so a modern alteration. If we look at the chart Bibain just provided the only case that chambers in this cylinder are of the bottleneck design based on the collectors measurements provided and there is no evidence that this cylinder is of antique original chambering since an original ballon head case will not fit. The only evidence that I am seeing and in my opinion thus far is alteration to a modern solid head case 44wcf.