New Model 3 .44 Russian

[Markus_Malizia]

hi folks, i own a new model 3 and i was wondering if anyone can tell production year and - mybe - some more in-depth information around my model 3. thx alot and greetings from italy, markus

PS: Let me know if you need more pics - thx

[mmaher94087]

Nice New Model #3. Appears to be all original and in .44 Russian caliber. It is a Target revolver but not part of the Target model series (.32-44 and .38-44). The finger rest trigger guard is an option not commonly seen in the States. All frames were manufactured before 1899 (antique status in the U.S.; Europe varies) even though these NM#3 revolvers were shipped into the 1900's.

[Wiregrassguy]

Mike, what do you make of the serial number? In particular, the 1 digit. To me, it looks to have been added separately.

[BMur]

Hey Guy,
Hope you don’t mind me chiming in?
I’ve seen this before when studying die stamps. Often dies would break from the “go to set” Being used by the machinists?
They would then make another. Sometimes the replacements aren’t a perfect match with the original set.
So what I look for is uniformly to the complete stamp. Notice the barrel stamp? The numbers are centered perfectly! That strongly suggests the numbers are correct.

Imagine the 1 not being there and you can see the remaining numbers would not be centered.

Murph

[Mbrgr1]

The book shows serial # 20000 as 1890, so somewhere in the 1885 or so range I guess. The beat up one I listed earlier is in the 240*** range early 1890s?


Good looking gun you have there! Thanks M

[mmaher94087]

I noticed the '1' but I believe it to be a factory stamp. The identical '1' is repeated on the barrel, frame and cylinder but I can't see the latch serial number in the photos but I bet it matches. To me, nothing seems out of the ordinary. I'll venture that the serial number is also on the inside of the right stock (grip in layman's terms). I'd buy that NM#3 in a heartbeat.

[Wiregrassguy]

Murph, of course I don't mind. I'm pleased the OP is getting info on the NM #3. If it was just the one stamp, I could accept your explanation. But, I can see the SNs on the barrel, cylinder and latch. Those numbers are all different sizes and the 1 is not uniform in placement or size, IMO. I suppose the overstamping could have been done at the factory before it was distributed for some reason. I've just never seen it before. It is a beautiful gun and I just found the stamping to be odd.


Well, Mike posted as I was typing. The OP says the SN on the grip is the same as on the gun.

[Markus_Malizia]

fellas, thank you very much for all your insights. much appreciate. the SN 19963 is also be found on the inside of the right grip. so, all numbrs matching. i was also surprised by the "1" but - as per your comments - it does not look to be a problem. if you should guess, how much would the gun be worth? thx alot

[rct269]

I don't know who stamped what where in the 1800's (probably no more than any of the rest of us), but I do know who did it in the 1950's. A guy stamped the butts---one butt right after the other----the frames coming from a purpose built rack loaded with frames---and he's using punches big enough to see in a 3X3.5" photo of him and his rack----and the whammity-bammin' is being done with a ball peen hammer----a pretty good sized one.

Now fast forward to a comely, young lady with another rack-----this one holding the numbered frames, and all the other pieces that get serialized. She's using punches too small to see in the photos, and a quite delicate, little hammer----one of the tap-tap variety rather than the whammity-bammin' sort used by the manly man.

Any and all who wish to see this with their own eyes are directed to the 8th edition of the Gun Digest (1954) wherein they will find an article/photo essay titled Raw Steel To Smith & Wesson----which is about what it says it's about.

As an aside, probably not even worth mentioning, are the facts we have two different people with two different sets of punches doing the whammity-bammin' and the tap-tappin' at a different time, in a different place-----but we probably shouldn't dwell on that, 'cause then we'd have to come up some other punch theory----something that made some sort of sense so we all could understand it.

That's the Gun Digest---8th edition---Raw Steel To Smith & Wesson---pages 123 thru 133.

Ralph Tremaine

[glowe]

Ralph, can you scan those pages or have someone do it? The only image I have is a worker stamping work (assembly) numbers on parts. I assume that there were dozens of workers capable of adding serial numbers and think that they did it with no jigs, templates, or rulers used. While almost all guns I own have near perfect serial numbers, there are a few with alignment or spacing issues, which I would attribute to new workers or someone who had a tough weekend?? I would really like to see those images from Gun Digest.

[rct269]

You betcha!!

They'll be in the mail to you directly.

RT

And the photos of (particular) interest are #'s 36 and 42.

[BMur]

I personally try to initially study the time period applicable to the subject material. This excellent Smith & Wesson being manufactured in the 1880’s? I’d recommend looking for published work from that time period on the subject of Machinist, tool & Die. Great information is out there and covers a lot on methods used. Most gun makers of that era actually hired Immigrants fresh off the boat From Europe who brought their skills and training with them. Especially machinists. Those already trained to work with belt driven lathes?
They made everything at that time, including dies. This was prior to industrialized manufacture and sale of same. The 1950’s , though interesting, is not applicable to this early belt driven, pre electricity era. Methods were totally different.
I’d go further but it’s impossible to compress many hours of studying antique tools and dies into an abbreviated post. Reading from 130 year old published material is a great experience.


Murph

[glowe]

As far as I can tell, they had hammers and steel stamps in the 1800s, just like those in the 1950s. We were discussing the process of stamping serial numbers, not the industrial revolution. I may be wrong, but don't believe that stamping numbers into steel changed from the 1870s to the 1950s.

[rct269]

Originally Posted by BMur

I personally try to initially study the time period applicable to the subject material. This excellent Smith & Wesson being manufactured in the 1880’s? I’d recommend looking for published work from that time period on the subject of Machinist, tool & Die. Great information is out there and covers a lot on methods used. Most gun makers of that era actually hired Immigrants fresh off the boat From Europe who brought their skills and training with them. Especially machinists. Those already trained to work with belt driven lathes?
They made everything at that time, including dies. This was prior to industrialized manufacture and sale of same. The 1950’s , though interesting, is not applicable to this early belt driven, pre electricity era. Methods were totally different.
I’d go further but it’s impossible to compress many hours of studying antique tools and dies into an abbreviated post. Reading from 130 year old published material is a great experience.


Murph

I can imagine the difficulty of compressing all those hours of studying antique tools and dies into an abbreviated post---especially considering those antique tools and dies came into being during an early belt driven, pre electricity era. It might possibly simplify your life, and free up more time for reading from 130 year old published material, if you'll recall we were talking about smacking number punches with a hammer. Then again, there may be some wisdom in determining how the cat got pregnant when the task at hand is to figure out what to do with the kittens.

I could study on it some---or maybe take a nap------might make for a fresh approach.

Ralph Tremaine

DAMN!! Gary got there first. Well, when you snooze, you lose!!

[BMur]

You Gents are certainly some interesting people. I guess. Leave the poor kitty alone!

There is a timeline to Stamping metal. If you actually believe that they were stamping guns like the "PROP" photo of the lady in the kitchen apron and the Gent in the clean cloth sweater and bow tie in the 1950's? Your about 70 years off.

Individual serial numeral stamping was obsolete by 1880. Early dies were stamped individually but that quickly was replaced by "Progressive" dies. Using square cut dies in alingment jigs for the machinist so the numbers would be set straight the first time and struck "ALL AT ONCE" but you guys already knew that?

The only time individual dies were used and struck with a hand held hammer was to correct a "Miss-stamp" Which by the 1950's didn't happen often...

** There are exceptions that include: Suffix letters, inspector letters/numbers, or specific contract or model numbers or letters that may or may not have been stamped individually. Often times they were included in the alignment jig

In the 1880's? That's a different story. It happened quite a bit. So the machinist would correct the "machine stamped numbers in the alignment jig" with an individual strike. If you look with an open mind you can find them a lot. Since they were often missed or "blown off" due to production time Contraints to meet production deadlines. That only got worse as time went on.

As an example from in depth research? You will find many mis-strikes in the Baltimore Police Baby Russian contract. Makes perfect sense since they were in a hurry to crank out 550 guns to support the Police Department during the Railroad Riots of 1877.

But I'll stop there and let you take another look at the ma and Pa photo again and try to convince me that they are plant workers? It's laughable, that's for sure. In the 1950's striking one number at a time?

The guns would be backed up for miles waiting for Betty to bang out one number at a time....

Hand stamping (Early production)(Fabrication)
Progressive stamping (Early to mid production)
Machine stamping? (Introduction of Electricity), also included multiple stations. Early attempts were made with steam driven belt equipment.

See photo's of a few of the "MACHINE STAMPS" from the 1920's. Authentic Colt factory stamp and Early Patent Applied for stamp from my collection. These were NOT struck with a hammer. They were inserted into machines and stamped with uniform pressure. Just like Smith and Wesson barrel stamps. Struck by "MACHINES". Not by Joe with his bow tie, cloth sweater, and hammer.



Murph

[model3sw]

Originally Posted by Wiregrassguy

Mike, what do you make of the serial number? In particular, the 1 digit. To me, it looks to have been added separately.

For what it is and the condition, I'll take the serial numbers as OK. Especially if you look at the rear face of the cylinder you notice the serial number is centered between 2 charge holes. Take the " 1 " away and you'll notice the SN looks off to one side. In my opinion, it's OK

If it were something of scarce manufacture and high condition, I would go deeper into examining all the originality all the way through.

All the best, Sal Raimondi, Sr.

[opoefc]

The captions on the photos mention above are incorrect. The lady is stamping the work/assembly numbers, not the serial numbers. Serial numbers are stamped on all frames, by a rotating advancing die, when the frames are forged. The only time a S&W would get an individual hand stamped serial number would be in the Service Dep't on a gun altered or damaged enough to require replacing the serial number Ed. (PS: occasionaly the advancing die gets stuck and repeats the same number on a series of frames, which can result in guns shipped with the same serial number , triggering a recall, etc )