Tulsa Bringback RM

m-1911 · #1 11-30-2010, 04:14 PM

I snagged the Registered Magnum at the Tulsa show and got a factory letter with it. Serial number 56943, Reg # 4060, shipped on April 25, 1938 to Salt Lake City Hardware. The revolver was one of 32 shipped to the Utah Highway Patrol. It originally shipped with a 6.5 inch barrel. But my understanding is that all of the UHP guns were returned to the factory and had their barrels shortened to 4 inches. There are 3 sets of factory rework dates under the grips. When I got it, it had an un-numbered set of diamond magnas on it and a strange front sight. I believe the grips were probably factory replacements. When Lee Jarret was not watching, I stole the pre war magnas out of his display case and with the help of Jim Fisher, I located a more appropriate front sight. It looks a bit nicer now than it did when I found it.

29aholic · #2 11-30-2010, 04:19 PM

Very cool Gary...probably one of the few RM's I would own.

kennyb · #3 11-30-2010, 04:40 PM

great work gary...congrats!

Art Doc · #4 11-30-2010, 04:55 PM

When I bought mine (serial 56459 REG 4034. Shipped 8/19/38 to Salt Lake City Hardware Co.) I was told by the seller that only one other of the 50 UHP guns was known to be in a collection. Others were still MIA. Either your gun is the one of which he spoke or this is a new one that has surfaced. Now that I think about it, maybe I have seen another one posted here but I am not sure.

I thought that they all had "Utah Highway Patrol" and numbers 1-50 inscribed on the side plate. Mine has the S&W logo on the left and yours is on the right. I think my letter states they were shipped with 6" and all were returned in late 1940s for chopping to 4" and refinishing but my one rework date is in the 1950s.

bmg60 · #5 11-30-2010, 04:56 PM

hi gary
the front sight looks really good on that gun
glad we could find one for you
jim

m-1911 · #6 11-30-2010, 05:26 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by bmg60

hi gary
the front sight looks really good on that gun
glad we could find one for you
jim

Thanks for you help Jim. The new sight sure looks better than the one that was on it when I got.

m-1911 · #7 11-30-2010, 06:12 PM

I checked the RM database and this gun is not in it so maybe this is one of the MIA guns. The rework dates on this one are 11/52, 6/55 and 9/57.

Art Doc · #8 11-30-2010, 07:24 PM

I am curious about the lack of the inscription. I thought they all had it. I don't have the letter handy but I recall there were 50 guns in 3 shipments. One was 32 pieces (including yours) but I don't recall if mine was in the 2nd or 3rd shipment. But if they got 32 units before mine was sent then the #27 on mine makes no sense unless they started the numbering 9and inscribing) at some midpoint in the run.

I will go dig the gun and letter out and see what I am missing.

mikepriwer · #9 11-30-2010, 08:21 PM

I assume the letter says it was shipped to SLC Hardware for the
Utah Highway Patrol ? Otherwise, with no UHP marking, how does one
know its a UHP gun?

Regards, Mike Priwer

m-1911 · #10 11-30-2010, 08:23 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by mikepriwer

I assume the letter says it was shipped to SLC Hardware for the
Utah Highway Patrol ? Otherwise, with no UHP marking, how does one
know its a UHP gun?

Regards, Mike Priwer

Mike

Yes, the letter says it was one of 32 guns for the UHP

RKmesa · #11 11-30-2010, 09:54 PM

Very nice to see a gun that has seen some action. That 4" is the coolest look on a RM.

Congrats!

j38 · #12 11-30-2010, 10:08 PM

Good looking old RM, Gary. I like that it shows some experience. Congratulations!

Jerry

Art Doc · #13 11-30-2010, 10:10 PM

Gary- I dug out my letter. First of all I correct myself, they were shipped as 6.5" guns not 6" as I had thought.

But the UHP must have bought more guns than I thought. My letter mentions 4 shipments totaling 50 units with mine being in the last shipment of 32 guns. My letter says that all 50 were factory engraved and numbered 1-50 (and yet Roy doesn't count these among factory engraved RMs for some reason). So if your gun was also part of a shipment of 32 units that makes at least 82 guns the UHP bought and apparently the 32 that included yours were, for some reason, not engraved with the agency name and a number.

The batch that included yours was shipped after the first shipment of engraved guns was sent and before the last group was shipped. Perhaps S&W offered them a deal on some guns in inventory if they accepted them "as is." Or maybe they skipped the engraving on some guns due to it being extra cost or taking longer to deliver. In any event there are apparently more UHP RMs than we first thought and there are apparently two distinct groups; engraved and non-engraved.

PS: My service date is 6/54. A diamond B on both grip frame and on the barrel in the shroud. IIRC they replaced these with post-war Magnums in 1955 so maybe mine almost made it without being cut and refinished.

Mike- That store was known for being a supplier to the UHP and I doubt they would order 32 identical guns if they weren't intended for the agency.

Art Doc · #14 11-30-2010, 10:14 PM

PS: In case you hadn't seen these...

ladder13 · #15 11-30-2010, 10:14 PM

Both guns pictured above are gorgeous, wouldn't mind owning either.

bettis1 · #16 12-01-2010, 09:21 AM

Gary,

Nice gun. Congratulations.

I believe that your gun probably left the factory marked just like Saxon's. At one of the returns, the then owner had it refinished and the UHP marking and the left side logo were removed and the then current right side logo was put on.
Bob

m-1911 · #17 12-01-2010, 09:23 AM

This is from the UHP website:

As was mentioned previously, the issued weapon for the Utah Highway Patrol in 1929 was a .44 caliber revolver. This weapon was not the .44 magnum that officers are familiar with today. During one incident in 1938, eleven rounds were fired at a pickup truck containing two escapees fleeing from Patrolman Jack Sullivan in Price Canyon. Five of the rounds struck the back of the truck; however, none of the rounds penetrated the stuffing of the back seat. The Utah Highway Patrol determined that more firepower was needed and the duty weapon was changed to a .357 magnum revolver with a six inch barrel in 1938. The Patrol ordered mostly Smith & Wesson revolvers; however, a few Colts were also issued. Patrolman second class Russ Cederlund, hired on December 1, 1938, was issued a Colt. In later years this weapon was replaced with a Smith & Wesson. The .357 was a new caliber introduced in 1935 and was only available to police agencies. Each weapon was registered as a way to keep them away from the criminal element.

Also issued were 12 gauge shotguns. Although early records call these weapons "sawed-off" shotguns, it is not known if these weapons were actual shortened by cutting off a portion of the barrel or if they were a shorter version issued specifically for police use. What is known is that the first issued shotgun of the Utah Highway Patrol was a Winchester Model 97. This model had an exposed hammer and was dubbed the "thumb buster" model. Officers not familiar with this weapon would often experience pinched thumbs and fingers due to improper placement of the officer’s hands, thumbs, and fingers during operation.

By 1940, the Utah Highway Patrol had also purchased three .45 caliber Thompson sub-machine guns. These weapons were carried throughout the state and instruction on their use was given by Captain L. L. Fryer.

handejector · #18 12-01-2010, 09:48 AM

Gary,
I wouldn't have bought that dog, unless I saw it FIRST!

Great score- good for you.
I think you made the best snag of the show.
No problem about stealing the grips- you surely stole that gun.

Did you steal the front sight too?

You might want to show the letter. It would help in understanding the provenance of these guns.

m-1911 · #19 12-01-2010, 10:01 AM

Lee

Here is the letter. I had to pay $5 for the sight. Do you think I got taken on it? I also got a King reflector for $10. I really like the gun and for $1800, I like it even more! I took it out shooting last week and it is a great shooter

handejector · #20 12-01-2010, 10:05 AM

I think you did great at 1800, but 1805 is WAY too much to have in it!
Want to bail?

m-1911 · #21 12-01-2010, 10:12 AM

I'd go $1805 without the sight, that way I can make a profit. I think you are just trying to get your grips back, ha, ha

RKmesa · #22 12-01-2010, 10:14 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by bettis1

Gary,

Nice gun. Congratulations.

I believe that your gun probably left the factory marked just like Saxon's. At one of the returns, the then owner had it refinished and the UHP marking and the left side logo were removed and the then current right side logo was put on.
Bob

Bob:

That theory may be possible, but the left side logo on all of my pre-war guns is usually stamped a little "deeper" than the right side logos and it would require the removal of a lot of metal to remove the logo. I also wonder about the fact that there is no "Made in U.S.A." on the right side of the frame. I do not believe that I have seen any other pre-war 357's without the "Made in U.S.A." Any thoughts on why it was not roll marked? Or if the marks were removed on both sides of the gun, it should be noticeably thinner, with the stocks having a bit more space between the backside of the "horn" and the flats of the frame.

Gary:

Thanks for posting the letter, which indicates that it was "marked" for the UHP, which supports Bob's theory that the marks were removed in one of its trips back to the factory? Some close ups of the right side of that great gun would be much appreciated. Also probably just the light on the photo, but I cannot make out the "S&W .357 Magnum" on the right side of the barrel.

Thanks,

m-1911 · #23 12-01-2010, 11:48 AM

Here are the additional pics. Interestingly, I "miked" the frame in the area of the "MADE IN USA" mark on several other RM's that I have, and the frame thickness varies from .657 to .661 in this area. On the UHP gun it measures .646. So that is an indication that the MADE IN USA mark was removed, however there is nothing in the fit of the sideplate or the screws to indicate any misfit. Does anyone have a picture of the UHP marking?

m-1911 · #24 12-01-2010, 01:01 PM

Another interesting UHP story. Note that the story mentions that the S&W revolver had a 4" barrel. That was some pretty good shooting at $200 yds.

1950 - 1959 / Shoot-out at Echo
Chapters
Return To Chapters1950 - 1959
OverviewColonel Joseph W. DudlerRed Cross On the HighwaysDepartment of Public SafetyCommissioner Jay C. NewmanPrison RiotsShoot-out at EchoIndians on the War PathColonel Masrion A. SnowColonel Lyle HyattPorts of EntryOfficers DownFirearms TrainingRunning Gun BattleValorSixth SenseCamp Williams AcademyIn 1951, a Special Session of the legislature ordered the Utah Highway Patrol to open truck weighing stations throughout Utah. No additional funding had been provided by the Special Session, only additional responsibilities. As a result, field personnel were required to work one day a week at these Ports of Entry. In April 1952, the Echo Port of Entry was opened.

Mark L. Birch joined the UHP in July 1951, with field duties in Weber County. On June 7, 1952, Patrolman Birch was assigned to work at the Echo Port of Entry. Patrolman Birch was to replace Trooper Ted London. Earlier that same day, two men had failed to pay for a meal at the Echo Cafe, Coalville, Utah. The owner, Bert Cattelan, had driven to the Echo Port of Entry after an employee had spotted the two men at the edge of town. Trooper London wrote a note for Patrolman Birch, locked the Port and attempted to locate the two thieves. The cafe owner, Mr. Cattelan, also left in his personal vehicle.

Patrolman Birch arrived at the Port and found Trooper London’s message. A few minutes later, Mr. Cattelan returned to the Port and told Patrolman Birch that he had found the two suspects. Patrolman Birch locked the Port and accompanied by Mr. Cattelan, went to look for the suspects. They located both suspects at the junction of U. S. 30S and U. S. 189, about four miles north of Coalville.

Patrolman Birch exited his vehicle and ordered the pair to come to his car. Upon their approach, Patrolman Birch immediately began to frisk the younger of the two. As he completed his cursory search, Mark turned to frisk the other suspect. The older suspect immediately produced two revolvers and began to fire both weapons at point blank range at Patrolman Birch. Both weapons were .32 caliber break action revolvers. One was a five shot, the other a six shot. A total of nine shots were fired by the suspect at a distance of two or three feet.

Mark was struck twice in the right chest, knocking him to the ground. Despite excruciating pain, Mark was able to draw his issued .357 revolver and return fire. When all the shooting began, Bert Cattelan jumped from the patrol car and sought cover near the cement underpass. The pair of bandits quickly jumped into the patrol car and sped away in a hail of gunfire. Patrolman Birch successfully fired three rounds into the back window of his fleeing patrol car. One of the rounds exited the windshield directly in front of the driver’s steering wheel. Another round struck the steering wheel. The younger suspect laid on the front seat while driving to avoid the volley of gunfire.

Within minutes, John Weston, Laketown, Rich County, Utah, passed the fallen officers location. Mr. Cattelan motioned for the Weston vehicle to stop. Together they transported Patrolman Birch to the Summit County Hospital, Coalville, Utah. During this entire ordeal, Mark never lost consciousness.

Reed J. Parker, M. D., performed emergency surgery on Patrolman Birch to remove the two .32 caliber slugs and to repair the hemothorax which had caused his right lung to fill with blood. During the operation two blood transfusions were required.

Trooper London had covered the highway through Coalville and was circling back towards Echo Junction when the fleeing patrol car passed on U. S. 189. Ted recognized it was Patrolman Birch’s issued cruiser. He also saw the two civilian occupants and the bullet hole in the windshield. Turning to pursue, Trooper London saw the back window was also broken. Trooper London immediately radioed the Summit County Sheriff’s Department; however, his transmission went unanswered. Radio traffic in that area was generally only successful from Coalville south to Wanship.

Within a mile, the fleeing felons turned onto the Echo Dam. Crashing through a chain guard, the fleeing patrol car began crossing the dam. Trooper London knew the road ended at the spillway. Skidding to a stop, the felons jumped from the vehicle and began to run up an adjacent sagebrush canyon. Trooper London stopped directly behind Patrolman Birch’s vehicle and exited with his issued Winchester model 97 shotgun. Trooper London could clearly see one of the fleeing felons carrying a revolver in each hand.

Trooper London gave a verbal order for the two fleeing felons to stop. They ignored this order. Ted knew the distance was far too great for effective use of double 00 buck. Firing three rounds of buckshot over their heads failed to halt their flight. Trooper London drew his 4 inch barrel .357 magnum revolver and again ordered the suspects to stop. They continued to flee.

Trooper London then began firing at the suspect who was holding a weapon in each hand. The fifth shot found its mark. The distance was nearly 200 yards. The bullet entered the suspect’s body at mid-level and exited just below the ribs on the left side. He was killed instantly. He was still clutching the two revolvers used to feloniously assault Patrolman Birch. Further examination of the weapons revealed nine spent cartridges and one live round in each weapon.

The dead suspect was later identified at Carman John Barbaro, 23, of Long Island, New York. He had been on the run since going A.W.O.L. from the U. S. Army. He was accompanied by his younger brother, Anthony Robert Barbaro, age 18. Anthony had served three years for burglary at the New York Vocational Institution and was wanted for parole violation. He was later convicted and sent to prison for accessory after the fact, assault with a deadly weapon with the intent to kill.

Patrolman Mark Birch, age 27, spent six days in the hospital and six weeks off work. While recovering from his wounds, he completed his probationary period and was advanced to the rank of trooper

m-1911 · #25 12-01-2010, 01:08 PM

Utah Department of Public Safety

Check out 1928 and 1938. Has anyone ever seen one of the 44's that UHP bought in 1928?

handejector · #26 12-01-2010, 01:12 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by m-1911

Here are the additional pics. Interestingly, I "miked" the frame in the area of the "MADE IN USA" mark on several other RM's that I have, and the frame thickness varies from .657 to .661 in this area. On the UHP gun it measures .646. So that is an indication that the MADE IN USA mark was removed, however there is nothing in the fit of the sideplate or the screws to indicate any misfit. Does anyone have a picture of the UHP marking?

The marking is on SP's gun shown above- putcher glasses on, ol' man.

I don't know if the Made in USA was ever there, but who knows? We have seen other errors.
I just miked a gun there at .708 and another at .710.
That area is hard to mike because of the yoke hinge on the other side, so I used a dial caliper that is dead on. The long jaws make it easy to be flat on the stamp and hit the widest point on the hinge.

Dan M · #27 12-01-2010, 02:22 PM

Cool Thread, Very Informative... Gary it was nice to finally meet you this trip. Now if I can just follow you around on your hunts

Dan

m-1911 · #28 12-01-2010, 02:27 PM

Now I see it!!!

m-1911 · #29 12-01-2010, 02:32 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dan M

Cool Thread, Very Informative... Gary it was nice to finally meet you this trip. Now if I can just follow you around on your hunts

Dan

Hey Dan, nice meeting you too. Now you can see the grips on the RM. I was thinking about following YOU around so I can find some BBQ guns. This has been a good thread.

Sgt 127 · #30 12-03-2010, 02:01 PM

Heres a picture of the stamping on mine. I'll get a better close up when I get a chance, but, the gun was (to the best of my knowledge) refinished in 1955. That lettering is pretty deep, it would surprise me that the went to the trouble of grinding it off.

boykinlp · #31 12-03-2010, 04:39 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sgt 127

Heres a picture of the stamping on mine. I'll get a better close up when I get a chance, but, the gun was (to the best of my knowledge) refinished in 1955. That lettering is pretty deep, it would surprise me that the went to the trouble of grinding it off.

WOW, Sgt 127 it looks like your gun has not been shot or the cylinder even turned since the 1955 refinish. Great gun.

m-1911 · #32 12-03-2010, 05:29 PM

I am starting to think that my gun escaped being marked. As you say, the lettering looks deep and it would be obvious if it was ground off

Thanks for the pic

Art Doc · #33 12-03-2010, 06:48 PM

I am certain m-1911's gun was never stamped. There were clearly more than 50 RMs sent to the UHP (as I stated earlier in the thread) and only 50 were stamped. The subject of this thread shipped in April of 1938 and was one of 32. Mine shipped in August of that year and was also in a shipment of 32 guns. That's 64 right there and my letter indicates that there were three other shipments that added up to 18 units to make a total order of 50. My letter says all 50 were stamped so I am guessing that the 32 guns that made up the shipment including m-1911's example (and any others that may exist) were not stamped.

It is my understanding that the UHP RMs were replaced in 1955 so Sgt127's gun being serviced that year likely saw little if any use after refinishing. Mine was reblued in 1954 and clearly shows holster wear and a retaining strap mark on the side plate.