For a great many years, I was under the impression that those 1917's with Brazilian markings were made under license in Brazil. I also believed they were common as all get out. Neither is true.

According to a letter from Roy Jinks, Brazil, in 1937, ordered 25,000 revolvers, made in Springfield, MA and paid for them in Brazilian funds. Sounds like a lot of weapons, but, according to Mr. Jinks, the total number of these revolvers made for use in this country totaled 385,866.

Now, that makes the Brazilian contract guns very rare in comparison. My question is: Why do the Brazilian contract guns sell for much lowers prices than comparable U.S. market guns?

Thanks in advance, for your opinions.

Less common doesn't equate to more valuable.Guns used by our military,with a possible WW1 connection, are more highly valued.

Demand. A lot of buyers would rather have a 1917 with US markings than one with Brazilian markings even if they are essentially the same revolver. Beyond that, the Brazilian guns have a reputation for being poorly cared for and indifferently transported from place to place; their finishes are often considered worn, scratched, dented and rusty. (Though I hasten to point out that attractive Brazilian 1917s can be found.)

There was a second Brazilian contract in 1946 that added another 15,000 or so guns to the "Brazilian" column. Production of 40,000 units does not make a gun rare or necessarily more desirable than a gun manufactured in 150,000 units.

As an aside, I don't recognize the 385,000 statistic. I thought no more than about 220,000 1917s were made, a number that includes the Brazilian contract production. Can you tell us where you found that number? (I could easily be wrong; I just want to correct my memory if I am.)

In general, scarcity comes into play as a price factor when fewer than 5000 units of some model were produced. And even at that level, a lot of people have to want one for the price to get much above the S&W average. Sometimes you have to find a gun for which fewer than 3000 units were made, or even 1000, before you see a solid collector-driven price bump.

__________________
David Wilson

From Roy Jinks' letter, dated December 22, 2010:

You are correct DCWilson... I misread the letter and should not have added 210,886 to 175,000. It also appears that the 25,000 were indeed a part of the total. The total production was 210,886 units. mea culpa