.22/.32 Hand Ejector (Heavy Frame Target, "Bekeart" type) Pictures
 

There are a lot of disconnected posts about these, so I thought maybe there could be a spot where images of various versions of this model (from the earliest 1911 production run to the post-1935 ones with the recessed cylinder) could be perused.

I'll start it off with #5175xx, shipped in 1930. The hammer spur is truncated, but I can't say whether it was broken off and the fracture then smoothed out, or if it was deliberately shortened for some reason.

Thanks for starting this thread, Goony. I look forward to seeing more pictures of these special .22 Heavy Target revolvers as other members post them. I passed a few months ago on one that I really wanted to buy, but the condition just was not good enough to justify the price the guy wanted and he wasn't willing to come down. I plan to keep looking.
Meanwhile, I thought I would mention that the letter I got from Roy on my .32/20 HE Model of 1902 Target revolver (serial #80xx) says it was shipped to Phillip Bekeart Company on March 15, 1904. If I understand the sequence correctly, that would mean it went to the old store, before the earthquake destroyed it. Good thing for me the gun was sold first, or I probably would not have it today.
Regards,
JP

A .22/32 thread! How could I not participate.

Here's one of the last .22/32 target revolvers shipped before WWII put an end to commercial production: no. 533038, shipped January 1940.

http://i280.photobucket.com/albums/k...e/IMG_0890.jpg

http://i280.photobucket.com/albums/k...e/IMG_0889.jpg

The later labels don't say anything about "Bekeart" or use the phrase Heavy Frame Target.

http://i280.photobucket.com/albums/k...e/IMG_0900.jpg

It's interesting to see how the company described this offering in its catalogs (1925 in this case).

http://i280.photobucket.com/albums/k...HFT1925p25.jpg

http://i280.photobucket.com/albums/k...HFT1925p26.jpg

I don't have a photo of the open cylinder showing the recessed chambers, but you can see from the tiny gap between cylinder and recoil shield that this cylinder enclosed the rims of inserted cartridges.

http://i280.photobucket.com/albums/k...e/IMG_0895.jpg

Super pictures, David. I especially enjoyed the catalog pages.
On the recessing: Early examples of the .22/32 Heavy Frame Targets that I've seen did not have recessed chambers. Do you know when they started doing that?
Jack

It is reported at serial 525,600 in 1935. These are a 160,XXX, a 270,XXX and a 384,XXX from top to bottom. The 384,XXX has a recessed cylinder and a gold bead front sight and went back to the factory in September of 1940. Apparently, someone thought that the new recessed chamber idea was a good one. The top gun 160,XXX has the smaller or "bobbed" hammer.

Is it correct to state, then, that the "bobbed" hammer was a factory variation or option?

I've attached a photo of the hammer on the gun with which I started off this thread. This appears to me to have been "bobbed" one way or another after it was shipped. Although it's not as obvious in the picture as it is when actually handling the gun, this hammer just doesn't have the look of a manufactured part, being uncomfortably sharp edged, and the end neither perfectly smooth or symmertrical. Perhaps it was a deliberate attempt to reproduce the factory shortened style hammer, but I fail to see what advantage was gained.

I suspect that the gun was dropped and landed on its hammer, leaving a broken tip. Rather than replacing the hammer, the owner just cleaned up the break as well as he could with a file and kept on shooting.

With the patent stamp on it, that's a company hammer.

I have a prewar Kit Gun (same action) with an enlarged hammer spur. I figured it was a repair after the original hammer was broken. Not sure why a shooter would willingly grind down the hammer on a target revolver. Most of the mods made the hammers bigger.

I saw a nice 22/32 at a show which lettered in 1922. The front sight was shaped like a patridge but had a v shaped cutout on the barrel side. Kind of looked like a fish hook sight. Pin looked untouched.I couldn't find reference to it in SSWC.

IIRC - they are covered on page 117.

Great thread!
Thanks for posting those pictures and copy's of the original literature, David.
I just bought one on Gun Broker. I should have it sometime next week and will post pictures. I didn't really know much about them other than what I read in the SCSW.

It looked to be in very good shooter condition and I thought it would sell for more than it did ($633.00), but I guess these aren't bringing the big dollars yet.

I can't what to get it to the range to see what it (and I) can do.

Guess I better jump in here. This one belonged to my Grandfather. I got it from him in about 1985. I don't have the serial number at hand but will try to post it up later.

http://i38.photobucket.com/albums/e1...s/DCP_1187.jpg

I got a chuckle out of some of the hyperbole in that 1925 catalog.

"Heavier and lighter arms were tried, but the .22 on a .32 sized frame proved by far the best."

Put that in your pipe and smoke it, you K-22 guys! Honestly, they really didn't leave themselves much wiggle room for touting the merits of the .22 Outdoorsman when it was introduced just a few years later, did they?

"The .22/32 is a man's gun, the stock fits the hand, and permits the loose yet firm grip so necessary for good shooting..."

So that's what I've been doing wrong all these years, not gripping the gun loosely and firmly at the same time! And evidently women need not bother considering buying this product. After all, we already have that Ladysmith for those darned suffragettes....

I just recently learned that S&W experimented with a K-frame .22 about 1910, but that it was a miserable failure because they got the rifling twist all wrong. Twenty years later they got the engineering worked out and the K-22 Outdoorsman was born.

Interesting that they indirectly slag their own M-frame target revolvers. They built them when they thought they could sell them; then when they thought they could sell something better, the M-frames got thrown under the bus.

Those old catalogs do bring a smile. There is a lot of high-mindedness to the prose. I guess you couldn't just say, "Kills things really dead" and expect to get the attention of the entire gun-buying market.

i got me one, forget the year, but ive had it lettered.

http://i1199.photobucket.com/albums/...22-32small.jpg

That looks to be an early one, maybe even from the first production run in 1911. Does it have a number on the bottom of the left side stock?

Goony, great thread and lotsa' eye candy!

Just a word about 'bobbed' hammers. I've not seen anything in writing about a factory bobbed hammer or ever observed one on dozens of HFTs I've seen. But I won't say Smith never made one, I just don't think so. I too see no advantage for the target shooter.

And I wouldn't say it wasn't done on purpose by an owner that carried it under winter clothing and was tired of snagging the hammer.

I have observed that the cut under the tip of the spur that forms the little bulge on the end occasionally creates a very narrow spot near the tip of the spur. Those seem prone to breakage at the slightest provocation.

As we all know, most revolvers when dropped, due to their weight distribution, will fall hammer down. Hence the reason for Smith's new hammer block safties that started with the Victory Model during the war when a U. S. sailor was killed and Uncle Sam sent them all back to S&W for retrofitting. And the reason so many old Colts and old model Rugers were infamous for shooting their owners when dropped.

No, it was not a factory option.
Most of these have nothing to do with being dropped and broken. I think they were shortened because large, meaty hands can get 'bit' in double action and interfere with the hammer when cocked single action.

James referring to one of his having "the" bobbed hammer instead of "a" bobbed hammer is what got me to infer that there might be a production variation. Clearly uninformed speculation on my part.

yes my grips have a number stamped on the bottom, i wanna say #2111, but i could be wrong.

Sorry if my wording confused anyone. I used the term "the" bobbed hammer because I have seen this on multiple .22/32's before, yours included. I would guess that if one did a search for .22/32 Heavy Frame target or just .22/32 that past threads discussing this topic will be found. I know that I have participated in at least one discussion regarding this hammer anomaly since mine suffers from the affliction.;)

I would tend to think the "Bobbed Hammer" was a Custom enhancement back in the day.

When I got this one it had a very slight bulge in the barrel. I did send it to David Chicoine and have the barrel lined, as well as a couple other minor problems fixed. It's S/N 441727, shipped 9/1926.
http://i151.photobucket.com/albums/s...6/IMG_0521.jpg

...and my custom job done 20 some years ago and previously shown here.
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v4...plabled--1.jpg

bobbed hammers
 

just real happy to have something to offer to the room of all knowledge smith & wesson. i have #2386xx and it has the bobbed hammer as well. i've seen a few offered online with this modification and posted the question here as well. seems likely that either the pinching or snagging could be the reason. mine seems to have been just put to a grinder.

randy

Made me smile as well, not a single word of acknowledgement for a concept commonly reported as initially requested by Bekeart.

If you search the forum for other .22/32 threads, this has been discussed before. My feeling is the same as Lee suggests, this was an after purchase modification to shorten the hammer tip and prevent pinching the web between the thumb and index finger.:eek:

I received my 22/32 over the weekend. It's a nice little gun in very good to excellent condition considering its' age. The serial number is 495xxx and it does not have recessed chambers. The cylinder and barrel match, and the grips are in very nice condition.

http://i163.photobucket.com/albums/t...cture006-2.jpg

http://i163.photobucket.com/albums/t...cture007-3.jpg

http://i163.photobucket.com/albums/t...cture017-3.jpg

Based on the grips with no medallions and the 2nd type ejector rod knob, you have a 1929-30 gun.

thanks Hondo!

I can't believe I for got to say what a gorgeous example of a 22/32 H F Target you have. What a great find!

.22/.32 Heavy Target bobbed hammer
 

I'm not sure this is interesting enough to justify space used but I am the possessor of one of these very interesting revolvers. originally obtained by accident with standard hammer but as time passed it was traded for something more interesting at the time. the next time I saw the gun the spur was missing from the hammer, the owner was not even aware so we dickered and I again had an Heavy Frame Target but now with a "Bobbed" hammer. The search was on for the missing spur and eventually it was recovered. Now I have this HFT without a spur on its hammer and I do not want a spurless hammer. I make inquiries with some of the old time S&W Collectors and find one, made the deal for it and when it arrives I install it but it does not function as a double action as it should. Not wanting to make any changes to the marrying parts I just removed the new hammer and replaced it with the hammer missing its spur. Finally located another hammer with some additional parts I found on this forum and it dropped in and function was perfect. I do not think they made "bobbed" hammers as an option from the S&W factory and my thoughts are that the hammer spurs were one of the weak spots thus causing "bobbed hammers". Apologize if this was boring. this is my story and I'm sticking to it!

Thank you!

I had a chance to give it a good cleaning last night. It's really in very good condition with just enough character to not feel bad shooting it. All the serial numbers match (barrel, extractor, cylinder) and the bore in the barrel and chambers are mirror bright. It looks like it hasn't been shot very much all. The side plate screws are perfect and look like they've not been turned. If they were, it was with the proper screw driver by someone that wasn't a hack.
All in all, this gun looks like it was owned by someone who appreciated it and took very good care of it.

It's my first Smith with a gold bead front sight and I'm really impressed with how good the sight picture is with it.

http://i163.photobucket.com/albums/t...vents176-1.jpg


I'm planning on having it lettered and I'm looking forward to finding out exactly were and when it started its' life.

It's really neat to be able to fondle a gun that's 80 +/- years old. The craftsmanship that went into these old Smiths is nothing short or remarkable. I think I get as much pleasure out of just looking at them as I do actually shooting them.
I'm hoping to get her to the range in the next few days to see how she shoots.

I just looked back to see what you paid for it and I feel that you sure got your money's worth on that deal. I find your gun very interesting because it seems to have been made at the point, 1929-30 when some features were changing: The non-medallion grips of the 1920s were just being phased out and silver ones introduced, the 2nd style ER knob was just transitioning from the 'mushroom' head, and the serial # penciled on the inside of the right grip was being changed to a stamping. I'm curious to know if yours is penciled on or stamped.

What beautiful .22s... What kind of pricing would I be looking at for one in shooter-grade? I don't need a 95% gun, I prefer function and character. As long as the action is tight and locks up right, it can look like a 30 year old VW for all I care. :)

It's a crisp enough example that I can believe this. However, it's not atypical for ones that have been shot a bit more to have a ring (or donut, if you prefer) of pitting about an inch in from the muzzle. You normally need a magnifying glass to see this clearly, but it certainly occurs. I suspect .22 ammunition back in the day used corrosive priming, and that for some technical reason the residue accumulated at that specific point in the barrel, so if the revolver wasn't cleaned religiously, it ate up the bore there. It doesn't seem to affect accuracy, though.

I've seen the condition you're looking for as low as $450-500 but as high as $600 asking price or auction starting price. That's why 1blindref"s was such a buy at $633. Check these closed auctions for actual sale prices:
http://www.gunbroker.com/Auction/SearchResults.aspx

Wow...Pricy. One further question, are all K22's considered C&R guns or did the K22 last beyond what is considered C&R?

Top is a 22 Target, bottom is a 32 Target. When I got this 22 the tip of the hammer spur was broken off, I obtained a replacement from Dave Chicone:
http://i181.photobucket.com/albums/x...232Targets.jpg

No, only those made before 1961. They made them for at least another 25 years after 1961 and are still made in some form, 10 shot stainless I believe.

Gatorbaiter,

Way cool! That .32 Target with pearl stocks and nickel plating is very interesting. There can't be too many out there with that combination of features. Does it show signs of extensive shooting, or is most of that wear and nickel loss from storage and carrying?

Froggie

Gator, have you shown that adjustable-sight .32 before? I don't recall it, and I'd hate to think my memory couldn't hold on to something like that if I had seen it. Can you share the serial number, or the first part of it?

Looks to me like that gun does not have a stud for the trigger rebound slide, which makes it an early Model of 1903. I have heard about two other adjustable sight four-inch .32s from that era. In general, target I-frame .32s were blued guns except for a few of the very early ones. S&W eventually adopted the policy that they would not provide a target revolver with a nickel finish, but there are a few from the early days. I have a nickel six-inch gun target shipped in 1904. The four-inch specimen is very cool. S&W made very few of those through the decades. In my opinion they should have made more.

I was happy with the price that I paid.
The seller of that gun usually has very clean S&W's and is very good about answering questions. I knew that I wouldn't get hurt paying what I paid for that gun.

I didn't see any numbers stamped into the grips. There weren't any clear penciled numbers, but I'll check them with a magnifying glass to make sure.

Thank you very much for your insight regarding this gun.

There are no stamped numbers.
I can see some very faint pencil marks on the right side grip, but I can't make them out at all.

If you have access to a decent digital camera, take a pic of where the pencil marking is (good close up if you can, unblurry) and I can run it through some of my imaging software and see if I can pull out the serial number. Shoot me a PM with your email as I would need the full resolution image straight off your camera (and not shrunk down from Imageshack or Flikr).

Spotted an interesting article that includes the .22/.32 as one of S&W's all-time twelve most important guns. See:

Shooting Times - Smith & Wesson

Re: 32 Target
 

Froggy,

You can't tell it in the picture, but there is a very faint importers stamp on the left front of the frame "SM SALES S.A.TX, (S.A.TX= San Antonio, Tx) which leads me to believe that this gun was imported from Mexico. The wear to the nickel, the dings and powder burn rings on the front of the cylinder indicate that it was carried and shot a lot, however the bore and chambers are in excellent condition with no pitting, so whoever used it took fairly good care of it.

David,
You are correct, it doesn't have the stud for the trigger rebound slide, the serial number is 50735. The last patent date on the bbl is July 7, 1903, it has the solid hammer pin rivet. According to Supica & Nahas, the rivet was changed from solid to hollow with flared rings "at around 48000". I identify it as a 32 HE Mdl of 1903-1st change.

Here's an example of the ultimate in "Bekeartness" in a .22/.32 Hand Ejector, being that it's from the initial 1911 production run of 1,044 and one of the 294 actually shipped that same year to the Phil. B. Bekeart Co. in San Francisco.

https://i.postimg.cc/mgZVpxfL/1016.jpg

That is dead sexy right there.

Anyone have one they are willing to part with? I have a Smith for trade + cash. :D

I have this 22/32 released in the early to mid 1920. It would have had the enlarged grips without medallions that were used during the 1920s. The cylinder is not recessed. I would like more information about these target grips if any one has any idea about the make. It has 22 lpi checker, with right handed thumb rest and the usual palm swell.

Spectacular target stocks. I too would like to know who made those -- and then I would keep an eye out for a set of my own.

Those are beautiful custom grips and all I can say is they are not Ropers but equal to Roper quality.

Is the backstrap of the gun's grip frame rebated (notched). If so the gun would have had the regulation police type sq butt extended grips with one screw from the early '20s. If it is not rebated, it would have had the extension targets with two screws from the mid to late '20s. Both w/o medallions as you said.

I have yet to acquire one of these elegant revolvers. I do however have a couple of pics to add to the thread.

http://i3.photobucket.com/albums/y97...thumbnail1.jpg

http://i3.photobucket.com/albums/y97...thumbnail1.jpg

f.t.