Increasingly more Interesting Triple Lock *update*

dacoontz · #51 07-18-2014, 07:00 PM

True, but Roy's letter states that it was originally shipped in blue and the SWHF letter says it was nickel. So was it blue than nickel than blue based on the info that is presented. I guess that's possible but funny to me.

Masterpiece · #52 07-18-2014, 08:00 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Hondo44

There's more going on here than meets the eye. I don't believe we have the entire story from the archives, only how it was originally shipped in blue with the sights and a much later part that has been digitized already.

This is clearly a case where the additional information only raised more questions.

I agree with Jim (Hondo44) there's definitely more going on with this Revolver than meets the eye...Much More In My Opinion!!

Also...Concerning the Original Configuration as stated in the Letter...In my opinion the Letter states this Revolver shipped as a "Std. Service-Sighted" Triple-Lock!! The Sights...(Factory Modified??...or Not??)...Were added "After" this Revolver left the factory in 1912 given I'm pretty certain Roy would have made mention of them in the sentence stating the Barrel Length, Finish & Stocks it shipped with...Not in the Additional Notation!!

Thought it best to throw that out there to lessen the confusion that already exists!!

Hondo44 · #53 07-18-2014, 08:50 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by SixgunStrumpet

The factory letter arrived:

Yes Masterpiece! Roy seems to have additional records from between his shipping records and the SWHF records indicating a factory return for refinishing and sight modification but apparently not digitized for retrieval by SWHF as yet. This could be when the nickel finish was done, which is documented by the SWHF as being redone again back to the original blue finish on the subsequent return trip to the factory documented in their records.

Masterpiece · #54 07-18-2014, 09:04 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Hondo44

Roy seems to have additional records from between his shipping records and the SWHF records indicating a factory return for refinishing and sight modification but apparently not digitized for retrieval by SWHF as yet.

Jim,

While that "May" be true??...If This Revolver Were Mine...I'd contact Roy asking him to add some clarity to the notation given there are one too many "And's" in that last sentence to suit me...Been There Before!!

Glenn Kelley · #55 07-18-2014, 10:20 PM

Mr Johnson states that he was not aware that the barrel had been shortened .

Roy stated that it left the factory as a 5" .It is a 5" .

Barrel change as well ?

Glenn

Modified · #56 07-19-2014, 06:51 PM

Whatever this gun turns out to be, nothing will stop me from loving it. As far as I am concerned all this information just makes it more and more interesting.

I snapped some more pictures of it. I've been pondering why I don't like the pictures I take of it, and I think it's because of the re-finish. I can get my other guns, by and large, to look like they do in person with the photographs, but never this one, or this one is just never quite right. I'm not unhappy with the pictures, but they aren't "right" somehow to me. I don't really know why.

In any case you may find these interesting:

Hondo44 · #57 07-19-2014, 07:55 PM

They look great to me. Oh man! Just noticed something else; the fine serrations on the ramp base below the front blade to match those on the rear sight. Cool. They'll clean up nicely.

Just a thought; I would get after the rust on the backstrap knuckle with some 4 ought bronze wool and Kroil. When I zoom in I can see red rust. As long as it's there it can continue to do its cancerous damage.

Can you see the back end of the top strap gulley when you sight thru the sq notch in the rear blade?

Modified · #58 07-19-2014, 07:59 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Hondo44

Can you see the back end of the top strap gulley when you sight thru the sq notch in the rear blade?

No. I really like the sight picture, you just see the rear blade and the front blade, either below or lined up with the undercut.

A big part of why I have loved this gun is how excellent the sights are when shooting it. In truth I don't think I would like a 5" Triple Lock with factory standard sights, target or fixed, as much as I like this gun.

Good call on that backstrap, I'll go take care of that momentarily.

Modified · #59 08-02-2014, 12:00 PM

Back from the road, found some envelopes waiting. Thought you guys might be interested:

SDH · #60 08-02-2014, 05:03 PM

Redundant but GREAT!
Few guns get that lucky...

Modified · #61 08-02-2014, 05:10 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by SDH

Redundant but GREAT!
Few guns get that lucky...

Indeed, plus there is the possibility of uncovering more as time goes by.

In truth this letter is the one that I like the most:

Quote:

Originally Posted by SixgunStrumpet

Dear sirs.

I broke this gun, could you please fix it? Here's $3, thanks.

Watchdog · #62 08-02-2014, 05:17 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by SixgunStrumpet

I enjoy a pristine example of an original gun, sure, but I also really like the idea that a gun has seen honest use.

I feel exactly the same way. If it were mine, I wouldn't do a thing to the stocks.

Hondo44 · #63 12-08-2014, 10:22 PM

Hi Sixgun,

Any updates for your quintessential TL factory retrofitted windage adj only Target from Jinks or SWHF?

Hondo44 · #64 12-08-2014, 10:23 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by SixgunStrumpet

Nope. Going to be a while on the SWHF I think, going to have to run another search when they have more years digitized.

I asked Roy for clarification after I joined the SWCA but I haven't had a response. I haven't really wanted to press him, I know he's a really nice guy but I figure making a pest of myself isn't a good thing to do, I already post enough as it is

I figure worse comes to worse he will be at the Symposium and I will ask him there. I'll most certainly be bringing it.

The late 1930's N frame Magnas may just be a false clue to when the nickel plating and sights were actually retrofitted by the factory and also the reason SWHF documentation has eluded them although Roy obviously referenced something for the letter you received from him.

Given that the letter verifies that the factory retrofitted the sights, and considering there's a star but no rework date stamp and SWHF couldn't find the earlier documentation for the sights and plating, IMO and reasoning, all things point to a factory retrofit prior to 1930 when date stamping was more hit and miss. The Magnas could have been added at anytime after the mid 1930's!

Modified · #65 12-08-2014, 10:25 PM

I fully agree Jim.

I figure I just need to be patient at this point. And put it in Roy's hands at the Symposium. Yours too if you are going to be there?

Modified · #66 12-10-2014, 05:52 PM

Double posting because I did get a response from Roy.

He says that he has seen examples of it done, by the factory old time gunsmith when he first went to the factory, and that his statement was based on his 50 years of working with the factory.

Now I want to find these other examples!

This excited me, and I took some more photos.

Nothing you haven't seen before, but maybe there's something I'm missing about it that you guys will find interesting. Or more importantly, something here that matches something you happen to have floating around in your gunsafe.

Hondo44 · #67 12-10-2014, 06:36 PM

Bravo!!

That is such a unique and interesting TL and completely verified as factory work!

IMO your TL is more rare, more special and more valuable than any other rare Smith. It would be the center of any advanced Smith collection!

Just imagine if one had ordered a new TL back in the day, requested the fixed (drift-adjustable-only) rear sight, and it's delivered with the more common version we usually see. Then a buddy sees it and sends his fixed sight TL back to the factory and requests a drift-adjustable-only rear sight be retrofitted. But his gun comes back looking like yours because it just happened to be assigned to the 'right' old gunsmith!!!!

Hondo44 · #68 12-08-2017, 10:58 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by SixgunStrumpet

Sure thing, the new camera arrived, so I could snap some.

I actually have a question about it I should probably ask here. This sight on ebay right now isn't 100% correct, it should have 2 holes, but do you guys know if it would work? The K-Frame here doesn't, the screw hole is in the wrong spot. I've been after a rear sight for nearly 2 years now and can't seem to find the right one. Seeing as I paid so little for the gun spending a few hundred on a sight would be no problem, if this one works, even if its slightly wrong, I think it would fit the overall aesthetic of the gun.

So my RM is, um. There's a bit of a story:

I didn't really know what they were, but I was at a gunshow and a guy set it out on a table right in front of me. The table was all knives plus this one gun, he wrote out a sticker with $150 on it, and stuck it to the gun. I was smart enough to realize that any N Frame .357 was worth $150, even if it was just in parts. I picked it up, checked the action, it all seemed to be good. It had two flaws however. It was wearing a set of smooth Herretts which didn't suit it at all, and the rear sight was gone with an extra hole in it

After two years and just re-reading the thread, something dawned on me regarding the RM. Besides the two elevation screws, the RM sight was unique with serrations on the rear of the sight base just below the blade. They actually match the those on your factory custom TL windage-adjustable-only rear sight.

Here's a photo of the RM correct sight. Of course any good smith could add these serrations. Have you made further progress on restoring it with original style sight?

Hondo44 · #69 12-08-2017, 11:33 PM

TOP: N frame Post War Micro click, tang ~ 2 ½” long that has had the tang rounded for a pre war-like flush fit similar to a K22-40/Mexican but the curve behind the blade is the dead-give-away that it’s a post 1950’s sight.

2nd: K22-40 and Mexican, tang only ~ 2 3/8” long, in the white and never fitted or finished; un-numbered. Notice milled “bending area” in bottom of tang; 2nd photo.

3rd: K frame Pre War, pre 1934 single screw, tang only ~ 2 3/8” long with King w/o blade, but no cut out in blade holder # 542390. Probably a 38 or 32-20 target sight from 1920s. The K22 Outdoorsman started at #682419 in 1931 and were numbered in the 38 M&P serial range.

4th: RM N frame Post 1935 two screw, Pre War, tang ~ 2 1/2” long, serrated rear, # 9639, four digits of an RM.

Modified · #70 12-09-2017, 12:30 AM

Excellent sight information. I actually found an original rear sight on ebay. Went right on, the gun shot dead on. It's been a bit since I looked at any of this, what with getting married and moving to Montana.

Here's the thread: My Beater Registered Magnum - Done!

I'm getting a but antsy to get back into this wonderful hobby of ours, but I have a house to buy and it's going to be a bit still.

On the plus side my wife just gave the thumbs up to a house that boasts an indoor pistol range and gun room... So I have to say life's looking pretty good, even if I can't pursue old smiths for a bit.

DCWilson · #71 12-09-2017, 12:12 PM

1940 Census: Albert Johnston, 28, b. Idaho abt 1912. Wife Eunice 25, dau Betty 3. One year of college. He's a tool and die maker. As in his letters, his address is 501 W Mariposa, but if you try to find him in El Segundo, you won't. The Census enumerates him in Inglewood, which is nearby but distinct from El Segundo. Access to the 1940 census is free at ancestry.com if you want to look him up.

El Segundo is not a big place. It lies immediately south of Los Angeles International Airport and just north of a Chevron oil refinery that is the largest such plant on the West Coast.

Troystat · #72 12-09-2017, 04:37 PM

You have a really neat old revolver, and the back story on it is great as well. Thanks for showing us.

dr. mordo · #73 12-09-2017, 08:53 PM

What a thread!

I'm definitely on the hunt for a shooter grade TL.

mikepriwer · #74 11-14-2020, 10:49 PM

Caleb

The TL has a trough for a traditional S&W adjustable rear sight assembly. From the letter the gun was shipped as a fixed-sighted revolver. I'm thinking that the sight modifications mentioned in one of those letters was to mill the trough, and add an adjustable rear sight assembly. Then, perhaps some time later, someone removed that assembly, and added the drift adjustable rear sight.

Otherwise, how does one explain the trough for an adjustable sight assembly?

I suppose one could argue that there is no invoice for this gun, and that is why there is no mention of adjustable sights Ie, the letter does not contain the full real shipping configuration. In such a case, maybe it was shipped originally with a rear adjustable sight assembly, and then sent back to have removed, and replaced with a drift-able rear sight. In such a case, I would think that the factory would have made a piece to fill in the trough; what you have now just does not look, to me, like something the factory would have done.

Regards, Mike

Modified · #75 11-14-2020, 11:53 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by mikepriwer

Caleb

The TL has a trough for a traditional S&W adjustable rear sight assembly. From the letter the gun was shipped as a fixed-sighted revolver. I'm thinking that the sight modifications mentioned in one of those letters was to mill the trough, and add an adjustable rear sight assembly. Then, perhaps some time later, someone removed that assembly, and added the drift adjustable rear sight.

Otherwise, how does one explain the trough for an adjustable sight assembly?

I suppose one could argue that there is no invoice for this gun, and that is why there is no mention of adjustable sights Ie, the letter does not contain the full real shipping configuration. In such a case, maybe it was shipped originally with a rear adjustable sight assembly, and then sent back to have removed, and replaced with a drift-able rear sight. In such a case, I would think that the factory would have made a piece to fill in the trough; what you have now just does not look, to me, like something the factory would have done.

Regards, Mike

In the years since I have had this gun I have handled enough to see exactly what you are talking about.

Fascinating. I'll have to pull it out and have a look at it when I get a chance. I'll let you know my observations when I do.

Eddie Southgate · #76 11-15-2020, 12:39 AM

I think this is probably as perfect as a handgun can get. I'm glad you got it instead of me , I'd wear the finish off it carrying it around and shooting it . Congratulations .

Modified · #77 11-25-2020, 01:23 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by mikepriwer

Caleb

The TL has a trough for a traditional S&W adjustable rear sight assembly. From the letter the gun was shipped as a fixed-sighted revolver. I'm thinking that the sight modifications mentioned in one of those letters was to mill the trough, and add an adjustable rear sight assembly. Then, perhaps some time later, someone removed that assembly, and added the drift adjustable rear sight.

Otherwise, how does one explain the trough for an adjustable sight assembly?

I suppose one could argue that there is no invoice for this gun, and that is why there is no mention of adjustable sights Ie, the letter does not contain the full real shipping configuration. In such a case, maybe it was shipped originally with a rear adjustable sight assembly, and then sent back to have removed, and replaced with a drift-able rear sight. In such a case, I would think that the factory would have made a piece to fill in the trough; what you have now just does not look, to me, like something the factory would have done.

Regards, Mike

So I got it out, dug and cleaned my gunroom until I found my box of spare sights, and sorted through them until I found a pre-war rear sight, and did the comparison.

Not sure if I could take a good enough picture to show what is going on exactly, but I can fill in with my observations:

- The channel is not wide enough for a sight.

- The channel dished, not squared, on the edges, so even if it were wider a sight wouldn't have fit.

- There is no tapped holes, nor holes filled in for screwing a sight down.

- The rear sight is low, this channel appears to have been added to allow for a correct sight picture.

Overall I think that the job wasn't merely the fine work of adding this rear sight, and the front sight, but also to modify the top strap to allow for proper sighting.

I suspect that if we ever find the order for this job in the SWHF documentation the requester will have had very specific instructions.

mikepriwer · #78 11-26-2020, 03:34 PM

Caleb

In looking at your latest posting to this thread, I noticed a couple of things that I had overlooked previously. One is the roundness of the bottom of the trough, on the top strap. The other is an apparent lack of threaded holes in the top strap. This says that there was not a adjustable rear sight attached to this gun. The trough, as it is now, is not the original rear sight configuration, but seems to be the result of that configuration being milled deeper, and perhaps a bit wider. From a recent conversation, it appears that, due to the placement of the rear sight blade, that extra depth is part of the line-of-sight for aiming the gun.

There are several known revolvers with a drift-adjustable rear sight blade. While this work is sometimes claimed to have been done by the factory, I am not aware of any factory record(s) that document this installation. This doesn't mean that the factory did not make these modifications; it simply means that I've not seen any documentation about the modifications.

Regards, Mike

StrawHat · #79 11-27-2020, 08:11 AM

Once again, the depth of knowledge, not only available, but freely shared on this forum is amazing! I keep coming back to this thread to learn and I don’t own or even like the TL revolver.

Kevin