The trouble with buying a gun on line is that, regardless how hard you stare at the photos, they're still just photos. If you have a question about what you see, or don't see, you have to rely on someone else (the seller) to provide the answer. The flip side to the equation is that you will find things on line that you would never expect to find in person. That's true wherever you live, but in Fairbanks, Alaska, it extremely so. The answer, sometimes, is to just roll the dice, and see what happens.
I rolled the dice on a nice looking old .38 on GunBroker today that was being offered for a fair price. The seller describes it as a 1902 1st change, quoteing the "Book". Serial number 600xx puts it in that age group, but visually, I'm not so sure. The pre 1920 stocks are a little confusing, as is the medium-size trade mark on the side plate. I can't get a good enough view of the left side to confirm the lockwork innerds, so I'll just have to wait and see. Sometimes I hate this stupid hobby.

__________________
Why, I aughta.....

Does it have the fifth screw ahead of the trigger guard? I wouldn't think the stocks are correct.

I'm thinking the stocks are a little late for a .38 Hand Ejector Military & Police in the 60,000 range. Any walnut stocks appearing at the time would have been sans medallion and had a concave surface at their tops as far as I know.

It does give an awfully nice appearance in the photo. Let us see more of it when it arrives.

I think you mean concave.

I know the stocks are wrong. I cannot tell from the photos, if there is a cylinder-stop screw, There are several photos, but none of them definitively show anything that helps date it (extractor star, etc.).

__________________
Why, I aughta.....

Well, either the serial number is wrong or the stocks are. They cannot both be correct!
I'm with DWalt. The presence or absence of the cylinder stop retaining screw would spell the difference and help you decide what's going on here. That serial number is close, but it should not be high enough to have the 1905 change in that area.
The blue on this sure does look nice in the photo!

And I know what you mean about feeling a bit isolated with respect to collecting Smiths. Palmer is bad enough. Fairbanks would be worse, in terms of having stuff pass by. At least I'm close to the fairgrounds here and get to several decent gun shows every year. You should come down sometime for the Lion's show or the AGCA show. You could come by the house (only 2 miles away) and we could look at Smiths and chew the fat. Seriously!

Jack

__________________
Jack
SWCA #2475, SWHF #318

Hah! I think you're right.

I bought one just like it today at my LGS, a Model of 1905, mine is SN 148xxx, I'm thinking made in 1907 (or later as it turns out. I think mine might be a 2nd Change, Last Pat. 1 Feb '06). Mine's not quite so pretty but the bore is perfect. I like mine, reckon you'll be very happy with yours. They have a nifty cylinder hold open feature in the crane. They may not have beefy target stocks but mine feels right in my hand, that skinny front sight in the tiny rear notch, if I could see them at the range (67 yo eyes), would make it a precision shooter. I'll be shooting my hard cast 158 gr lead semi-wadcutters.

(2nd edit) On the left of the barrel mine reads: 38 S&W SPECIAL
& U.S. SERVICE CTG'S

October has been a busy month. A minty 18-2 in the box/papers/tools along with an even better 29 4 screw in presentation clamshell, 4", tools and paper, these same day/shop. Then a 17, 4 screw, no paper or anything on GB a week ago, then the 1905 today. Hobby? Disease!

Good things come to those who wait. .. ..

That's a 1905 First Change. Notice the rearward position of the trigger return slide spring stud. That came along in 1906. Before that, there was a leaf-spring driven rocker assembly that had a stud through the left side of the frame more or less directly below the thumb release.

I suspect the serial number was misread or misreported. Maybe 800xx?

__________________
David Wilson

Darn!! He beat me to it.^^^^^^^^

David

I think you are right. The redesigned trigger rebound mechanism comes after the
5th frame screw, so there ought to be a fifth frame screw in front of the trigger
guard. Usually its visible in a picture such as above, but I can't tell if there is one
or not.

The problem is with the serial number. 60XXX is generally too low for the 5th frame
screw - the boundary is supposed to be 62450. "6" and "8", for example, don't usually
get mixed up.

One possibility is that the serial number was read upside down.

Another possibility, although with a very low probability, is that this frame was
lying around the factory for a year or so before it was completed into a gun. The
factory would not have worried about the serial number - they would have just
completed the gun. I think it would still have had the 5th frame screw.

Regards, Mike Priwer

Mike,

I always ask where the serial number came from if not shown in a photo or stated in the text. Assembly #s in the yoke are often quoted as serial #s and they have as many as 5 digits.

The features don't lie as often as quoted serial #s do. If it has 2 dowels in the extractor star when you get it, it's more likely a 1905 2nd Change.

And if the extractor knob is not a separate piece that unscrews, it's more likely a 3rd change and in that case the stocks are correct!

Whatever it turns out to be, it's a beautiful piece.

__________________
Jim
S&WCA #819

Jim

I agree with questioning the source of the reported serial number. I usually ask if it
agrees with the numbers on the back of the cylinder, and the flat under the barrel.
Its impossible to read the cylinder serial number upside down.

And yes - that could be the work order number from the cylinder/frame area.

Regards, Mike

I agree with all of you. I called the seller and told him that I suspected that the serial number was incorrect. He insisted that the number was 600xx, and that it came from the butt. He added that he's been "doing this a long time", which can be interpreted more than one way. I see the rebound stud, and I don't see the old-style pin. I'm sure it's an '05. Still, it's a nice gun, and I'd like to keep it, but it really wasn't what I was in the market for. I could have bid on a confirmed '02 with target sights and plastic grips, that sold yesterday for $399.00. I'm a little bummed out but grateful for this valuable learning experience (yeah right). I'll have to think of something creative, but not too unkind, in terms of "feedback".

__________________
Why, I aughta.....

I'm just back from the range with my 1905 2nd Change. It shot very well, felt natural in the hand, compared well to the Mod 17 I shot first, a good vintage experience. I think you'll like your 1905. I thought the rounded front sight wouldn't work well but perhaps the old guys were onto something, it was sort of like an illuminated dot in the notch, stood out.

Than David could be correct with his scenario about the reason for the out-of-range serial #, he usually is.

Is a return possible as a "misrepresented item"? And postage both ways should be refunded as well. I know it's more to Alaska.

It would be cool if it's a righteous 1905 3rd change with correct stocks.

__________________
Jim
S&WCA #819

Is a return possible as a "misrepresented item"? And postage both ways should be refunded as well. I know it's more to Alaska.

It would be cool if it's a righteous 1905 3rd change with correct stocks.[/QUOTE]

I hate to raise Hell over an honest mistake. I'm not sure what I'll do. I haven't seen the gun yet.

__________________
Why, I aughta.....

If you have grounds to think that the gun was knowingly or accidentally misrepresented, you would have grounds to reject it and roll back the deal. If the gun is badly described as a consequence of what appears to be factory mismarking, I don't know if the seller would have an obligation to take the gun back, though I suspect a reputable seller would do so.

The actual value of the gun will depend on whether the separate parts (perhaps including the stocks, which are not in bad shape whether they are correct or not) are all marked with the same serial number. I don't think it would be a put-together gun, but in the absence of evidence about serial numbers on other parts that possibility must be acknowledged.

If you don't want the gun when you see it, and if it appears to be correct, I'd think you could remarket it right here in the classifieds and cover most (if not all) of your cost. Then you could get the 1902 that calls to you more strongly.

It's a nice looking revolver. I can see why it tempted you.

__________________
David Wilson