Hi I have a s&w 22 that was passed down to me. It has no model number behind the wheel serial number is on front side of Handel(276528). It has a adjustable rear sight. Long front sight. I really don't think it is a k. But it has no letters anywhere. Help?

Attached Images

image.jpg (78.2 KB, 121 views)

You have a .22/32 Heavy Frame Target revolver, made about 1919. Aka known as the Model I Hand Ejectopr Model of 1903, Fifth Change. Commonly call the " Bekeart" Model by collectors, as the design was first suggested by S&W dealer, Phil Bekeart, in San Francisco in 1911. Model numbers did not start until 1957. Ed.

Thank you very much. What do you think it might be worth?

Welcome to the Forum. As Ed states, the most recognizable name used today is 22/32 Heavy Frame Target revolver. The "32" represent the fact that this was originally an I frame gun that was designed for 32 Long ammunition. S&W had not offered a reliable 22 revolver since the 1860s and the Model 1903 I frame became the basis for making the first successful 22 LR revolver ever for S&W.

i would say the stocks are hand-made target stocks that the owner placed the S&W medallion from an old set of original S&W target stocks. The standard target stocks used on the 22/32 HFT were longer that the butt-frame, but were still small in diameter. Good chance the owner had large hands and needed a better fit for target shooting. Original configuration would have looked like the picture below.

Condition is everything when valuing a gun like yours. Without the original factory stocks and general wear the value is lowered. I have purchased two of these within the last year. The one pictured was $350 and the other one was $250, so yours would be somewhere in that price range. I hope you can keep it in the family, since you will never be able to get it back if sold.

Attached Images

P1010004.jpg (58.9 KB, 60 views)

__________________
Gary
SWCA 2515

Just curious, Gary. Was the Ladysmith unreliable? Never owned one, so I don't know. But your post would imply it wasn't.

__________________
Jack
SWCA #2475, SWHF #318

The term fragile comes to mind. The Ladysmith was not designed or marketed as a 22 LR, so the 22/32 HFT was the first S&W to be chambered in 22 LR.

The only tight actions that I have handled were guns that almost certainly saw little or no use. The revolver was so small that it was difficult to use. I do not have large fingers, but have to remove my finger from the trigger guard to give enough space to enable the trigger to reset for the next shot. Many forcing cones were blown out.

A lot of the problems with this model may be because the owners used 22 LR ammo instead of the recommended 22 Long. I have never considered 22 LR ammo to be particularly strong round, but the marginal design of the 22 Ladysmith did not hold up well to continiued use.

__________________
Gary
SWCA 2515

Never had or even fired a Ladysmith, but they do have a reputation for having a delicate mechanism, and being difficult to work on. I have seen some which had been damaged from firing .22 LR. I suppose most people had no idea the the .22 Long was the correct cartridge. And of course, there were no .22 HV loads being made back when the Ladysmith was on the market. I would not use anything more potent than .22 Short standard velocity ammo in a Ladysmith if I had one.