At least it started off life that way but I think the barrel has been changed-out to a later 5" M&P barrel. I know the nickle is not factory.

Serial # is 49598. There is no serial on the barrel under the rod. .38 special.

Nothing on top of the barrel. Smith & Wesson on one side and .38 S&W Special cartridge on the other.

It's tight and shoots very well. It only cost me $125.00 so I really can't complain.

I got the old Service brand 5" holster with it.

Attached Images

	DSCN6106 (2).jpg (135.2 KB, 114 views)
	DSCN6107 (2).jpg (142.4 KB, 99 views)
	DSCN6108 (2).jpg (84.0 KB, 76 views)

...appears to be a model of 1902 made before 1922...someone will be along to narrow it down by the serial number...

__________________
A Country Boy Can Survive

The five digit serial number at 49xxx puts production in about 1903 or 1904.

The extractor rod knob is correct for the period. What I can't see in your pictures is the machined notch on the underside of the barrel. It should be of the two-step type to accommodate the knob. No serial number and the absence of patent dates makes one wonder about its origin and when it was replaced. Can you post a picture of the barrel flat with the cylinder swung open?

__________________
Jack
SWCA #2475, SWHF #318

It has it and was the first thing I checked for....It looks fine but someone could have easily milled it to fit the knob.

...almost appears as if someone filed the clearance in for the ejector knob...

__________________
A Country Boy Can Survive

Dang, nice deal, or should I say steal! Those stocks look like new. I can imagine a night watchman making the rounds wearing that.

__________________
TEAM DNF

I'm with you, I think that is exactly what happened.

Attached Images

	DSCN6111 (2).jpg (123.7 KB, 32 views)
	DSCN6110 (2).jpg (122.2 KB, 164 views)

Looks to be in good shape for its age. Re-nickled or not, even with a replaced barrel, I'd buy it for $125 - and I need another 38 special like I need another hole in my head

Reasonaly close SNs on my list would indicate frame shipment in 1904 or 1905, probably 1904. I show SN 478xx as shipping in 7/1904. It must be a replacement barrel, probably not done at the factory. But the S&W and caliber stampings indicate it is an S&W barrel. Regarding that, I know that yours should have a two-line caliber stamping of

38 Special &
US Service Cartridge

Therefore the barrel must be earlier, I think very possibly a Model 1899 barrel because it would not have the recesses for the extractor rod knob. And I think those from the SN range from about 7500 and later had the ".38 S&W Special CTG" barrel caliber stamping.

Yes, Model of 1902 -- and the serial number puts in the First Change category.

I think you called it correctly on the barrel, and there is more evidence that just the apparently modified cut for the older ejector rod knob. If the patent dates weren't missing we could confirm its later manufacture from the last one in the list, but in their absence we can look at the other markings. In 1903/4, I believe the caliber rollmark would be .38 S&W SPECIAL AND US MILITARY CTGS, and it would have been on the left side of the barrel, not the right.

Great shooter. Enjoy it!

EDITED TO ADD: Dwalt weighed in with the caliber marking observation while I was still collecting my thoughts and typing. I can't subscribe to the 1899 suggestion though, for the reasons Guy points out in the next post.

__________________
David Wilson

Come on guys! It couldn't be a Model 1899 barrel as they had no front locking lug and were not tapered. It also appears to be machined for the MERK from the factory. It could be a replacement barrel from up to 1929.

__________________
Guy
SWHF #474 SWCA LM#2629

...I really think the clearance was filed in...those are file marks...not milling machine marks...

__________________
A Country Boy Can Survive

The font and style of lettering on the barrel suggest after WW II and before the ramp front sight (1956).

__________________
Alan
SWCA LM 2023, SWHF 220

That would explain the lack of patent dates. I hadn't considered this because I was under the impression the barrel had been milled for the barrel-shaped ejector rod and that only the additional notch for the larger diameter portion had been hand cut. Now with the better photo it looks to me like maybe not, and that the entire two-step notch was added.

__________________
David Wilson

Alan
I think you hit the nail right on the head (and it wasn't your fingernail). I was pondering exactly the same theory when I saw your post. Great minds, etc.

__________________
Jack
SWCA #2475, SWHF #318