I purchased a 22 caliber Outdoorsman at Tulsa in April. I submitted serial number for letter and found out it was shipped to Shapleigh Hardware in St. Louis April 1936. I submitted the letter info to Smith and Wesson Historical Foundation.
I was advised that the invoice was not found but 5 letters between the owner and S&W service department from April 1937 were found and forwarded to me.
Most of the letters are mundane business information but the letter of April 27th has some information I had not seen before.
The S&W service department stated that the .22 caliber double action would not feel like his M&P because the 22 caliber used a heavier spring. I was lead to believe that a K frame spring was the same no matter of gun it was in.

__________________
SWCA 1932 SWHF 135

Nice Outdoorsman!

.22s are notoriously harder to ignite than CF ammo. The spring can appear the same but with different tensile strength.

If 22 and M&P springs were removed from the gun, you could probably feel the difference in tension by flexing them.

Also over the long period of time applications of these spring have been used, they may have differed in some periods, and been the same in another.

__________________
Jim
S&WCA #819

Without knowing the ins and outs of gun springs (the leaf springs), I suspect one could measure the thickness (perhaps the width as well), and see a difference. And having said that, I shall do that; and see what's what. I may find I should have measured them before I started running my mouth.

Ralph Tremaine

Okay, the deed is done---not real fancy, but enough. I measured the mainspring thickness of two guns (in the guns)---a .22 Outdoorsman shipped in 1934, and an M&P Target shipped in 1932. I measured them at two points each (the points selected on the basis of replication), right next to the strain screw---and as far up as the nose of my calipers would go without interference. The lower thickness was the same---call it .070". The upper thickness wasn't-----.040" on the M&P, .045" on the Outdoorsman.

Having spent a goodly portion of my younger days racing funny little foreign cars, and learning about the difference in "stick" (rubber to the road) and balance to be had by changing springs and bars ("sway bars"---more properly "anti-roll bars"), I came to know the spring rate (call it stiffness) changes by the square of the difference in diameter, the wire diameter (of coil springs and "sway bars")--at least that's my best recollection lo these many years later. So---bottom line: The Outdoorsman has a stiffer spring------no doubt about it.

Ralph Tremaine

As an aside, I have a Colt SAA which had the absolute worst action you can imagine---right out of the box----from the Colt Custom Shop (in case you think you always get good stuff when it's "custom"). I imagined having to use both hands to cock the damn thing, and the trigger pull would have been best measured with a bathroom scale. Off it went to Oglesby & Oglesby(sp?), Gun Makers---where I was told toiled the world's greatest single action wizards. Back it came-------WOW!!!! The mainspring had been narrowed (about in the middle). It may also have been thinned--but you can see narrowed---and a blind man could feel it---no problem! Hence my prior suggestion about comparing the width of the S&W rimfire and centerfire springs--------which I didn't measure---being too lazy to take them out. Although, now it belatedly occurs to me I could have used a micrometer; but I was also too lazy to go to the garage and get one.

And now, having learned what I've just learned------------and having recently installed a Miculek S&W Spring Kit in an M&P, it occurs to me Miculek's spring kit (and I suspect all the others) is a "one size fits all" proposition. Having now learned S&W didn't go with one size fits all, Miculek calls for a 7 lb. DA trigger pull (which is adjustable as part of the installation process)---all the while cautioning 7 lbs. may result in too light a strike for some primers----citing Federal as the most accommodating (centerfire). So-----given rimfire primers require a harder hit, if you are so inclined towards spring kits----you may want to keep that in mind should you be sticking such a kit in a rimfire gun---and crank it up a bit more.

Thanks Ralph I have not gotten around to taking measurements. The last letter is to S&W stating the gun was expressed to them for the trigger modification. These was no invoice found and no S&W rework dates on the frame. I did measure single action trigger pull and it was right at 3 pounds.

__________________
SWCA 1932 SWHF 135

It is my experience from way back when I didn't know any better, that reducing the power of the rebound slide spring (with a wire cutter) results in a lighter SA trigger pull (DA too). I also learned cutting too much is too much---and you get to start over with a new spring. Of course you don't have a new spring, so you get to wait on the new spring---to start cutting again. These days, if one were inclined to mess with such things, it seems like the way to go would be with a selection of different rebound slide springs--and leave the wire cutters in the drawer. Of course these days, you can get a selection of such springs----easily.

Ralph Tremaine

All this trigger pull chit-chat reminds me of another Outdoorsman I have. This one is one of a pair---sort of. The pile of stuff I got from the historical foundation tells me Mr. Jeffcoat ordered this pair of Outdoorman's----one little one and one big one----and he wanted "light trigger pulls to match".

He got 'em too----no extra charge. And he got 10% off one of the guns because he was an NRA member. Them there am the good old days!!

Ralph Tremaine

Ralph the one big one and one little one.
What aspect of the gun does that relate to ?

__________________
Paul
S&WCA #2726

I've used that "one big one and one little one" line more than a few times---wondering if everybody would get it---and hoping they wouldn't---and wondering if they'd be curious enough and honest enough to ask. You're the first, and you get a BIG GOLD STAR----with an oak leaf cluster. GOOD FOR YOU!!!

A big Outdoorsman is the 38/44 N frame, and having said that, you immediately know the little one is the .22 Outdoorsman K frame. A case might possibly be made to call the 22/32 (so called) Bekeart Model a little-bitty one, but then we'd have to come up with something to call the Ladysmith Target. I solve that problem by pretending the Ladysmith doesn't exist, and not talking about it. (That should get a few dirty looks!)

Ralph Tremaine

My list:
A 22 cal rifle for small game hunting
A 12 gauge shotgun
A large caliber rifle in 270 or 30-06 for big game hunting.
A semi-automatic defensive handgun in either 40S&W or 45ACP

Jim

Just a thought could not the spring tension be adjusted at the factory when new, by varying the length of the tension screw? Not stocking different springs for rimfire as opposed to centerfire guns?

__________________
age is just a number

Yeah, but--------------------------------

Assuming you're talking about varying the length by moving the screw (rather than using/stocking different length screws---which brings us back to the beginning) a screw (any fastener) which is not tight is subject to movement in the course of operation. This is not good. Depending upon the assembly involved, the wheels on your car, or the propeller on your airplane for example, it can be worse. In this application, and considering all loose fasteners get looser (except under certain rotational circumstances), your gun is subject to going from bang-----to click. You then are subject to going from a happy camper----to something else. I reckon all this has to do with why they're called fasteners---rather than adjusters.

Ralph Tremaine

rct269,

I assumed you were talking about big and little caliber and were referring to a 38 M&P Target and the 22 Outdoorsman, not catching the significance of the "Outdoorsman" part of the title. (Amphibians are notoriously slow on the uptake of everything but food!)

I guess I'm stuck with the idea of the post-War Masterpiece series that even went so far as matching weights of all three available calibers by the '50s, a fairly manageable task. Trying to match even the trigger pull on two different frame sizes must have been quite the challenge. Do you have a family picture of the two Outdoorsmen? That should make a nice portrait.

Froggie

Froggie

Well now you've raised another "Yeah, but" situation-------matched weights of the Masterpiece series. The weights were matched alright---but matched loaded. Now it's time for the "Yeah, but" part: So what happens when the first round is fired (from either of the three revolvers)? Answer: The weights aren't matched anymore. So now what are we supposed to do? This has been yet another in the series of extreme nit picking which pretty much defines the lunatic fringe of which we are a part.

Our Mr. Jeffcoat (the original owner of the "pair" of Outdoorsman's) fit right in with this group. The material from the Historical Foundation is chockablock full of nits raised by him---and responded to by no less than our D.B. Wesson (Vice President). Nit #1 concerns an extra charge noted for the Call bead front sight called for in the catalog, but not in the circular Jeffcoat was basing his order on. Next was the matter of matched trigger pulls. That was followed by a discussion of the heat treating of the cylinder for the big gun---but not for the little one. Next came an exchange concerning "the double safety feature of rebound slide and hammer block" to be found on the big gun----but not on the little one. I figure our Mr. Jeffcoat for a hyper engineer type. It's noteworthy D.B. stayed right with him every step of the way.

I have no photos of the pair----this for several reasons, primarily because I don't have THE pair-----just the little half. I have a big Outdoorsman, but it's not THE big Outdoorsman.

All in all, based on the story of Jeffcoat's guns (and several others), buying new guns direct from the factory was a lot more fun than picking one up at Walmart.

Ralph Tremaine

There is a point to be made with this thread, that none of this information would have surfaced with out the scanned documents from SWHF and the effort to search them by staff of SWHF.

__________________
SWCA 1932 SWHF 135

AMEN!!

RCT