|
|
09-06-2017, 12:21 AM
|
US Veteran
|
|
|
Join Date: Jun 2014
Location: Central Virginia
Posts: 1,125
Likes: 6,011
Liked 1,631 Times in 547 Posts
|
|
Need some info on a 2nd model ladysmith 22 ctg, pics added
A friend of mine asked me today about a pistol he has. Supposedly a 2nd model nickel ladysmith hand ejector 7 shot revolver. Don't know the barrel length and have no pics to go on yet. This is a little older then what I normally deal with and have no idea about how many were made or what they sell for. He says the finish is worn pretty bad. Any info would be greatly appreciated. And if he sends me some pics I will put them up. Got some picks today and some numbers to the number on the butt and cylinder are 9821, and on the crane and frame are 10248. Like I said this is beyond my scope of knowledge so any more info and a price estimate would be great!!
Last edited by Usmc5811; 09-06-2017 at 05:53 PM.
Reason: Pics added
|
The Following 2 Users Like Post:
|
|
09-06-2017, 12:37 AM
|
|
Member
|
|
|
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: South Texas & San Antonio
Posts: 33,480
Likes: 236
Liked 28,943 Times in 14,013 Posts
|
|
Pictures would be good. Main thing to check first is if the forcing cone area of the barrel has not been split or damaged. Many are, as the result of firing .22 LR high speed ammo in them (they were designed to use .22 Long standard velocity only). The mechanism tends to be delicate, and repair is next to impossible if needed. The second models have a round butt with a locking thingy ahead of the extractor knob. There were 9,374 of the Second Models made in the SN range of 4,576-13,950. Best left unfired, but if someone feels so inclined, BB caps, CB caps, or .22 Short standard velocitiy should be safe. NO .22 Long Rifle. BTW, S&W did not call them "Ladysmiths". They are M frame .22 Hand Ejectors.
Last edited by DWalt; 09-06-2017 at 12:39 AM.
|
The Following 3 Users Like Post:
|
|
09-06-2017, 05:49 AM
|
|
US Veteran
|
|
|
Join Date: Oct 2013
Location: Central Montana
Posts: 13,625
Likes: 12,742
Liked 39,091 Times in 9,966 Posts
|
|
and they look so cool. Miniaturized S&W revolvers. I would like to find one in decent shape for a reasonable amount, just because. Only ever ran across one and it had been over buffed and renickeled and the pawn shop owner was way to proud of it.
|
09-06-2017, 07:25 AM
|
US Veteran
|
|
|
Join Date: Jun 2014
Location: Central Virginia
Posts: 1,125
Likes: 6,011
Liked 1,631 Times in 547 Posts
|
|
The owner did tell me that the forcing cone was not cracked or damaged in anyway. I invited him to join the forum, hopefully he will. I know I would like to ride out and take a gander at it. He lives in the same area as me. Maybe he will see my post and add some pics today on here. As always you guys are a wealth of info. Thanks again
|
The Following User Likes This Post:
|
|
09-06-2017, 10:45 AM
|
|
US Veteran
|
|
|
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Michigan Western UP
Posts: 12,916
Likes: 3,028
Liked 14,261 Times in 5,435 Posts
|
|
The 22 Hand Ejector was made from from 1902 to 1921. Below are some catalog details of this model. The 1st Model (as named by collectors appears in the 1903 catalog, the 3rd Model appears in the 1912 Catalog. The 2nd Model had the new ejector rod knob assembly, but still retained the round butt style. The 3rd Model added a square butt smooth medallion stocks. By 1923, they were dropped from the catalog and only the 22/32 Heavy Frame Target Model was offered, which was built on a larger I frame. Interesting to see what is said about these little guns by the company. The 1906 price lists show this model for sale at $11.00.
__________________
Gary
SWCA 2515
|
The Following 2 Users Like Post:
|
|
09-06-2017, 11:34 AM
|
SWCA Member
|
|
|
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Inman, SC USA
Posts: 1,303
Likes: 95
Liked 649 Times in 372 Posts
|
|
After looking at the picture and reading the words in the third picture, I am confused! The .22 long cartridges that I have seen and used all had the same case as the .22 Long Rifle, but the bullet was the same 29 gr. as used in the .22 Short. This ad says that the bullet for the .22 S&W was 40 gr. Which is correct?
__________________
Tom
1560
|
The Following User Likes This Post:
|
|
09-06-2017, 12:35 PM
|
|
US Veteran
|
|
|
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Michigan Western UP
Posts: 12,916
Likes: 3,028
Liked 14,261 Times in 5,435 Posts
|
|
The catalog description of the 22 S&W Long also stated it was a black powder cartridge. I have always wondered how they got enough BP in those tiny cases to get a bullet past the muzzle so maybe it was a low pressure cartridge even with the heavier bullet?? I have reloaded 22 shorts with 4F and shot them in my Model 1 revolvers years ago and often the bullet would get stuck in the barrel. Using a mortar & pestle, I also ground 4F to a fine powder and still got very poor performance, so I gave up reloading 22 rimfire ammo.
Barnes book, Cartridges of the World states that 22 Long was developed in 1871 with a 29 grain bullet and that the 22 Long Rifle, developed in 1887 was a 40 grain bullet. Barnes also sates that the early 22 Long had a slightly higher velocity than either the 22 Short and the 22 LR up until the advent of smokeless powder. I cannot find any reference to BP 40 grain 22 Long, so maybe S&W was referring to BP 22 LR, which was supposedly slower than the 22 Long ammo of the day?
__________________
Gary
SWCA 2515
|
The Following 2 Users Like Post:
|
|
09-06-2017, 02:24 PM
|
|
Member
|
|
|
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: South Texas & San Antonio
Posts: 33,480
Likes: 236
Liked 28,943 Times in 14,013 Posts
|
|
The 1910 UMC ammunition catalog shows that BP and smokeless .22 Long (and .22 Short) loadings use 29 grain bullets. The .22 Long Rifle uses 40 grain bullets.
|
The Following User Likes This Post:
|
|
09-06-2017, 05:51 PM
|
US Veteran
|
|
|
Join Date: Jun 2014
Location: Central Virginia
Posts: 1,125
Likes: 6,011
Liked 1,631 Times in 547 Posts
|
|
Pics and more info added on the first post.
|
09-06-2017, 07:20 PM
|
|
Member
|
|
|
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: South Texas & San Antonio
Posts: 33,480
Likes: 236
Liked 28,943 Times in 14,013 Posts
|
|
Both the SN and your pictures make it a second model. I have seen worse. A little work with some metal polish might shine up the nickel plating and improve its appearance. As I earlier stated, even if it is mechanically OK, I probably would not shoot it (maybe except for a few rounds just so I could say I shot it) out of concern that something might break that can't be repaired.
You might want to read this about Hitler's Ladysmith (a first model). Germania International; items of German, Hitler, Kaiser, Nazi, Tsar, and Reich Origin
Last edited by DWalt; 09-06-2017 at 07:25 PM.
|
The Following 2 Users Like Post:
|
|
09-07-2017, 09:01 PM
|
|
Member
|
|
|
Join Date: Feb 2016
Location: Midwest
Posts: 1,723
Likes: 986
Liked 1,966 Times in 837 Posts
|
|
DWALT -
That was a great read. I had no previous knowledge of Hitler's association with the "Lady Smith". Thanks for posting that link.
|
The Following User Likes This Post:
|
|
|
Thread Tools |
|
Display Modes |
Linear Mode
|
Posting Rules
|
|
|
|
|