M&P late "S" serial #. Are these grips correct?

Attached Images

	P1010015.jpg (87.3 KB, 138 views)
	P1010013.jpg (78.3 KB, 115 views)

This one is s/n S976xxx and the stocks match the gun.

__________________
Mike
S&WCA #3065

Yes, they appear to be the "sharp shoulder" Magna stocks of that era, but on a later stainless K frame.

You're a good guesser .

__________________
Alan
SWCA LM 2023, SWHF 220

No, at least 15 years too early. They don't fit either. But valuable stocks non the less.

__________________
Jim
S&WCA #819

I'm confused by the conflicting responses. Please clarify for me......or is this rocky hazing???

I don't know about guessers and that is why I posted my stocks. They are correct for the "S" postwar.



shipped March 1, 1948.

__________________
Mike
S&WCA #3065

It's Hondo44 that has me confused. Please clarify....15 years earlier???

What are the stocks #d?

No, stocks not correct for that gun.

Isn't your gun Stainless? Those were not introduced until 1965. Your sharp shoulder Magna stocks were no longer used after about 1950.

Stocks correct for late S series ~ 1948 M&P.

__________________
Jim
S&WCA #819

Hondo is definitely right that the fit is bad, so they're likely not original to the gun.

I think they are indeed sharp-shoulder magnas which would be right for an S-prefix M&P, but the weird lighting and shadow effects in your original photos aren't helping. Any chance of a "normal" photo in natural light?

PS: Both Murphydog and Hondo mistook your gun for stainless, obviously impossible for an S-prefix; seems to reinforce my point about the lighting . Or you're wrong about the serial.

The grips are for an early post-war gun, but the gun in the photo is much newer than the grips. Appears to be either a Model 64 or 65 in the photo.

mark

__________________
S&W Forum Member #721

Yes. The lighting is weird, making it nearly impossible to see what the finish is on the gun itself. But the hammer and trigger appear to be flash chrome, which would be correct on a Model 64 or 65, but incorrect for an early postwar M&P. Also, the thumb piece appears to be stainless.

I really don't know what is going on, since the original post says the gun has an S prefix serial number.

__________________
Jack
SWCA #2475, SWHF #318

I see a blued gun with poor lighting, but I didn't believe it was SS or nickel.
The OP said it was a late S prefix, and it looks ok to me.

There is no "bug" screw aka upper side plate screw on guesser's revolver. The "bug" screw went away in the late 1950s (I think).

__________________
John 3:16
WAR EAGLE!

I went back over my notes on hand ejectors. They were five screws from about 1905 -1955. About 1955 the top screw was eliminated and about 1961 the trigger guard screw was eliminated.

The revolver in the OP's post does not have a top screw. I would think that would eliminate it as an "S" prefix postwar.

__________________
Mike
S&WCA #3065

I misread the original post in that I thought the question was whether or not the grips were correct for an 'S' prefix M&P. I didn't think he was implying that the gun pictured was actually an early post war gun....

Nothin' new to me, I stay confused most of the time anyway.

Mark

__________________
S&W Forum Member #721

The grips pictured in the initial post appear to be sharp shoulder Magnas, correct for the 1946-53 period. Having no upper sideplate screw would place the gun in the post-1955 period, so it could not have an S prefix SN as that stopped in 1948. The grips are not correct for the gun pictured.

Finally, the correct and reasoned answer!

__________________
Gunsmithing since 1961

The confusing thing is:

Yes, these appear to be proper stocks for an early postwar S prefix .38 M & P. But that is not the gun in the photo. Are you asking if these are the proper stocks to put on an S prefix M & P?

__________________
Alan
SWCA LM 2023, SWHF 220

True. But there was nothing "unreasoned" about the earlier response. The original post said, "M&P late "S" serial #. Are these grips correct?" That sounds very much like he is saying the gun is an S prefix revolver and wants to know if the "grips" are correct. Read any other way, it is very odd, since the S would not appear on the stocks.

It is no wonder at all that people were confused.

To be very clear, I'm not criticizing guesser. I'm only speaking in defense of the other people who posted.

__________________
Jack
SWCA #2475, SWHF #318

I saw something for sale recently described as a "S&W 38 Police Special, Model of 1905 3rd Change mfg.1905-1915," with those same grips. They have the new, small silver S&W medallions, not the bigger ones with the prominent border I've seen on pre-Depression-era guns. I've got major doubts about this one, not least because the seller also says it has "blued trigger and hammer" when the ones pictured are clearly case hardened. That sort of thing makes me think the seller wouldn't know a genuine S&W if he accidentally shot himself with it. There's only one picture that shows the ejector rod, and it's not great, but it does not appear to be the old style with the wide knob on the end; it looks like the 50's vintage straight rod. The frame is clearly a 5-screw, but there's no trace of the S&W stamp below the thumb latch or the "MADE IN U.S.A." stamp on the right side of the frame. There's also no trace of lettering on the right side of the barrel, which should have the cartridge designation on it. My first impression is this poor beast came out of three or four parts bins with a vicious buffing and a re-blue over the top. There is a close-up of the crane, and the pivoting surface of the crane shows heavy drag marks, but no bare metal, which definitely says re-blue to me. Does this smell a bit funny to the rest of you?

The 3rd change had five screws and a large S&W trademark on the sideplate.

Here is one that shipped in Oct 1914



with stocks matched to the revolver.

I was told that the "Made in USA" one line started sometime in 1922.

__________________
Mike
S&WCA #3065

Which is exactly what I said in post #10 above....

Mark

__________________
S&W Forum Member #721

Interesting debate. This is a 1947 factory nickel 4" M&P with the correct stocks. IMO, Post numbers 16, 17,& 19 puts the OPs gun/stock question correctly in perspective

__________________
John

This wouldn't have been a "debate" at all if we hadn't all been so eager to answer a question the OP never asked, namely about the gun.

In English, frequently less is more, but not in this case.

"Would these grips be the correst ones to put on a late S-prefix M&P?" might have been dealt with in one or two answer posts. But then, we all have too much time on our hands, or we wouldn't be here.

The stocks are correct. The gun is wrong.

Yes, I knew the gun was a M64. It was the stocks I was asking about as I need a set for a late "S" series M&P. I was single minded and did not consider the entire pic. Being obtuse comes easy for me in that aspect and thanks to each and all of you for helping me.

Whew glad we got that sorted out. It is interesting how some see one thing some see other things. Then there are those that see everything. Nice model 64 and the grips ain't too shabby either.