32-20 First Model ? UPDATE Thanks to all for input

[perryhd]

Pictures on 6,7 and 8 finely.

I was in the Montgomery AL area Thursday and stopped in a small pawn shop. If I'm looking a the SCSW correctly it's a 32-20 first model ser# 2366 with 4in barrel. It has defiantly had a hard life. Near zero original finish the screws are buggered and if you look hard enough you can see the outline of the S&W logo. The chambers and barrel have some pitting but not bad. Grips are not original they have a 155xxx ser#. The function is amazing considering it's looks and age. The trigger and cylinder lockup are probably close to as good as new. I have been wanting a 32-20 for some time and while this is not what I had in mind I couldn't resist it. One thing that has me totally confused is the Feb 6 06 Pat date on the barrel. If it is a first model the production date should be around 1900. I have difficulty rating the condition of revolvers that are this old. Based on looks I would say poor but from what I read due to the good function it may be fair. Bottom line is I liked it well enough to pay $200 OTD. Any and all comments will be greatly appreciated.
Tried to attach pictures but got a message that a security token was missing what ever that means. Will attach pictures if I get it figured out.

[gmborkovic]

Hello Perry, work with me on this one. Why did you buy it?
Im all ways curious when I read these post and had to ask.

[JP@AK]

Does it have a front locking lug for the extractor rod? If so, it isn't an intact First Model. It could possibly have had a barrel change, but the extractor rod would have been changed as well, possibly the cylinder also.

But the problem with the barrel replacement theory is that by 1906, the thread size on the barrel had changed. I don't see how a barrel that late could be fitted to a First Model. Is the serial number you listed found on the butt?

Pics would help a lot, if you can figure out how to post some.

[perryhd]

Originally Posted by gmborkovic

Hello Perry, work with me on this one. Why did you buy it?
Im all ways curious when I read these post and had to ask.

I ask myself the same question sometime. I guess the best answer is I'm a born tinkerer and enjoy taking them apart. I wouldn't want to tinker with a high end collector grade revolver. While I would prefer that it was in better condition it's sound enough to shoot. I can't explain why but I enjoy shooting old revolvers. BTW every thing I buy is not in bad condition. Got a call earlier from one of the LGS and came back with a like new mod 30. Please don't ask why I bought it because I surely don't know.

[perryhd]

Originally Posted by JP@AK

Does it have a front locking lug for the extractor rod? If so, it isn't an intact First Model. It could possibly have had a barrel change, but the extractor rod would have been changed as well, possibly the cylinder also.

But the problem with the barrel replacement theory is that by 1906, the thread size on the barrel had changed. I don't see how a barrel that late could be fitted to a First Model. Is the serial number you listed found on the butt?

Pics would help a lot, if you can figure out how to post some.

I should have said in my op that ser# are matching butt, cyl and barrel. No locking lug.

[merl67]

Well sounds like a mystery as with that serial number would certainly be a !st Model Hand Ejector. The last patent date of Feb 6 06 does make it confusing, especially with no locking lug. I would look under the grips on the frame for a rework date that might explain the patent date anomaly.

[perryhd]

IMG_0674.jpg

IMG_0673.jpg

I managed to get two pictures to load I think

[perryhd]

IMG_0677.jpg

IMG_0678.jpg

Got two more loaded. I have two pictures one a full view of the left side and one of the right side and I can not get them to load.

[perryhd]

IMG_0671-1.jpg

IMG_0672-1.jpg

YA HOO I think I got them to load.

[Muley Gil]

Congrats! Yours still has the ejector rod knob. Most of the 1899s that I have seen are missing the knob

[JP@AK]

Very strange! The barrel is correct for a Model of 1899 - same diameter all the way to the front of the frame. The barrel threads were enlarged (seen by the external flare; absent on this gun) in c. 1903. That was the first change gun after the Model of 1902 was introduced. So why in the world does this barrel have a 1906 date on it???

Also note the position of the pin on the left side of the frame. It is forward, where it belongs on a Model of 1899. By 1906, that pin would be moved rearward.

Mike or someone who knows these guns might come along and straighten us out, but this gun seems odd to me. I would not be puzzled if it weren't for that date . . .

[Absalom]

This is indeed weird. Unfortunately, the SWCA database has only one four-digit Model 1899 in .32-20 listed, 32xx, so not much of a sample, but that shipped in 1901, so if your butt serial of 2366 is legit, your gun should have been assembled before then, BUT obviously with the 06 as the last patent date at least the barrel stamping is younger.

By 1906, serials of .32-20's shipped reach the upper 20-thousands.

And since the serials on butt, cylinder, and barrel are matching, that's a problem. All I could come up with as an explanation would be some story based entirely on assumptions, like someone at the factory finding some 1899 parts in 1907 or 1908 and assembling a Model 1899, but using the then-current barrel stamp. An explanation totally out of thin air, of course.

Maybe Mike Priwer will pop up and point out something obvious we all overlooked .

PS: One possibility just occurs to me. A lot of the 1899 models had no barrel stampings. If this gun was returned to the factory after 1906, but before the 1909 patent date was added, it could have received the stamp on a previously blank barrel. Just a thought; no idea whether such a thing ever happened. I think date stamps for factory returns didn't start until around 1910.

[Muley Gil]

S&W M1899, .32-20 5” blue, # 4287, shipped in September 1901.

[perryhd]

IMG_0679-1.jpg

IMG_0680-1.jpg

IMG_0682-1.jpg

The ser# on the barrel is the hardest to read but it's there.

[gmborkovic]

Perry, I can see now why you bought it.

[824tsv]

For $200, I would have bought it as well.......I like it.....

[perryhd]

IMG_0683-1.jpg

One more picture the only marking on the grip frame is a 66 at the very top.

[glowe]

Not sure what "The barrel threads were enlarged (seen by the external flare; absent on this gun", but everything looks original and appropriate on the gun except that barrel has been replaced. My original barrel 1899 guns have the barrel pin in the same location as the OPs. They also have exposed threads all the way back to the cylinder, while the OPs appears to be smooth. I think that was the case on the Model 1902. My guess is that the barrel was replaced at the factory after 1906, using a 1902 barrel. When the roll marks were applied, the worker used the current dies available with the later patent date. This was the practice when old stamping dies were retired or lost/broken, etc.

[Absalom]

Originally Posted by glowe

.... My guess is that the barrel was replaced at the factory after 1906, using a 1902 barrel. When the roll marks were applied, the worker used the current dies available with the later patent date. This was the practice when old stamping dies were retired or lost/broken, etc.

That is a realistic possibility. It would mean that between 1906 and 1909 they used a “leftover” barrel from before the First Change on the Model 1902, which brought about the flared barrel root, and machined off the barrel lug, a minor job. Nor difficult to imagine. Although then it may just as well have been a blank 1899 barrel left over from a year or two earlier.

[glowe]

I am curious whether all 1899 barrels were threaded back to the cylinder? I am sure that barrels for the 1899s would have been kept in inventory for several years after the model was discontinued for repairs and replacements. They also could have removed the threads on the exposed barrel section inside the frame. We have all seen refinished and repaired S&Ws with more modern stampings than should appear on their parts, but will never know why it was done.

[Muley Gil]

My 1899 has a '98 date on the barrel.

[merl67]

Ok y'all made me get my three 1899's out only one of mine is threaded all the way back to the cylinder one of those that aren't has been back to the factory so...

[perryhd]

Thanks to all for your input. I really appreciate you taking the time to help me figure out why the 06 date is on the barrel. A barrel change seams to be the only logical answer. I don't think the barrel change will hurt the value very much. Thanks again for your help.
Dan

[mikepriwer]

I have some observations, but my conclusion is that the barrel on this gun is an original 1899 barrel that was installed years later, probably by the factory.

First. the patent date roll markings are on the side of the barrel, but they should be on the top. This occurred after about 1903, and lasted until about 1913 for the 4" barrels. It was done because the shoulder on the 1902 1st change barrels did not leave enough space for the top roll marking die. Instead of making a new die, they rolled it on the side of the barrel. Sometime around 1913, they made up a shorter roll die that would fit between the shoulder and the front sight base, and thus returned the roll markings to the top of the barrel.

Second, this is an 1899 barrel, because the flat under the barrel hangs down, as opposed to being ground into the barrel since the 1902 1st change. The increase in the barrel OD (at the frame face) caused the bottom of the barrel to interfere with the extractor rod, so the flat had to be ground into the barrel.

Third, and probably most important, the barrel serial number is not in the 'proper' place. All the ones I've seen are right next to the frame, and the digits are close-packed to each other. These digits are not close packed, and are not next to the frame. This is indicative of something done in the service department, instead of on the factory floor.

Fourth, the latest patent date on all the 1899's I've seen is Oct 4, 98. 06 is clearly something later. It just so happens that I have 32-20 sn 40070, as a 4" target. The last patent date is Feb 6, 06, rolled on the right side of the barrel. 40070 was shipped Oct 29, 1908. This is probably about the time frame for the barrel to be put on the gun in this thread.

As an aside, there were a lot of 1899 barrels lying around the factory as late as the early 1950's, and possibly a decade or more later.

I think this gun went back to the factory (for whatever reason) sometime in the 1908 - 1910 time frame, and the barrel was replaced at this time. At the time of the installation, the replacement barrel did not have any patent date markings, so someone in the service department rolled the then-current die on side of the barrel, not realizing that it probaby would have fit on the top. The latest 4" revolver I have seen with the patent date roll markings on the right side of the barrel is a .38 M&P sn 206306 shipped Jan 27 1913. The last patent date on this gun is Sep 14, 09. I would guess that this 09 roll marking would have been put into use sometime around 1910 to 1911.

Regards, Mike Priwer

[jmace57]

Time travel!

[perryhd]

Thanks Mike I never cease to be amazed at the knowledge available on this forum. Thanks again.

[Absalom]

Originally Posted by mikepriwer

.....The latest 4" revolver I have seen with the patent date roll markings on the right side of the barrel is a .38 M&P sn 206306 shipped Jan 27 1913.....

Regards, Mike Priwer

I knew you’d be able to put all the pieces together .

I can get you a bit later with a side barrel stamping, a .32-20 M&P #60670 which shipped on Dec. 11, 1913.

[glowe]

Great info Mike. I have a 32-20 5" Target, and the latest patent date is 1903. Serial number is 47389 and it shipped in 1910. I think there were lots of anomalies out there, but agree that the OPs barrel has to be a replacement. Factory must have forgotten to stamp the butt-frame with the normal return/repair stamps. Of course, an option would have been to order the barrel and have a gunsmith install it?? Early S&W catalogs offered mail order parts. The back of the 1900 catalog offered a replacement barrel for $1.50.

[Absalom]

Originally Posted by glowe

...... I think there were lots of anomalies out there, but agree that the OPs barrel has to be a replacement. Factory must have forgotten to stamp the butt-frame with the normal return/repair stamps......

According to the SCSW, the date stamping on the grip frame for factory repairs started in 1910 and the earliest star has been observed in 1926 (quoting Roy), so should one even expect any clear evidence (in the form of stamps) for a factory barrel replacement this early?

[glowe]

If true, it would mean that the repair took place earlier than 1910. I have a feeling that there were many more repairs/replacements done outside the factory, so either is possible.

[merl67]

Originally Posted by Absalom

According to the SCSW, the date stamping on the grip frame for factory repairs started in 1910 and the earliest star has been observed in 1926 (quoting Roy), so should one even expect any clear evidence (in the form of stamps) for a factory barrel replacement this early?

My 1899 has a 8.12 repair date on frame and a star on the butt so would this mean it made two trips to the factory if what Roy says about 1926 being the earliest the star being observed ?

[glowe]

The star should be associated with the return date. That is only one trip, but I have seen guns that have two or three different dates stamped on the butt-frames. I also have early teens stamps on a couple of revolvers and others stamped in the early 1920s.