I've been offered this gun at $1200. It has a bobbed hammer. otherwise the owner rates the finish at 95%-98%. Exactly where should the serial # be on this gun? he's quoting a 4 digit # , I thought it should be a six digit number? Also, no # stamped on the bottom of the stocks.
Is this a reasonable price on this gun? MORE PICS ADDED

I'd bet the gun was dropped at some point and the tip of the hammer broke off (then dressed with file).
I think the serial number is on front strap of these revolvers. Price seems high but experts will chime in shortly

I recently bought a 98%er for $400 shipped. Now, I have to admit I stole this revolver and the Gun Police are currently looking for me.
Your pic is terrible and really hard to make an informed decision. It is an early gun and may not have the number on the stock. The number on the inside is more critical as it should be the serial number of the revolver in pencil.They are great little revolvers. Big Larry

Whoa! Hold on to your hat!

$1200 with a broken hammer is full retail, and then some! The only ones bringing that kind of money are true Beakerts.
With a broken hammer half that might be high.

I saw one sell high at a local auction a few weeks ago and that one hammered in the $900 range.

Yours should have a 6 digit serial number. If it says "Made in U.S.A." on the left side of the frame it is 1922 or later.

I bought this one just over a year ago at a local gun show for $475 out the door. It shipped in October, 1925.


I don't believe I would pay anywhere near $1200 for the one you showed. I do like those stocks, though!

__________________
Jack
SWCA #2475, SWHF #318

The stocks are from the teens, so it would be in a serial number range from about 138,000 to 280,000 if they are original to the gun. Hammers can be found that will fit the I frame HFT, but the early style hammers are scarce.

Price seems high, but an intact HFT is listed as $2000 excellent and $1250 in Fine condition in the SCSW4. Not nearly enough images to nail down condition.

__________________
Gary
SWCA 2515

Now have the serial# It is #238539. Can anybody hook that up with a date? I know it must be before 1919.

238574 shipped Jan 1917 and 240087 and 240235 shipped Dec 1916. So 238539 would have been made prior to Dec. 1916, but when shipped is a guess. $1200 is way on the high side, I think. I will have a same era NIB example of the 22/32 HFT for sale at the June 2018 Reno meet of the S&WCA for around that price! Ed.

It's a no from me as well, price is way out of line. A bobbed hammer in a target gin is useless. As others have said most likely dropped. At the price asked you could possibly buy two.

The gun looks nice but I can't assess actual condition from the photos. I agree with above members, way over priced especially with a broken hammer.

I don't know of anyone ever being able to find a replacement rim fire hammer for these. The choice is welding on a replacement spur from a center fire hammer of correct vintage, or slightly modifying a center fire hammer of the same style and vintage as a replacement.

It's in a serial # range too high to qualify for even the 4th class and least valuable of the collectible so called Bekeart Models, even it had shipped to the Bekeart gun shop in SF, Ca, the suggester for S&W to produce this model.

These are not that hard to find, to pay such a high price for one.

__________________
Jim
S&WCA #819

More pics added, any other opinions comments with the added pics? I really appreciate all the help.

I probably own more of these than most folks including one of the prototypes. Unfortunately, these I frame predecessors to the 1930's K frame K-22's have never really caught on even though to me they are the huge stepping stone between the small M frame Ladysmith's* (*collector speak, not S&W) 22 revolvers and the 1930's K-22's built on the new K frame.

The gun's serial number will be found on the front strap, the cylinder face and under the barrel with the cylinder swung open in plain view. There are a couple of other places but require a flash light and good eyes. In my database guns around yours shipped in late 1916 and early 1917 but only a letter or joining the S&WCA and asking Roy Jinks will say for sure.

Value has remained low on these and most of my collection were purchased for $750 or less but not all are in 98% condition. I was collecting examples and not safe queens.

I own 3 from 3 of the original 6 Bekeart shipments in 1911 and 2 from the 5 M.W. Robinson shipments in 1914.

The bobbed hammer has been seen by me on several occasions and I have one in my collection that shipped to Iver Johnson in 1912. Some feel that this is a dropped hammer remedy and yet others feel that this may have been a shooters modification to prevent the hammer from pinching the web of the hand during single action. Who knows?

It is reported that only the first 3,000 guns received the left stock bottom number imprint signifying the order in which the gun was assembled however, my database of over 2,000 entries has only found a high number of 2582 on a M.W. Robinson gun shipped in 1914. The Robinson guns end at 208415 and the next serial number block to appear is 220,XXX. I find NO examples with this stock imprint from the 220,XXX range on.

The left stock bottom imprint has NO correlation to the serial number and apparently NO records were maintained by S&W as to this number, the serial number or the shipping date.

So, all that said, I follow these guns daily on the interweb and most that are asking over $1,000 have been sitting for over a year. If you had one of the Bekeart shipped guns in an original Bekeart labeled box, then $1,200 would be a steal. Heck the box alone could bring $1,000 but that has more to do with the fragility of cardboard than anything else.

Below is a photo of my collection. Click on the photo to enlarge it and then do it again.

Attached Images

252.jpg (87.9 KB, 83 views)

__________________
James Redfield
LM #497

It appears to have an excellent satin finish. This is indicative of a factory refinish done after WWII until ~ 1956 when the pre war bright blue finish was again made standard.

Is there any numbers under the left grip stamped on the grip frame that could look like a date, i.e., 7.53 for July 1953?

Is there a star on the grip frame or following the serial # on the fore grip?

__________________
Jim
S&WCA #819

So, how many of these do you suppose were made? If I were to make a counter offer what price should I consider?

I have a Colt Police Positive Target .22 made in 1915 that would go well with this gun. (one for each hand, gunfighter style.....)

They are fun to shoot, mine is from 1916, Bought it for $600 from an estate. No where near as nice as yours however. Lots of honest wear, but all matching including the grips. To me with the hammer issue and a possible refinish $1200 is really high.

Attached Images

2232.jpg (77.8 KB, 22 views)

About 20,000 were produced.
I'd want to know if it was a factory refinish first. If it was confirmed I'd go $600.

If not a factory refinish I'd value it at $500 but wouldn't want to buy it.

__________________
Jim
S&WCA #819

From the photographs I am still not convinced that it is or is not refinished. Some suggest this, others do not.

I don't know the circumstances from which the asking price was derived. Is it someone who inherited it, was given it, or bought very long ago, where they just formulated an asking price from a search on the internet as to what others were for sale for, and reasoning can allow for a more realistic price, or is it someone who has $1000 invested in this who cannot be swayed to take anything less than 4 figures for it?

The one I saw sell locally a few weeks ago, which went very high, I thought, brought $915, including commission. It is number 253707, so not a Beakert as well, pre-1922 production.

Again, I don't know the circumstances, but you can explain what you learned on the forum. I would offer $300 and wouldn't go over $400 on it. A replacement hammer can be difficult to find; also uncertainty relative to being refinished or not. If refinished, and with the problematic hammer, going $400 on it might be a bit high even.

FWIW, I looked at all of mine around the OP's serial number and they all have a bright finish. Sometimes an overzealous cleaning can dull a finish but it is tough to tell without a hands on inspection. Aside from the dull finish, I do not see any of the other blatant signs of a refinish.

No telling why the seller feels that it is a $1,200 gun other than looking at some for sale on GB or looking at one of the books of supposed values. The problem with looking on for sale sights is that these are asking prices and not selling prices. Check the sold guns and see what they went for.

The problem with offering $300 to $400 on a gun asking $1,200 is that you are so far apart that the seller may get insulted and no further negotiation may be possible.

Before making any offer I would ask the seller how he arrived at the price. Maybe the gun was once owned by Annie Oakley or some famous person. Is there a factory letter?

Just as a matter of information, I have NO guns in my database shipped to Bekeart after those in the 160,XXX range in 1912.

Not saying none were, as I don't have every gun listed, but you would think one would have shown up by now if any had been shipped after 1912.

__________________
James Redfield
LM #497

I did not believe this firearm was refinished. It didn't appear to me to be as such, but I deferred to Hondo44; he knows more than I do with regards to these...so, yes, my suggested offer was low because of the possibility of this being a refinish. Again, problematic with regards to the hammer situation, but if confirmed to be original finish, $500 might be a fair offer.

Could insult the seller, yes. That's why, in a previous post, I asked as to the circumstances. I am guessing the seller is not into this a grand and looking to make $200. My unsubstantiated guess is that the seller has no idea what these actually bring, and has determined that, due to low or no money invested, $1200 is what this is worth as in the land of the internet and .22/32 HFT models, this is what listed and relisted guns are listed at...and, of course, never sell...

Thanks all for the help. If any of you fellows have one of these guns in this condition I'd gladly buy it for $400-$600.

I will join the camp of original finish. The stampings are as crisp as can be, the blue on the back of the cylinder shows only light usage along with the stocks being in great condition all leads me to believe original. Edges are sharp as NIB and the limited wear features are in the exact right places. Lastly, I have seen the in-the-white mushroom ejector rod knob before on some other teens revolvers and am leaning towards thinking that some being issued that way.

The dilemma with the hammer still remains and I think one would have a very difficult time finding the correct era hammer. As I understand it and see it in my examples, the shape of the hammer was changed in the 1920s from the slender design to a more humpback design. Without the correct hammer, the value would remain low.

The first image shows a proper teens era hammer on top and a 1920s hammer on bottom. s/n 253,XXX that shipped in 1917 shows the slender design, while s/n 360,XXX, shipped in 1923 shows the more humpback shape.

Attached Images

	P10103.jpg (66.1 KB, 13 views)
	P1010003.jpg (80.4 KB, 13 views)

__________________
Gary
SWCA 2515