So I am looking at a very nice condition 2nd Model .44 with 6.5" barrel and original finish.

Thinking maybe the cylinders may have been reamed and it will accept some brands, but not all .44 Magnum cartridges.

So obviously if it's been modified and I need to know what kind value deduction would be fair given this mod? I may still be interested in the gun for the right price.

Thanks in advance for your thoughts.

__________________
Tom Graham SWCA #2303

I'd probably deduct about 40%--and that would be assuming that no quantity of 44 mag had actually been shot through it. JMHO

__________________
Randy
Provenance nerd

The asking price is $1,650 but that was before the cylinder issue was discovered.

The timing and lock-up are excellent and the gun does not show abuse. The stocks are in nearly new condition.

No way to know how much if any heavy loads were fired down the pipe.

__________________
Tom Graham SWCA #2303

Personally, I wouldn't touch it. Whoever reamed that cylinder for magnums obviously intended to shoot magnums in it. That gun wasn't designed or built for that kind of pressure. And you have no way of knowing just how many magnums were shot through it. There could be metal fatigue that isn't visible to the naked eye or other problems just waiting to happen.
If and only IF you could get it dirt cheap AND very,very carefully examine it up, down, backwards and sideways should you even consider this gun.
But That's just my opinion. Take it for what you will.

Is it possible that the depth of the cylinder bores could have been a bit deeper cut on some of the .44 HE's??
The reason I ask is that I just tried inserting various .44 Magnum cartridges of different manufacture and get different results. Some of them drop all the way in and others do not and have about 1/16" space between the case and cylinder face.

Here are photos showing the same cylinder with a .44 S&W Special round and two different .44 Magnum round inserted

Of course the .44 Mag case length and crimp could have something to do with it??

NOTE: The recoil plate shows very little wear, almost none.

__________________
Tom Graham SWCA #2303

Check all you other .44Specials...

Is the bottom of the top strap flat?

Here is a photo of my 5" 2nd Model .44 HE with a .44 Special and .44 Magnum inserted. I don't have others to compare with.

__________________
Tom Graham SWCA #2303

I suppose it is possible that the cylinders were accidentally reamed a bit deep at the factory. If that were the case, the gun should be fine.
Have you examined the chambers with a good light? It they were reamed later, I would think that you should be able to see the tool marks. I know I've seen several .38 S&W Victory models that were reamed to .38 Special and looking in the chambers you could see where they had been recut.
Honestly, I think you're gonna have to wait for one of our resident .44 HE experts to chime in. This is way above my level.

The chambers look factory to me, no obvious machine marks.

__________________
Tom Graham SWCA #2303

Here are a few shots of the revolver in question.......This one shipped January 27th, 1923 to Decatur, IL according to the Roy Jinks letter.

__________________
Tom Graham SWCA #2303

Tom,

That's a beautiful 2nd Model.

1. It looks completely righteous to me. It has the semi satin finish of the post WWI hand ejectors (until ~ 1929).

2. The re-ream marks in the chambers mentioned by Grayfox that YOU DON"T SEE is telltale that it hasn't been reamed.

3. Spin the cyl very slowly and look at the light gap between the cyl and the top strap, and the cyl and lower cyl window frame surface. If you see no variation in both lights spaces above and below the cyl notches area of the cyl, that would confirm to me that there's no expansion of the chambers. You can check the diameter of the cyl all around to make sure it's still perfectly round.

4. Look for fatigue hairline cracks from over pressure at the front of the frame will first show up as vertical cracks between the yoke cutout and the barrel threads. Check the cyl notches for hairline cracks.

5. I checked my TLs and early post war 44s; none of the chambers will take 44 Mags. Some with a heavy roll crimp will get within 1/32" from seating, but none of 5 brands of various 44 Mags will seat fully.

__________________
Jim
S&WCA #819

About the .38 S&W/.38-200/.38 Spl reaming. You can usually see the reaming there because the shorter cartridge has a larger diameter than the .38 Spl. The best such Victory conversion I've ever seen was done by a noted British gunsmithing firm (and so stamped) and had proof marks indicating re-proof firing in .38 Spl.

Making a .44 chamber deeper should show some difference in finish/blue. Rather than use loaded .44 Mag to check the chambers, I'd suggest either fired or resized & neck expanded cases. You should be seeing something approaching 0.125 inches between cylinder face and front of case rim. Give or take a bit depending upon case length & machining practice at the time. The differences noted in your known .44 Spl are a good guide. I'd expect the 1/8" difference in factory case length was intended to cover production variations.

Perhaps a brief note to Roy Jinks about the depth of original chambers with some details about the issue noted?

This morning I dug out my 1924 2nd Model .44 HE and tried it. .44 Mags would not seat fully in any of the chambers.
However, looking at the pictures you posted, especially the one of the front of the cylinder, I'd say that your gun has NOT been reamed. It looks completely original to me. In fact, it looks like that gun hasn't been shot much at all.
My only question would be if those slightly deeper chambers might effect accuracy?
If everything checked out mechanically, I'd buy it. However, I'd probably use those deep chambers as a bargaining point.

Tom, I have two 2nd model .44 militarys from that period, 23403 and 24432. Neither will chamber factory .44 magnum cartridges from Federal, Remington, S&B, and Winchester. I'm assuming that you intend to collect, rather than shoot, the 2nd model in question. If that is the case, and if I were buying it, I would check it out as others have advised. If it checks out then go for it. It's a beauty. However, one day you will sell it and you will be obliged to disclose the long chambers.

__________________
Tom in AZ
Respect the Dingbat

Based on everyone’s comments and my physical inspection I now believe this is 100% factory correct and not a modified cylinder. As mentioned before the only 44 magnum that seated fully in the chamber was heavily roll crimped on a lead bullet. All factory jacketed 44 Magnum rounds would not completely seat in the Chambers.h based on everyone’s comments and my physical inspection I now believe this is 100% factory correct and not a modified cylinder. As mentioned before the only 44 magnum that seated fully in the chamber was heavily roll cramped on a lead bullet. All jacketed 44 Magnum rounds would not completely seat in the Chambers as you can see from the photos I posted.

The variation in chamber depth to the shoulder could have just been a new tool or the machine was not set up exactly when changed. Since there was no such thing as a 44 magnum at the time of production I’m sure it was not a concern to those building the gun.

__________________
Tom Graham SWCA #2303

Tom, you have a nice gun there and looks like it wasn’t fired much. Since you have some good opinions here from respectable collectors, what would a reduced price be considering Tom would have to reveal the lengthened chambers when he decides to sell it. What does the SCSW have for a price, I’m Sure the long bbl is not common in this model. Larry

I'm a 2nd Model fan and got mine out to see how it checks out and all magnum rounds chamber the same as the one of yours that sticks out 1/8" or so. That looks to me to be a very nice example of the model and should look good in any collection. I'd be tempted to try and get the price down with the difference in reaming as mentioned by others.

As I mentioned previously I really think the Chambers are factory done. I’m sure if we got enough of these guns out and compared all of them there’s going to be some variance. But if you inspect the Chambers on the cylinder there is absolutely no sign of machining being done on this.

__________________
Tom Graham SWCA #2303

That's a nice gun.
I don't think it has been messed with.
Ya want Bubba's phone number?

__________________
Regards,
Lee Jarrett

My, that's a beautiful looking handgun.
I suspect as others do that the chambers are factory and for the 44special.

The fact that a heavily roll crimped 44mag case w/a lead bullet would drop in does not necessarily sound any alarm.

Is the roll crimped case a factory round, or a reload? If a reload, do you know if the case was ever trimmed,,ever?
Old rounds aren't much use as gauges.

The factory loads are better to gauge by. At least some consistency. Even then the specs vary from mfg to mfg as any reloader knows.

But the fact that none of the Factory jacketed loaded rounds would chamber, and they all seated to approx the same depth would tell me that the chambers are the same depth.
Simple examination will tell you if they've been recut/lengthened. The reamer marks when the operation is done will just not match up with the original and the lengthened section can usually be spotted.
Unless a very competent workman with a nasty habit of touching up details, those reamer and even followup chamber polishing marks will show,
It certainly doesn't look like any such work done on the three that can be seen from the front in the one pic.

Are there any bright marks encircling the chambers on the rear face of the cylinder?
If the chambers are deepened, the reamer goes in and cuts but the depth is generally controlled simply by the rim cutter portion of the that reamer as it comes in contact with the rear face of the cylinder.
That simple very light contact will leave a bright mark in the bluing,,at least somewhere around some, all or maybe onlyone of the chambers. But it'd be very difficult to do the job w/o touching that surface w/the reamer rim cutting edge and not leave an imprint.

A careful set up on a mill w/a depth stop would do it w/o marking the rear face if done correctly. But normally these chamber lengthening jobs are a reamer, a T handle and squirt of favorite lube juice while the cylinder is in the bench vise.



??--Wouldn't many/most(all?) common factory loaded Jacketed 44Magnum rounds if seated completely in the cylinder of these 2nd Models leave the bullet hanging at least a little bit out the front of the cylinder?

Just now spotted this thread. Barrel is marked 44 Special, so one would expect to be able to use that cartridge. Have you tried inserting a 44-40 case into the cylinder? It may be that a previous owner wanted to use 44-40 ammo.

Not having purchased a collectible S&W in several years, I have not paid much attention to the current market. If the chambers will accept a 44 Magnum case, I would try to negotiate a lower price, because no 44 Special or 44-40 revolver was ever made to take 44 Magnum pressures. Even the original Remington ammo from 1956, listed at 1500 fps, was later downloaded to reduce velocity/pressure because the pre-Model 29s were shooting loose. Nice-looking 2d Model HE, though.

The longer 44-40 Cartridge reamer would extend the chamber shoulder over the 44 spl length, but not at a diameter that would accept the 44 case length.

And there would be two extra reaming rings showing in the chambers; one for the 44-40 case shoulder and one at the case mouth.

__________________
Jim
S&WCA #819

I have some factory Hornady 44 magnum brass that will just barely chamber (very tightly) in my 624, which is not modified in any way. I agree with the others that there probably is nothing wrong with the pistol, just an example of tolerance stack.

I recall hearing (reading) of tolerance stacking or other minor errors that would sometimes allow for loading the wrong cartridge into a firearm. It's been so long that the details evade me, but I recall enough to know that while rare, it is not impossible.

__________________
NHI, 10-8.

Hello OP, that is a beauty. If you have doubt, walk away or dont shoot
magnum loads in a gun not designed for that purpose.

__________________
Mike 2796
SoFo Bunch member

I'd be on it like a sixteen-year-old on a pizza buffet.

__________________
Oh well, what the hell.

From the pictures there is absolutely nothing to give any reason believe the charge holes of OPs revolver are any way different than the way they left the factory.



Chamber depth is only an issue in the original caliber if it is too short, deep chambers are not at all un-common. Some of my .38 Spl. S&Ws will come very close to chambering a .357 Magnum cartridge, but not quite! Same with my Model 24-3, close but not so close the cylinder can be closed!


I wouldn't give another thought to this gun having issues.

__________________
Gunsmithing since 1961