Got this off of GB last week. I have wanted a target 44 special and was not able to find a nice enough model 24 that I could justify the asking price. This was advertised as a Model of 1950.. also advertised as refinished. If it was refinished, someone did a pretty good job. Pins are proud, side plate seam looks good. It has holster wear and the flutes on the cylinder don't look rounded over...i bought it knowing it may have been refinished. Barrel, cylinder, grips, and frame all have the same number. The cleaning kit is not from a 44. The brush is 32 caliber size. I have the receipt from S&W for the replacement sight, and some provenance from a couple of guys who have owned it. There is no rework date stamp under the grips. The gent I bought it from is a gun writer. I am into it for $1300.

What is the correct model for this.

I am happy with the price, but opinions on the value.

Do you guys think it is refinished? If you think so, please educate me as to why.

Robert

__________________
Robert
SWCA #2906, SWHF #760

Looks good to me, I have S 143742, S147326, and S146001. Other than the front sight, for which you have the explanation, it looks like a Model of 1950 (pre-24) 44 Special. I don't see any obvious signs of a re-blue but if done by the factory it likely wouldn't be obvious anyway. No re-work date on the butt and you don't show a * or other stamps that would confirm a factory re-blue.

Not sure what one with the sight modification you have is worth; I'm guessing somewhere in the $1200-$1500 range and if not re-blued perhaps more. I wouldn't have any problem paying $1300 for it. Nice, enjoy. Here's one of mine.

Jeff
SWCA 1457

Attached Images

1950 Target 44.jpg (39.7 KB, 268 views)

Both beautiful revolvers and Jeff, you're correct according to the catalog.

__________________
Ed

Nice revolver. Looking at the sideplate, the finish looks original to me. Looks like it has
never been removed. Enjoy it.

4th model 44 hand ejector target, A little dishing on the screw holes, but otherwise pretty nice. I hate a heavy handed buffing job on reblued guns and yours is not!

Nice thing is you can shoot it and enjoy it without guilt. Enjoy.

I don't see any evidence of refinish. I'm surprised the Service Dept. didn't mark it when they did the sight replacement, but stranger things have happened. Nice gun!

__________________
Mike H

Finish looks like the original bright blue and from about a mid 1955 shipper.

Is there a large B following the serial # in the barrel shroud?

__________________
Jim
S&WCA #819

I have the almost identical revolver (1950 44 Target, Pre-Model 24) to yours that I enjoy shooting very much. I don't believe yours is refinished. The only item in the photos that is not correct for your revolver is the set of tools as they date to the mid-60s or later.

Bill

I guessed that about the tools. The brush is for a 32 caliber...kinda lost in that 44.

Yours is in nicer shape.

Robert

__________________
Robert
SWCA #2906, SWHF #760

No, Jim...the serial number is there but no B

What do you think about the box? Never saw one that looked like this.

Robert

__________________
Robert
SWCA #2906, SWHF #760

Congrats!

No B indicates the bright blue after it became standard again like before the war.

I like the quick draw front sight like the 44 mag on these.
Does your S&W receipt include installation or just for the sight purchase from the parts dept?

The plain box has been known to be a factory return box.

__________________
Jim
S&WCA #819

Receipt included fitting...and shipping to a gentleman in the Albany NY area.

Robert

__________________
Robert
SWCA #2906, SWHF #760

"What is the correct model for this."

Just as the box says, at that time it was cataloged as the 1950 Model 44 Target. You did OK on the price.

More pics would help.
Is this surface blued?









What about these---







I'm thinking it is reblued. I see light dishing. Are those tiny pits? The logo on my bright 1950s are raised. This one is polished.

Attached Images

	159a3050a3f28bd90597c9d30f38986d.jpg (50.0 KB, 1670 views)
	712d7e514fab38d04c943c1ddf7c82dd.jpg (186.9 KB, 1674 views)
	02fa58abe5e685cee35321d37502d3d6.jpg (242.3 KB, 1681 views)

__________________
Regards,
Lee Jarrett

That box is correct.

__________________
Regards,
Lee Jarrett

The lock pin does not look blued. The trade mark does look a little flat.

The pin is proud. The bevel, i dont know... pictures if the side plate screws. Maybe some very slight dishing...the area on the upper side plate does not seem to have pitting.

If it was refinished, i think it saw plenty of use after...and i think it may have been, as much as I'd like it not to have been...in any case it was well done...and it rounds out my 44s.

I appreciate all the help.



Robert

__________________
Robert
SWCA #2906, SWHF #760

Years ago, I was with a group of guys at the Tulsa Gun Show, discussing a rare Prewar Winchester Model 70. The group consisted of two of the top high-end dealers, a well known gunsmith, and a very serious collector. The discussion went back and forth over several details on originality and whether or not the gun had been refinished. Not one man was 100 percent positive either way and each felt that if it had been redone, it was a masterful job. I laughed and said “Guys, look around. If you guys, of all people, don’t know for certain, then it really doesn’t matter. It’s a great gun!”

__________________
SWHF #691

Ask the seller why he called it refinished. He may know for sure. I have to say I believe it is refinished. Those scratches in the upper sideplate pretty well cinch it.

__________________
Regards,
Lee Jarrett

I have reached out to him, but based on him saying so in his ad, and some of the things you've pointed out, i am going with refinished. As i look closely at the right and left sides, i see evidence of very ine lines from buffing. I don't see that on other pieces pf mine from the same time period. Who ever did the work was pretty good. As I said at the outset, i bought it knowing the seller said it was refinished and I am pleased to own it. The exercise here was educational for me and I thank you guys.

I wished, but of wishes were NIB Schofields....


Here is the family



Robert

__________________
Robert
SWCA #2906, SWHF #760

Yes, the scratches and the flattened logo with letters slightly dished.

__________________
Jim
S&WCA #819

"Robert,
Great question. I deliberated on this for some time. It doesn't look refinished, except perhaps around the S&W stamp, but there is no "star" anyplace to prove it was refinished at the factory, and virtually no one is capable of
duplicating their refinishing. I have a "Triple Lock" that Montgomery returned to S&W to be refinished for his Sheriff. I would never have pegged it to be refinished, but for the asterisk next to the serial number and my knowledge
that he did return it. I'm waiting for more info from S&W now. I described your gun as being refinished for one reason; better to under describe it than have the buyer think he/she got screwed. It's a beautiful gun and it will be
interested to show it to your friends and to see if they mention that it looks refinished. "

__________________
Robert
SWCA #2906, SWHF #760

VERY INTERESTING! I'm surprised there's no rework date stamp or star on the butt. However we learn things everyday. And perhaps for something so minor, they didn't stamp.

__________________
Jim
S&WCA #819

Very nice gun. I was able to purchase a 24-4 SiX inch barrel NIB a week ago. I was in the right place at the right time. It will not be new for long.

Good lord what a beautiful sidearm!
Bravo ral, Bravo!

thank you. I can tell you I'm thrilled to own it.

__________________
Robert
SWCA #2906, SWHF #760

That's a pretty special .44 Spl. Baughman quick draw red ramp front sight like the 44 Mag, but with standard hammer and trigger.

Is the right side grip also cut out like the left side? If it is, you have a rare "Through the Line" one of "The 12 Revolvers" set over run guns from 1990. The right side grip was cut out to expose the side plate engraving, which it wouldn't have as an over run. The beauty of it is that no other Model 24-4s with 6 1/2" barrel were produced and which have the 44 Mag Endurance package.

As I recall there's no special markings on the box label to indicate what it is. How is your box label marked?

__________________
Jim
S&WCA #819

I would be too!

Robert,

As acknowledged by you and others, the tools are incorrect, also:

There should be a .44 cal. wool mop included.

The sight adjustment tool, S.A.T., screwdriver should have a handle with knurled rings either blued steel or nickel plated; #s 2, 4, or 5 from the left:


Photo by RKmesa (Richard)

__________________
Jim
S&WCA #819

OK, since I don't have any mid 60's 32s and I don't see myself putting a complete package of one together, What is this tool set worth to someone trying to complete a 32 from the 60s. As I'll never use it, and don't make a real effort to collect complete packages, I would be willing to offer it for sale at a reasonable price.

I do happen to have a 9 row like #4 in the picture.

__________________
Robert
SWCA #2906, SWHF #760

You've got best of the best! That one has endurance package, and it will LAST!

I was in the club where they shoot a lot, few collectors. And those old dogs told me that S&W -3, -4 and -5 (models with firing pin on hammer) are the best S&W ever. They liked them so much that they have just with those dash numbers. Apparently, S&W started using CNC machinery, and on top of that, same critical parts, like crane, that were before from bit softer steel for easier fitting, are now from considerably stronger steel. CNC machining allowed closer tolerances and less fitting, and using stronger steel S&W avoided latter problems with loose guns.

I still kicking myself for passing LNIB 624, -3 or -4, I think 6", but could be 6.5". At that time I had tough times, and honestly, I was more in magnum mood. Later one, after flipping number of guns, all magnums, I realized why 44 Special is so special. Now, I would love to have a nice 624-3/-4, 6"-6.5", and Ruger Flattop stainless Bisley in 44 Special, 5.5". Considering my current location, wouldn't be easy.

You know what they say: "Ve get too soon oldt, and too late shmart." (wrong spelling intended)

Actually I don't care for MIM guns at all. But I can put my bias aside long enough to acknowledge they are truly the best guns Smith has ever made. All it took was a little education about them. Just think, you know of all the little wear issues that come up for discussion on this forum with pre MIM guns, especially those shot a lot? Now just imagine those issues never happening anymore; that's what MIM does. Want details, just ask.

Having said that, I still don't like them and will stick with my mostly pre 1960 Smiths.

__________________
Jim
S&WCA #819

...MIM?
Sorry, but the term is new to me.

Metal injected molded. A manufacturing method where powdered metal is injected into a die.....not unlike molding of plastic. .it allows near net shapes requiring little if any machining....results are reduced weight amd lower manufacturing costs and the ability to use harder materials...tradeoff might be grain structure

Robert

__________________
Robert
SWCA #2906, SWHF #760

...interesting...
I wasn't aware of that.
Thank you for taking the time to explain that.

Metal injection molding (MIM) is a metalworking process in which finely-powdered metal is mixed with binder material to create a "feedstock" that is then shaped and solidified using injection molding. The molding process allows high volume, complex parts to be produced and shaped with very accurate tolerances in a single step.

__________________
Jim
S&WCA #819

Here is my pre-model24, or Model of 1950 Target.

Attached Images

	P102.JPG (60.8 KB, 70 views)
	P103.JPG (58.1 KB, 54 views)

Range report added...first 10 shots...i can only discern 9 holes... #10 must have gone thru one of the others.. these are my reloads using 6.5 grains Unique and 240 gr lead flat points...dang I like shooting 44 special...

Robert

__________________
Robert
SWCA #2906, SWHF #760

Think you have two 3-shot groups in that bunch.

Your 6.5" set-up is the same as mine....Magnas, TH but not a TT. Most bullseye shooters didn't order the wide hammer but preferred the thinner standard trigger. The TT seemed to decrease the sensitivity. Magnas also are more ergonomic than target stocks. When you make a fist, the inside of your hand turns into am "ice cream cone", if you will....it is wide at the top and narrows at the bottom. The target stock does the opposite.

I almost bought that one but found a nice one local # S 138011, love the 44 Specials, Would have liked to have it too but glad you got it, Plan to shoot mine a little but have a 24-3 4" to do most of my plinking.

...and now you guys know why they're Special.

My dad long gone ( 1914-1978 ) taught me just how special they were back in the mid 1956 when he handed me his New Service 44 Special to shoot and load for it, I was 8 going on 9 and he had a Hurters # 3 press he bought in 1953. used to shoot that gun till he parted with it in 1967 and that started a big row between us Still miss the gun but miss him even more. Just paid a dear but fair price for My S&W 1950 Target 44 Spec. and that one will not go to my kids but will go in the casket with me I hope, Love it that much.