|
|
 |
11-18-2020, 06:29 AM
|
 |
SWCA Member
|
|
|
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Ashtabula County, Ohio
Posts: 6,064
Likes: 9,330
Liked 13,714 Times in 4,029 Posts
|
|
Military Model Question
I am aware that S&W produced the Model 1917 and the Model 1950 Military. Were any other 45 ACP revolvers introduced as “Military” Models. I guess I am asking was there a Model 1955 Military?
Thank you.
Kevin
__________________
Unshared knowledge is wasted.
|
|
The Following User Likes This Post:
|
|
11-18-2020, 07:04 AM
|
 |
Moderator
|
|
|
Join Date: Jun 2007
Posts: 26,880
Likes: 980
Liked 18,995 Times in 9,295 Posts
|
|
There were no 1955 Military (fixed sight) guns; the 1950 version went through the normal progression of modifications (5 to 4 to 3 screws, etc.) and became the model 22.
The reintroduced model 22-4 was called the Thunder Ranch (4") or the 1917 Classic (5.5"). I suppose you could call a non-TR logo gun a model of 2007 Military if you like. 
__________________
Alan
SWCA LM 2023, SWHF 220
|
|
The Following 4 Users Like Post:
|
|
11-18-2020, 09:55 AM
|
 |
SWCA Member
|
|
|
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: San Antonio, TX
Posts: 3,525
Likes: 11,150
Liked 12,127 Times in 1,938 Posts
|
|
I have always understood that the Model of 1950 Military was in 44 caliber (pre 21) and that the 1950 45 acp (pre 22) was designated the Army model. Ame I wrong?
__________________
Randy
Provenance nerd
|
|
The Following 2 Users Like Post:
|
|
11-18-2020, 10:13 AM
|
 |
US Veteran
|
|
|
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: Bartlett, Tennessee
Posts: 7,614
Likes: 2,932
Liked 18,684 Times in 4,787 Posts
|
|
1950 Military .44 Special.
|
|
The Following 7 Users Like Post:
|
|
11-18-2020, 11:35 AM
|
 |
SWCA Member
Absent Comrade
|
|
|
Join Date: Jan 2014
Location: Oregon
Posts: 12,834
Likes: 10,103
Liked 27,996 Times in 8,452 Posts
|
|
You didn‘t ask about this, but for completeness‘ sake just a historical reminder that for S&W the .38 K-Frame was the original “Military Model”.
|
|
The Following 6 Users Like Post:
|
|
11-18-2020, 07:10 PM
|
|
Member
|
|
|
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Occupied California
Posts: 2,790
Likes: 1,523
Liked 5,581 Times in 1,610 Posts
|
|
Here's a pic of my Model 1950 Army Model and a photo of what the box for one looks like (not my box). I find it interesting that the Model 1950 chambered in .44 Special is referred to as the "Military" Model and the Model 1950 chambered in .45 ACP is referred to as the "Army" Model. Probably because the .44 was introduced first and they didn't want to cause confusion by using the same terminology for a different caliber.
Last edited by Walter Rego; 11-18-2020 at 07:13 PM.
|
|
The Following 4 Users Like Post:
|
|
11-18-2020, 08:10 PM
|
|
SWCA Member
|
|
|
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Ashtabula County, Ohio
Posts: 6,064
Likes: 9,330
Liked 13,714 Times in 4,029 Posts
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by quinn
I have always understood that the Model of 1950 Military was in 44 caliber (pre 21) and that the 1950 45 acp (pre 22) was designated the Army model. Ame I wrong?
|
My mistake. Apparently the 44 is the 1950 Military and the 45 is the 1950 Army. That makes it even odder as the 44 S&W Special was never a military cartridge. At least not to my knowledge. The 44 Colt, yes. And somewhere I recall the 44 American but not the Special.
Kevin
__________________
Unshared knowledge is wasted.
|
11-18-2020, 08:18 PM
|
|
SWCA Member
|
|
|
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Ashtabula County, Ohio
Posts: 6,064
Likes: 9,330
Liked 13,714 Times in 4,029 Posts
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Absalom
You didn‘t ask about this, but for completeness‘ sake just a historical reminder that for S&W the .38 K-Frame was the original “Military Model”. |
I know the 38 Colt was adopted by the Military but, prior to WWII, was the 38 S&W Special ever adopted by tge U S Military?
Kevin
__________________
Unshared knowledge is wasted.
|
11-18-2020, 08:32 PM
|
|
SWCA Member
|
|
|
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Ashtabula County, Ohio
Posts: 6,064
Likes: 9,330
Liked 13,714 Times in 4,029 Posts
|
|
And just because we love to see photos!
From the left, the Model 1950 Army, the Model 22-4, the Thunder Ridge version of the Model 22-4, and the Model 22-4 with the 5 1/2” barrel, the Army Model? The 22-4 Commercial? The ???
Okay no photo Of the 5 1/2”, 22-4. Those will come later.
Kevin
__________________
Unshared knowledge is wasted.
Last edited by StrawHat; 11-18-2020 at 08:40 PM.
|
|
The Following 2 Users Like Post:
|
|
11-18-2020, 09:51 PM
|
 |
US Veteran
|
|
|
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: Palmer, Alaska
Posts: 14,500
Likes: 5,121
Liked 19,049 Times in 6,879 Posts
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by StrawHat
prior to WWII, was the 38 S&W Special ever adopted by tge [sic] U S Military?
|
No, Kevin, it wasn't. But Absalom's point was it was named that by S&W. So the 1950 "Military Model" has a precedent.
With respect to the prewar .38 Military & Police model, it seems it was named that way because, before 1911, the company hoped it would be adopted by the U.S. military as a replacement for revolvers shooting the .38 Colt's cartridge. The Philippine Insurrection gave the Colt's cartridge a bad reputation. Ultimately, the .45 A.C.P. won the honors instead of the .38 Special. But the name for the revolver stuck.
__________________
Jack
SWCA #2475, SWHF #318
|
|
The Following 2 Users Like Post:
|
|
11-18-2020, 10:10 PM
|
|
SWCA Member
Absent Comrade
|
|
|
Join Date: Jan 2014
Location: Oregon
Posts: 12,834
Likes: 10,103
Liked 27,996 Times in 8,452 Posts
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by StrawHat
I know the 38 Colt was adopted by the Military but, prior to WWII, was the 38 S&W Special ever adopted by the U S Military?
|
Well ... if you want to get really technical, yes, at least the Navy did buy 150 Army Special revolvers in 1910. And don't let the .38/c caliber designation throw you; these were in .38 Special. Before WW II, Colt records did not distinguish the .38 calibers, so the letters don't either.
But you probably can't call that "adoption". 
The lettered gun below is actually owned by the Colt assistant historian. We have discussed this on the Colt forum. The working hypothesis is that the Navy needed the guns urgently for some reason, the old D.A. 38's were no longer produced, but the new .45 M1909's not yet available.
|
|
The Following User Likes This Post:
|
|
11-19-2020, 06:37 AM
|
|
SWCA Member
|
|
|
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Ashtabula County, Ohio
Posts: 6,064
Likes: 9,330
Liked 13,714 Times in 4,029 Posts
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by JP@AK
No, Kevin, it wasn't. But Absalom's point was it was named that by S&W. So the 1950 "Military Model" has a precedent.
With respect to the prewar .38 Military & Police model, it seems it was named that way because, before 1911, the company hoped it would be adopted by the U.S. military as a replacement for revolvers shooting the .38 Colt's cartridge. The Philippine Insurrection gave the Colt's cartridge a bad reputation. Ultimately, the .45 A.C.P. won the honors instead of the .38 Special. But the name for the revolver stuck.
|
That is what I gathered. Too bad as the 38 S&W Special is a decent cartridge.
Kevin
__________________
Unshared knowledge is wasted.
|
11-19-2020, 10:37 AM
|
 |
Member
|
|
|
Join Date: Jan 2014
Location: Puget Sound Area
Posts: 888
Likes: 39
Liked 2,388 Times in 649 Posts
|
|
This has been an informative and enjoyable thread and has answered a couple of questions on the subject that I've always harbored.
I've also always wondered why the 38 Long Colt was loaded to less power than the 38 S&W Special, even though the cases for all intents and purposes were the same.
__________________
Keep your powder dry.
Last edited by Scharfschuetzer; 11-19-2020 at 10:40 AM.
|
|
The Following User Likes This Post:
|
|
11-19-2020, 11:49 AM
|
|
SWCA Member
Absent Comrade
|
|
|
Join Date: Jan 2014
Location: Oregon
Posts: 12,834
Likes: 10,103
Liked 27,996 Times in 8,452 Posts
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Scharfschuetzer
....
I've also always wondered why the 38 Long Colt was loaded to less power than the 38 S&W Special, even though the cases for all intents and purposes were the same.
|
The .38 Long Colt was developed from the .38 Short Colt as a black powder load a few decades before the .38 Special, and frame dimension and strength of the guns was designed accordingly.
The .38 LC guns survived the transition to smokeless (in the US military in 1900) without modifications, and Colt even advertised their suitability for Special, but for the actual sustained shooting of .38 Special-level pressure loads, a stronger frame was necessary.
S&W designed that along with the cartridge, as the K-frame. Colt followed in 1908 by replacing the old D.A. frame with the newly designed Army Special.
|
|
The Following User Likes This Post:
|
|
11-19-2020, 01:00 PM
|
 |
Member
|
|
|
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Washington State
Posts: 7,467
Likes: 14,571
Liked 9,288 Times in 3,716 Posts
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by StrawHat
That is what I gathered. Too bad as the 38 S&W Special is a decent cartridge. Kevin
|
*
As loaded with the round nose bullet and uninformed training with regard to how to shoot and where to put rounds (tactical anatomy), the .38 Special got a bad reputation for good reason. Loaded with any kind of decent projectile, and I tend to go old school with a SWC because they are most likely to work well and consistently in a modest velocity revolver, it is a decent load for personal defense. The power/controllability curve crosses at a point where a large number of people will perform well shooting it.
__________________
NHI, 10-8.
Last edited by Doug M.; 11-20-2020 at 05:34 PM.
Reason: I can't type or proofread without an adult supervisor
|
11-19-2020, 03:24 PM
|
|
SWCA Member
|
|
|
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Ashtabula County, Ohio
Posts: 6,064
Likes: 9,330
Liked 13,714 Times in 4,029 Posts
|
|
The round nose bullet is one of the more accurate shapes. Not much shock though. The wadcutter has both accuracy and shock working for it. It is my choice when carrying the small bore.
Kevin
__________________
Unshared knowledge is wasted.
|
11-19-2020, 04:46 PM
|
|
Member
|
|
|
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 1,535
Likes: 6
Liked 862 Times in 379 Posts
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Scharfschuetzer
This has been an informative and enjoyable thread and has answered a couple of questions on the subject that I've always harbored.
I've also always wondered why the 38 Long Colt was loaded to less power than the 38 S&W Special, even though the cases for all intents and purposes were the same.
|
.38 Long Colt is a shorter Cartridge Case than .38 S&W Special...and with this, has a slightly smaller Case volume.
Otherwise, they are the same diameter.
In original Black Powder Loading, the .38 S & W Special Cartridge held more Powder than the .38 Long Colt Cartridge.
|
11-19-2020, 07:29 PM
|
|
Member
|
|
|
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Occupied California
Posts: 2,790
Likes: 1,523
Liked 5,581 Times in 1,610 Posts
|
|
Many of us probably know that prior to the Colt Official Police Model, the same gun with minor cosmetic differences was known as the Army Special. It was never adopted by the US Army but it's obvious that Colt's marketing department along with Smith & Wesson's had some wishful thinking going on.
|
|
The Following User Likes This Post:
|
|
|
Posting Rules
|
|
|
|
|
Linear Mode
