Edit: The gun arrived, pictures: http://smith-wessonforum.com/140997139-post65.html

and a glamour shot from a visitor to my home:




Original Post:
Just won a gun that one of the wonderful SWCA members pointed me at.

I'm pretty excited about it and thought I might do something a bit different than my usual with this gun, and start a thread on it before I have it in hand.

The pictures are a bit lacking, but I thought there might be some fun to be had speculating about it and seeing what speculations pan out when I have direct possession of it.

I have a little bit of information regarding it to add (not from the seller, actually something I have known for quite some time that was brought to my attention by another SWCA member who is welcome to chime in and take credit for enabling me), but I think that information may spoil any fun to be had in idle speculation. So I'll hold off on it for the moment.

So without further ado, in all it's horribly butchered glory:









A triple-lock!

What are your thoughts?

Edit: After a round of speculation I added more information to Post #27 if you want to spoil your speculative fun.

Oh Bubba! Couldn’t you have stayed in small engine repair?

__________________
Possum—The other white meat!

Well there is no coming back from that! But it is a great example of 1920's-1930's combat customization, I bet that it feels a lot better then it looks!

__________________
Life NRA, Life TSRA, C&R FFL

Did you do the Fitz treatment or did it come that way? I'm not understanding, exactly.

Personally, and I know that the "Fitz treatment" was popular in some circles, including well respected ones, I still think it is a dangerous modification. We have a Forum member (TheShootist1894) who has done those for other members, well, at least once that I know about for certain, and when I saw it I liked everything but the trigger guard. So I had him do some modifications for me on a DAO M64 but I specifically said "no Fitz". He modified the trigger guard for me but did not cut it open.



That's just outside my danger point with an open trigger guard. YMMV

__________________
Come and take it!!

Wow! I sure hope there's some interesting history with that one, or the seller paid you to take it!

__________________
Mike H

Evidently someone along the line thought those changes would make it more functional for their intended purpose.

__________________
SWCA #3356, SWHF#611

The trigger guard can be repaired. Forum member tennexplorer had an N frame that had been Fitzed brought back by welding in another trigger guard from a donor revolver.

The grip frame looks like a round butted Schofield.

__________________
John 3:16
WAR EAGLE!

Somebody did a nice job on the black powder chamfer.

__________________
low speed, high drag

I wish it could talk !! Get it all liquored up and the tales it could tell.

The TL came with a chamfered cylinder.

__________________
John 3:16
WAR EAGLE!

Maybe the front of the trigger guard was impacting the trigger finger of a previous owner during recoil.

__________________
U.S. Coast Guard, retired CPO

Fitz sure destroyed many nice handguns!!!

Randy

What a find.

My "first thoughts":

It's still a TL but is it even a S&W or a copy? The trade mark is hard to see well, but it doesn't look quite right although maybe because it's too fuzzy.

What if it was an original 4" or 5" barrel?!?!

A great parts gun for an unmolested TL frame that needed them, including a TL hammer ripe for welding on a post war target spur w/o sacrificing an original TL hammer.

A big project to bring back to "life" with lot's of welding.

A money pit to fix.

Does it still have a SA function?

A great conversation piece just as it is.

A gun I would have no problem getting re-blued.

A TL that's all business for serious social work by the owner that had it built. I wonder if he died using it or lived to retire.

The owner that had it built was NO COLLECTOR.

You probably got it for a pretty low price, meaning it's worth more parted out and the parts sold individually.

And most of all, I wonder what plan you have in mind for it.

And those are also my "last thoughts".

__________________
Jim
S&WCA #819

Never pre-judge scars that might be combat related. Necessity always trumps potential collectors value.....or perhaps enhanced the value at/or for the time.

He posted that he doesn't even have it in his possession yet.

__________________
Jim
S&WCA #819

I kinda like a “Fitzed” Triplelock!

Aside from the trigger guard and overall condition, that gun has a strange appeal. I would fix the trigger guard, reblue it and have a pretty cool retro combat revolver. Just because. Forget the cost.

__________________
Just Say No - To Social Media

Well....OK.
The Fitz concept is well executed, at least. I've just never understood the need for essentially ruining a good revolver to make it "easier" to shoot.
But then again, I don't have giant hands that make an N frame-sized handgun look like a derringer.
Hopefully, the OP got some pretty heavy provenance to go with this "creation" to at least make it worthwhile. Otherwise even a Triple Lock might be a big "So what?" IMHO and end up as a pretty expensive project to bring it back to it's original glory.
OP, I wish you the best with it. I hope my comments don't sound insulting in any way, because the bottom line is you scored a Triple Lock and there ain't no arguing with that!

Would that make it a Fitzlelock?


To me it looks like someone tried to modify the TL for pocket carry (suits had bigger pockets back in the day).

Interesting timestamp piece. The rounding of the top of the grip frame looks very odd - makes me want to hold it just to see how it feels.

Somebody sure took a lot of metal off that gun! Not only the barrel and trigger guard but also the rear of the frame and the frame in front of the trigger guard. They turned a big honkin N frame into a pocket pistol. Looking at the frame above the hammer it looks like they did it to a target model to boot. It does look like a pretty well done job. I would clean it and shoot it and enjoy it.

Well, it sure looks interesting. I would bet that the story will be well worth the read.

__________________
On the Oak Savannah

Interesting.

I understand all the mods except rounding off the frame knuckle. I cannot figure how that would help the feel of the grip, but I haven't held it. The grips look interesting and probably comfortable otherwise.
I would not change or restore a thing.
I would name him Roscoe.

__________________
Regards,
Lee Jarrett

The trigger guard would be an easy fix. The rest of the "improvements" would be really difficult to un do

Back in the day it was just another old gun, possibly with a bulged barrel or some other defects. You have to admit that who ever did it figured out just how much he could remove and still have it work and he did a pretty good job on the finish.

I would rather it had been left alone of course.

Interesting gun, Caleb! I look forward to hearing more about it when you get it.

__________________
Guy
SWHF #474 SWCA LM#2629

I think these types of modifications/guns are a snapshot of a time period and are very interesting from a historical perspective. I use to see these guns frequently at shows, but have not for many years. That leads me to believe that a lot of folks did these Fitz specials back in the day.

I think Caleb bought a piece of history and I am with Lee, I would not change a thing. The revolver is like a Chopper motorcycle, or Rat Rod or Willys MB with a lift kit and 8-Track player—a reflection of a period of time.

Sure it would be great to have the original Willys MB, but no one thought of that back in the day. Someone wanted a monster mudder and to blast Foghat. Here someone wanted a hard-core, concealed carry piece.

__________________
Possum—The other white meat!

I love it, and would keep it exactly as is. Custom guns meld the factory’s design, the owners desires, and the craftsman's talent, over the entire human scale of capabilities. There’s a lot more story there than “the day it left the factory”.

Fitz wrote about “tricks” that usually involved twisting an opponents gun away, and breaking their trigger finger in the process. IMO that’s why he cut trigger guards, to protect the owner from that action.

Well awesome, everyone seems to be having fun with this thread! I had really hoped as much. This gun I believe is a type that elicits strong emotions. I love that kind of gun.

Jim summed up a lot of what people have said, I've taken a snippit out here:

First off, I did get it for a low price, not peanuts, but a price that is low enough I am very pleased with the gun, despite it's issues (I must admit that I, like most of you, find the fitz job in particular to be horrifying).

I intend to do nothing to the gun aside from cleaning it well, hopefully finding a nice Star on the butt (and getting corresponding SWHF documents, hey a guy can dream can't he?), and maybe trying my hand at making additional grips for it. I have this dream of learning how to jig bone, but that's a topic for another day.

I believe some, or many, of the questions people have regarding the gun are answered in an article out of the March '35 American Rifleman, along with (what I believe you will agree with me on), a firm resolve not to actually change the gun.



When this gun was pointed out to me I recognized it instantly as an example of Frank Frisbie style butchery, particularly the "complete removal of the much-cussed hump on the grip".

As sad as it all is, the way that Frank fully admits what he did horrified collectors... in 1935 no less... well there's a certain charm there to me.

I hope you all get as much entertainment out of our poor butchered Roscoe as I already have, even before having it in hand.

Oh, last note: this is obviously not the gun in the picture. The sight is different, and the stocks are obviously different. However this gun clearly was inspired by (or maybe inspired?) Frank.

My hope of course (being me) is that someone was reading their new copy of American Rifleman, and found this article, and thought; "This frank guy is onto something, I hate that much cussed hump too! I think I'll send it back to S&W with a copy of this article and have them improve this gun to Frank's specifications!"

Of course I doubt that will happen, but it's fun to dream about.

Yes, it is kind of like late 50s Cadillacs. In the 70s nobody wanted them, you could get one for a couple hundred and make it into a great demo derby car. Now they are worth big bucks. A 2 door 53 Chevy was a $100. I could have bought a nice 55 2 door post for $350.

Triple locks, 455s, 1917s were all just cheap old guns at one time. M1 carbines. When I was about 16 the local Tempo store had racks of 1917 Enfolds and Springfields priced at $17.95, buy as many as you could get in you car

I get you, but then again look at this line from the article;

"The next thing was the butchering process, which was fast and furious while it lasted; and some of the onlookers who loved the old Triple-Locks, threw up their hands in holy horror, declaring that a beautiful old six-gun was being cruelly disfigured."

And remember, this was in 1935!

I don't think so, the sight notch would show like it does on the Frisbie gun in the article above.

__________________
Jim
S&WCA #819

When I shoot magnum or heavy loads in a Smith, the knuckle is what causes me pain. When I shoot those same loads in a Colt or Ruger SA they're much more comfortable to shoot because they don't have the knuckle, which I've always felt was because no knuckle allows the gun to roll up in the hand and dissipate the straight back recoil.

I believe it's a distinct advantage, and agree with Frisbie especially on a DA with such a short barrel and that's had the frame lightened.

__________________
Jim
S&WCA #819

A little duct tape and WD40 would get it back to original.

Sent from my SM-G955U using Tapatalk

__________________
SWCA #3713

One question I have is regarding the front sight.

It looks a great deal to me like a Baughman ramp. I was curious if anyone was going to comment on it. I am kind of fixated on sights typically, but it was one of the first things that drew my eye, particularly because it had me wondering if it was a sight that anyone might recognize the make of to give clues about who did the work.

Although, likely it will take better pictures to suss that out.

Probably not that many by Fitzgerald himself, but he was certainly the inspiration for generations of Bubbas. I can see Fitz, being an experimenter, trying out the cutaway trigger guard and it may have worked well for him. For pretty much everyone since, they have engaged in simple butchery.

Oh, and I just realized that I should have added that the S/N is purported to be 8493

Which I don't think is right because the Database has that as an Australian shipped triple lock. So we will have to wait until its in hand to see what the S/N actually is

No sir, I don't like it.

__________________
Made it, Ma! Top of the world!

Odd, to me.
Is a King Super Target with short action and doublecockeyed hammer and a widened, checkered trigger and checkered gripstraps horrifying? It's a heavily modified gun......


Is a Bowen 38/44 turned into a 45 Colt horrifying?
I used to think so.


Now, I've come to appreciate them for what they are- guns built to suit the taste of a particular person. The only ones I feel are horrifying are the Bubba jobs done so crudely that the guy should not have been working beyond his ability.


In 2014, I had a bunch of guns laid out at Tulsa that I did not want to sell, but I needed some cash, so I figured I'd sell till I got some $$$ and pull the survivors off the table.


One of the guns was what I called my "Poor man's K-38". It was a 6" M&P from 1930, shipped to a dealer in Cincinatti. I had bought it off a table at Tulsa in 2012---










It had some great grips by an unknown maker-







It had a neatly checkered trigger--






The guy must have been a "thumb hooker" like me, so he deepened the notch on the hammer for surer cocking--




It had a really neat treatment on the front sight that turned it into a shark fin--





Unfortunately, the pic of the rear face is blurred, so you cannot see the really neat glare proofing the guy did. He had used a round or half round file to roll a very finely grooved pattern of cross hatching onto the surface that it took magnification to fully appreciate!---







I often held that old gun checking out the mods. It really spoke to me. The mods were done with a high skill level. It had been shot a LOT. Something had to go, so I stuck $600 on the gun, figuring that might protect it. But Tom Selleck came along and noticed the grips and I pointed out the other mods, and he bought the damned thing! At least it went to a good home.

Attached Images

	007.JPG (156.3 KB, 1495 views)
	004.JPG (131.5 KB, 1481 views)
	003.JPG (197.1 KB, 1487 views)
	001.JPG (186.4 KB, 1491 views)
	002.JPG (105.8 KB, 1493 views)
	005.JPG (182.6 KB, 1487 views)
	006.JPG (98.1 KB, 1480 views)

__________________
Regards,
Lee Jarrett

I'll bet it brought as much comfort to the guy who carried it as is does horror to collectors then and now.

I've never bought the argument that removing the front of trigger guard was necessary for men with big hands for one reason: Bill Jordan never had it done (although he did shave the right side), and he could palm Elmer Keith's head - hat and all.

__________________
I need ammo, not a ride.

Roscoe would be welcome at my dinner table any night of the week! I'd even see if I could dig out a drop of my step-dad's Five Mile Woods moon shine for toasts.

__________________
Randy
Provenance nerd

To each his own.
I don't mind the roll-up in a SA. I have owned and done a lot of shooting with both Colts and Rugers. The roll-up actually helps in rapid shooting because the thumb is closer to the spur, allowing "hook and sling" cocking.
Since I was always fond of DA shooting, rolling up is a disadvantage. The hand must be repositioned, retarding the time for the next shot. That does not make sense in a belly gun. Just hold on tight and get used to how it feels.


ODD also, to me, that the guy in the article grooved the trigger. In my DA shooting, I much prefer smooth triggers. Grooved triggers chew up my finger after a bunch of shooting. I guess you guys will be horrified by the triggers I have smoothed, like my 1950 44 Mil and my 1926 Trans 44......

__________________
Regards,
Lee Jarrett

While I've never been a fan of "Fitz-ing" in removing the front of the trigger guard, I don't share the abhorrence of many here who decry almost any alteration from factory original specifications.

Long before most of us were born, people were using the guns we now collect.
Professional gun carriers in particular will modify to suit their needs, always have. I don't think anything is wrong with that as long as the work is done by an accomplished gunsmith. Just adds to the flavor for me and I seek out guns so modified, at a minimum to study.

Congrats on your "Roscoe ". I'd love to see some more detailed pics when available and any other information you manage to uncover about previous owner(s).

Thanks for sharing it.

Repeat. Sorry.

Oh no, I should be clear.

I am not horrified at the the historical, period modification. In fact, I adore such things, even the Fitz jobs when done well.

My horror is purely from a safety perspective. I can't help but cringe every time I look at, or pick up, a Fitz'd gun. I think it's just about how I was originally taught gun safety.

In fact, I think the only period thing I own that gives me the same feeling of horror is my spring loaded Saftey Speed Holster, where you press a button with your trigger finger and your gun is now free of the holster with a violence that has to be felt to be understood.

I think I made a video on it a long time ago, but turned it off because I kept being berated for being wrong about the holster. The thing still scares me.

When someone looks at one of my fitzed guns and declares it the most unsafe thing they have ever seen, I ask if they feel the same about a Rem O/U derringer. I guess if you push your revolvers into your holster (or pants pocket) with 10lbs of pressure, it could be an issue.

I like the OP's gun, although I find the knuckle trimming a little weird.

My chopped up triple lock, long gone. I take no credit or blame except for the grips.

__________________
Charlie

That one has a lot of character...I like it......Ben

__________________
Cogito, ergo BOOM!...

Those aren't Double Action though are they?

Ok, the Hi-Standard derringer then.

I love it, chopped trigger guard and all.

__________________
“What you got, ain’t new.”

Oh Lordy!

I never thought I could ever dislike a TL. I was dead wrong.

And hate the butchers so much.

May the Lord forgive me in my wrath.

__________________
Expect the unexpected

I for one, like it. Would I do it to a gun that I own, no but to acquire the gun and take ti to the range, yes. As it has been pointed out, someone had it modified to be what they wanted and until you shoot it, how would you know if it was good or not. It is sure to bring out conversations at the range. Speaking fo which, would love to hear a range report once you have it in hand.