Based on your photos, I would say refinished. Have you checked under the stocks or the end of the cylinder for any markings that would indicate a factory nickel finish?
Thanks. I don't have it in hand, these were sent to me by the seller.
The images are actually pretty good but dont enlarge on here very well. I hope to get better shortly. Thanks
As C3Ranger mentioned, ask seller if there are "N" stamps on the lower left side of grip frame, bottom of barrel and on back of cylinder under the extractor star.
It's a 4-screw frame. Is it really stamped MOD-40 on the frame?
Most J-frames went to the 3-screw frame by '56. The Centennials were "slow sellers" from most reports so they might have still had 4-screw frames a bit longer.
The flat style thumbpiece went away in February '66.
I got some more images. The cylinder is stamped with an N, and the frame is marked MOD 40. The grips look correct to me, an original screwdriver is in the box. This gun is looking very nice at this point and Ill get it in hand for a better look.
I guess a 4-screw gun shouldn't have a Bangor Punta box. Is there any way that could have happened?
Last edited by ezb57; 03-06-2023 at 07:04 PM.
Reason: clarity
I guess a 4-screw gun shouldn't have a Bangor Punta box. Is there any way that could have happened?
Several points to note.
The Centennial (Model 40) is not a target model with adjustable sights so it shouldn't have a screwdriver (SAT -- sight adjustment tool).
From my perch I see a gray box that's had its original label removed (glue around the edges of the new label), and a modern replica of the label written for a Model 40. There are no "INS" or "PKR" (inspector or packer) marks to suggest its legit.
Is the Model 40's serial number the same as on the label?
Folks put wrong boxes with revolvers all the time. The ones who put replica labels on boxes to make them appear "authentic" get caught when they use a box from the wrong era.
Hmm, someone would change the label then put the new one on upside down? Curious. Doesn't seem like like an attempt to deceive. Is there a tell-tale that the label is aftermarket?
Did these Model 40s sit in stock so long that a current box may have been used to ship one? Wish I knew what the production year was.
The two piece boxes were meant to be upside down. That meant the label was up, and the top was on the bottom. That way, when you slid the box off the shelf for the customer to look at, the pistol did not fall out of the box with the bottom of the box and crack the grips, etc.
Hmm, someone would change the label then put the new one on upside down? Curious. Doesn't seem like like an attempt to deceive. Is there a tell-tale that the label is aftermarket? Did these Model 40s sit in stock so long that a current box may have been used to ship one? Wish I knew what the production year was.
Interesting question. I have been pondering the use of different boxes for a while. A related question would be - As these slow movers sat around in the vault, what did they sit around in? Assuming that the guns sat in something, was it the box being used the day that the gun was 'finished', or was it another storage container of some sort, and the gun shipped in the box being used the day the piece shipped? It's a question that is really nit-picky, but the answer could explain a few odd things we see.
Depending on the price of the revolver, the box is just something to keep the firearm in. If there is a premium for the box then the wrong box would have to be discussed as there is no big premium for having a wrong box.
SWCA 892
I have a strong suspicion the box is not original to the gun but still have to ask the seller more about it. I am satisfied with the asking price regardless of the box.
My take is if you are satisfied with the asking price, buy it.
As far as it being refinished, there really aren’t enough good pictures to make that determination. In the last set of pictures you posted, the “Smith & Wesson” rollmark on the barrel looks pretty crisp, but better pictures of the side plate and screws are what I’d really like to see for a more educated opinion. I’d also like to see pictures of both sides of the frame with the grips removed.
The box is from the mid 60’s, and like others have pointed out is not the correct box for that vintage gun. The reproduction label is upside down and smaller than the label that was originally on the box.
I wish sellers would not do things like that, but then maybe he got it that way. Who knows. When I come across stuff like that lots of red flags pop up. Selling it as a Model 40 shows he either doesn't know what he has or he is being deceptive. It's probably the former. That's a weird package, SAT and post 1965 box and all. The Centennial w/ smooth high horns does look nice.
OR, maybe the box should look like this! Not a Banjor box.
And to confuse things a little more here is few serial numbers around the ops serial number from my database!
15428 40 NI Sep-60 Nickel
15554 40 Aug-60 4 screw sideplate
15966 40 Jul-69
16133 40 May-61
jcelect
Last edited by jcelect; 03-07-2023 at 11:58 AM.
Reason: additions
Thanks for all the great comments.
I was mistaken about the screwdriver; it did not come with the gun.
I'm eager to get a better look at this but unfortunately it will be a couple weeks until.
Here are a few more images:
The pics are just not good enough to make the call on the finish. I see some stuff that looks good, and I see some stuff that makes me wonder. The box is bogus IMO.
Wow, am I reading that correctly, #15966 was shipped in 1969?
Bangor Punta was certainly involved by that time.
Yes sir, you are correct! Bangor Punta bought S&W in 1965. However, your Centennial, #15990, was probably shipped in late 1960 or early 1961. In this time frame S&W was using the solid boarder non-Bangor blue box or possibly a left-over Sun Burst box for the J frame guns. The problem with projecting any kind of date with the Centennials is they were not a good seller and languished on the storage shelf. The Centennial models were brought out in late 1952 and early 1953 at serial number #1. It was not until mid 1957 before they had shipped 10,000 guns! With a slow mover in manufacturing, storage, and shipment there is a high probably the serial numbers will get jumbled up a lot more than a fast moving model! I feel the box for that Centennial is incorrect for the many reasons stated above!
jcelect
As these slow movers sat around in the vault, what did they sit around in? Assuming that the guns sat in something, was it the box being used the day that the gun was 'finished', or was it another storage container of some sort, and the gun shipped in the box being used the day the piece shipped?
Guns were packed in boxes as they were finished. They were stored in the vault in the boxes. Almost always, the gun and its box should match in vintage.
Thanks again to all.
So, looking at the dates above, in the case of a slow-selling gun such as these, a frame could be made in say 1955, final assembly and stamping take place in 1959, and shipped out in 1969?
I had a chance to see this in person today and was disappointed. I am comparing this gun to a nickel 2-inch model 34 I had a while back. My first impression was that there was more overall wear than I had hoped, largely due to the stocks having more wear than expected and some dents/nicks. While barrel markings and sharp edges looked good, the gun had a vague overall watery appearance. Some finished areas had odd spots, almost like paint runs or pulls in the nickel, hard to describe. Some areas including above the cylinder looked rough under the nickel. The large trademark on the left was very thin, disappearing completely on its left edge, and had 2 big scratches through it. On the right side, the Marcas text got fainter on its right side. Frame screws 1 and 2 had faint low spot/depressions around them. The barrel pin on the left also looked a bit down to me. So, I’m thinking this an original nickel gun that was redone some time back. I did not ask to remove the grips and look for an N or repair date or pin as I knew I wasn’t going to be a buyer.
Seemed decent mechanically, ratchet and hand looked nice. The cylinder opened and closed normally. The ejector rod operation was a bit stiff.
Lastly, some years back the seller had asked about this gun on this very forum and related that he had no box or paperwork. Today the gun is in the box you see above with Smith wax paper, and I was told that the gun and box were acquired at the same time, so there is that. I also explained the discrepancies of the box.
Being at what I think is near the top in price, I passed on this gun. Maybe I’ll regret it someday. ezb
I had a chance to see this in person today and was disappointed. I am comparing this gun to a nickel 2-inch model 34 I had a while back. My first impression was that there was more overall wear than I had hoped, largely due to the stocks having more wear than expected and some dents/nicks. While barrel markings and sharp edges looked good, the gun had a vague overall watery appearance. Some finished areas had odd spots, almost like paint runs or pulls in the nickel, hard to describe. Some areas including above the cylinder looked rough under the nickel. The large trademark on the left was very thin, disappearing completely on its left edge, and had 2 big scratches through it. On the right side, the Marcas text got fainter on its right side. Frame screws 1 and 2 had faint low spot/depressions around them. The barrel pin on the left also looked a bit down to me. So, I’m thinking this an original nickel gun that was redone some time back. I did not ask to remove the grips and look for an N or repair date or pin as I knew I wasn’t going to be a buyer.
Seemed decent mechanically, ratchet and hand looked nice. The cylinder opened and closed normally. The ejector rod operation was a bit stiff.
Lastly, some years back the seller had asked about this gun on this very forum and related that he had no box or paperwork. Today the gun is in the box you see above with Smith wax paper, and I was told that the gun and box were acquired at the same time, so there is that. I also explained the discrepancies of the box.
Being at what I think is near the top in price, I passed on this gun. Maybe I’ll regret it someday. ezb
For all the reasons that you did not buy it, rest assured that you should not have. As for "regrets", I think you would have regrets if you did buy it. Having seen what you described I would have passed as well. Research tends to pay off.
I know you are right.
Sadly, this was sort of a "bucket list" gun for me and they, or any nice old Smith, just don't show up around here often.
Thanks for all the great shared wisdom.
Nickle Flat Latch Model 40
...Ben
Linear Mode
