This is serial number 61366, a pre 5 screw/4 screw 38 M&P in nickel w/ a 6 1/2" barrel. Letter requested but won't see it for another 4-6 weeks, so, what say y'all?

__________________
Pace

This is serial number 61366, a pre 5 screw/4 screw 38 M&P in nickel w/ a 6 1/2" barrel. Letter requested but won't see it for another 4-6 weeks, so, what say y'all?

__________________
Pace

Pace

Its a nice-looking revolver - I assume its the original finish ?

There is no such thing, according to all the factory catalogs and literature,
as a square-butt 1902 . You will have to think of a different name !

I wrote a long story about this a few months ago - the title was something
about 1902 Long live the King. Check it out.

This gun is a model of 1905. The defining characteristic of a 1905 is the
square butt; the defining characteristic of a 1902 is the round butt, and
the factory continued that definition all the way up to WW2.

In their zeal to put things in nice boxes, the collectors, decades later,
decided that the defining characteristic of a 1905 was the 5th frame screw
in front of the trigger guard. Since this gun does not have one, the collectors
would call this a 1902 1st change - something that , according to the factory,
they never made !

If the collectors wanted to be consistent with the factory catalogs, this gun
would be, and is, a 1905. When the 5th frame screw was added, they would call
that a 1905 1st change, but a similar gun in round butt would then have to
be called a 1902 2nd change. The collector elected to do away with the 1902
designation after 1905, but this is not what the factory did. The factory
catalogs show both models - a 1902 and a 1905 , as being sold, as separate
models, all the way up to WW2.

Regards, Mike Priwer

Hi Mike

Had a feeling the topic would get your attention and I'm glad you jumped in first. First, thanks and yes, its original finish. I did read your article, numerous times actually. I've also read a lot of other literature (Jinks, Neal/Jinks, Supica/Nahas, Henwood) and must take notice of the differing opinions. This is the first example of this variance I've put my hands, hence the post and the question. I'm certainly no expert and don't pretend to be. I am probably looking forward to how this letters more than any other I've requested, well maybe except one. Have a great holiday and thanks.

__________________
Pace

Assuming the serial number is correct this falls near the end of 1902 production in 1904 per SCSW. In the description of the 1902 1st Change the final sentence states, "The first square butt K frames show up in the middle of this model s/n range." That would make it possible for a square butt to be as early as 48,000 or so with production late 1903 to early 1904. Under the Winchester Model (.32-20) 1902 1st change, both round and square butts are referenced also. As I recall, McHenry & Roper agrees with SCSW, but I cannot get to mine right now.

Does that mean a Model 1905 could have been built in 1903???? Much more logical to recognize that round/square butt is not the distinguishing feature between the models. Advertising isn't the best research source.

BTW, that's the prettiest Nickel centurion+ I have seen in quite a while, assuming it isn't a re-finish. If it is, I would really like to know who did the work!

__________________
Gunsmithing since 1961

What's the last patent date on the top of the barrel?

Dec 17, 01

__________________
Pace

The gun will letter as a square butt 1902 1st change.

Like I said, that is not what the factory called it. To them, its a
1905 - and furthermore, to them, there is no notions of 1st change, etc.
In the service department, they eventually kept track of significant
engineering changes, so that they would know what parts were
required for servicing a particular gun.

The factory literature is very clear about the distinction between
a 1902 and a 1905, and indeed it is the square vs round butt. They
carry this distinction for several decades, in the catalogs, which were
the primary communications by which they sold the guns. To the factory,
these are two separate models. To the collector, they are identical
guns, except for the butt configuration. And this is the source of
the confusion.

Personally, I think it would have been better had the collectors
kept the two models separate, if for no other reason than the
nomenclature would then be consistent with the catalogs. And, I think,
as the factory historian does, that the catalogs and flyers of the
period are the ultimate reference documents.

We need to keep in mind that the definitions being used today are
convenient for understanding both models in a common context, but
this commonly-used nomenclature is not consistent with those of
the factory.

Later, Mike Priwer

Mike...I certainly thank you for taking the time here. This period in production history is absolutely fascinating to me. To add to my confusion is the patent date question posed by SmithNut. Clearly, at least in my eyes, the Dec 17, '01 date preceeds the 1905 model change. Especially when I examine another variation in my possession.

This is serial numbered 67852, another nickel example, this one a 5 inch round butt.



This is early after the 1905 serial number series began yet there are two additional patent dates; Sept 2, 02 and July 7, 03. Now, since this is later in the chronology, its entirely possible to accept this as a 1902 model since there are numerous examples of different models running through the same serial number series. My confusion remains in the fact that the Dec 17, 01 date predates the 1905 patent change. Please don't get me wrong here. I am not questioning your article at all. To the contrary, accepting it as fact, I am questioning that the factory made the catalogue distinctions they did even though the patent dates don't line up. You would think that even then, they would think the consumers would notice the discrepencies. Maybe not. Whatever the case, this is a perfect example of why this hobby is such a blast. Thanks again.

__________________
Pace

Maybe it's a Pre-M1905 Square Butt......

I like it

__________________
Pace

Pace

Does this latest gun, 67852, has the 5th frame screw in front of the
trigger guard ?

As to the '.01 patent date on the barrel, I would say that, at the
time of manufacture of that first gun, they had not yet updated the roll
markings on the top of the barrel. Or, if they had, they still had some of
the older barrels lying around, and wanted to use them up.

I would that you are confusing yourself, let alone totally mixing up
Smithnut, in regards to trying to reconcile dates in roll markings vis-a-vis
a particular variant. The important characteristics of the first gun
are the square butt with no 5th frame screw. This makes it one of early
1905's, according to the factory. To collectors, it makes it a square-butt
1902 1st change. The important characteristics of the second gun are the
round butt, with the early lockwork, and the issue about the 5th frame screw.
If it has the 5th frame screw, then it is scarce, as there are only about
10000 serial numbers with the 5th screw but the old lockwork. If there is
not 5th frame screw, then its a very late serial number for what the
collectors want to call a 1902 1st change.

Laer, Mike Priwer

By Jove, I think I've got it!

1) The distinction must be made between the factory classification and the collector classification.

2) The factory letter is issued with the collector classification.

Geez, no wonder this used brain had trouble grasping this.

Mike, I can't thank you enough for your patience in walking me through this and the education you provided. I think maybe I'll include old factory catalogs in the quest for revolvers for a while. This is engaging stuff.


Oh...the second revolver is, in fact, a 5 screw, also original finish.

__________________
Pace

Pace

That is exactly right - you've got it !

I should add that, from time to time, the factory letters have changed
vis-a-via which orientation the historian is using.

I owned 80155 , a round-butt target shipped in Nov 1906 . Its a 5-screw
with the new (at the time) rebounding lockwork. It lettered as a late-
shipped 1902, about 8 to 10 years ago. I asked him about that, and he
said that 1902 was how the gun was described in the shipping records -
as it should have been, because it is a round butt.

Today, if you lettered the gun, I believe it would letter as a 1905 1st
change, which is consistent with the collector definitions of everything
after 1905 is a 1905, irregardless of butt configuration. I know this would
be the case in general ; in this specific instance, where the records say
1902, he may revert back to calling it a 1902. But - without that specific
reference, it would be a 1905, for collector purposes.

Later, Mike Priwer

Thanks you gentlemen for the very interesting discussion. Pace, you have some sweet .38 M&Ps'!

Jerry

Well...Mr Priwer certainly was right and I needed to change the label on the photo. The square butt first pictured is indeed a 4 screw 1905...

__________________
Pace

Pace40; whatever it is it's certainly pretty.

mikepriwer said-
Mike-
Ya think Roy read this thread?

BTW- I fully agree with your assessment of the two systems of classification.
I agree that one is only "technically correct" when we divide them as the factory did- Round=1902 and Square=1905.
Buuuuttttttt.........I do enjoy the simplified communication possible when using the "collector system" set up in Neal & Jinks. It makes it MUCH simpler for seller AND buyer when listing items for sale.

__________________
Regards,
Lee Jarrett

Lee

There is one very important reason to stick with the factory defintions, rather
than the collector definitions. And as a dealer, I think you will appreciate it.

Consider a 1920's, 1925's .38 M&P target. It will letter, today, as a 1905,
probably 4th change ( the change part is not important ). It will letter this
way irregardless of the butt configuration. Suppose this gun is a round butt .
This fact would be disguised, and worse not even mentioned, in the letter.

In reality, this 1902 is worth a lot more money than a 1905 , if for no other reason
than the scarcity of a round-butt 1920's or 1925's target. There are just none
around. But, by categorizing it as a 1905, and thereby not really recognizing it for
what it is, that value is obscured, and perhaps even lost.

By labeling things incorrectly, we miss the important significance of what they are.
This is why it's so important to get the right labels on these guns.

The collector definitions have created confusion in two area. Both are a confusion,
or misclassification, between models and options. First - the 1902 and 1905 are
very separate models, yet we treat it as more of an option. Second - the 32/20's are
not a separate model, but an optional chambering. Here again, I think we get the value
wrong, when thinking about 32/20's as scarce models. They are just an optional
chambering, just like optional walnut grips.

I would argue that, to get this straightened out, we should drop the notion of 32/20's
as being separate models, and in it place, identify the 1902 as a separate model.
Sure, there will be a difference of "change" between otherwise identical guns, but
that is OK, I think. And, for those of us collectors who try to understand what is
going on in the context of the factory literature, it will all make a lot more sense.

Regards, Mike Priwer

Mike,
I do believe I have just been ACCUSED of being capable of UNDERpricing a gun!!!
THAT really hurts!!
Lest anyone think the fray has begun, that statement is made tongue-in-cheek.

Seriously,
Mike, et al,
I should have qualified the statement about agreeing with the 1902 or 1905 classification by saying early on.
Disclaimer:
I do not suppose, nor hope, to change your mind, Mike. I only intend to set forth my preference for, and some logical reasoning for, the collector classifications.

To wit:
I am perfectly content with the "collector classifications" that Neal & Jinks took from the McHenry and Roper book and clarified. It might be expanded even further to include:
"1905-5th Change", which would be the Safety Hammer Block.
"1905-6th Change" which would be the short action.

If I told you I have a: 1905-3rd Ch, 38, 5", Nickel, Target, ROUND BUTT, Gold Med grips numbered to it, do you really have a problem understanding what I have?
Conversely, if you have that gun, and describe it to me as a: 1902, 38, 5", Nickel, Target, Gold Med grips numbered to it, do you think I get as accurate a picture in my mind as you could get from the other description?

You said:
Well, duhhhh. I think I can read what the catalogs called them, and I think I can also read the variations in Neal & Jinks and figure out EXACTLY which mecahnical variation I have.
Not so. They carry that distinction for app. 1.2 decades- 12 yrs. It runs from the first "The Revolver" catalog(ca 1905) Through the 3 Pirates catalog (ca 1913). The "Mountain Lion", Catalog D (ca 1917), shows a "Military & Police" model in both round and square butt. The only catalogs that continue to mention "1902" and "1905" are the Parts catalogs, BUT, the 1941 P-4 Parts catalog still also shows a 44 Double Action which had been discontinued 28 years, so Parts catalogs are hardly documentation of CURRENT models.
Think about it- In 1917, when the Catalog D came out, weapons in general were undergoing exponential evolution! Airplanes were strafing and bombing! Machine guns were changing tactices and strategy FOREVER! The Germans were shelling Paris from 60+ miles away (more tha FOUR horizons at sea!!). The BAR put a PORTABLE machine gun in the hands of a man who could RUN with it!
Now, in the face of all that, you think a returning Doughboy is going to buy a Model 1902???????? A THIRTEEN or FOURTEEN year OLD model??????
Not good sales hype- not good at all!!
Nope- they changed to "Military & Police" at this time. Think about that "Military & Police"- the "Men at Arms"- i.e.: "The Good Guys". Here is THE weapon for any "Good Guy" to take out a "bad guy"!
Even Colt when they marketed the 45 Auto, never commonly called it the 1911 like we do today- they called it the "Government Model" to keep it from becoming "dated".

I've addressed this above- by the time a guy is advanced enough to care whether he has a 2nd Ch or 3rd Ch, he can figure it out with Neal & Jinks, and if it has a ROUND BUTT, he will probably notice!

They were very separate models when the NEW square butt was introduced in 1905. 12 years later, it was treated by the catalogs as merely an option. C'mon now, "These models are identical, except for the shape of the handle"- an exact quote from the 1905 catalog!!!!!


WHOA!!! Don't do that! Leave them separate! They were numbered in a SEPARATE series, so leave them separate.
Picture this if you meld them into one model- a novice has a 38 M&P in the 144,000 range, and a 32/20 in the 144,000 range, and wants to know WHY they are so DIFFERENT, since they were likely made the same DAY! WE actually know they were made 30-35 years apart, but blending them will serve NO one well!

Enough for now. Chances are, I'll get a chance to comment further.......

__________________
Regards,
Lee Jarrett