Ah, here it is, at last. I picked it up on the July 3rd, so I was able to let my brother examine it when he came over on the 4th. I think the photos below speak for themselves, but I personally think its condition is 99%++. I added the Tyler T-Grip.

I ordered a factory letter the day after I bought it. Because the revolver was subject to a 30-day instead of the usual 10-day hold, I received the letter a couple days before I actually picked up the revolver. I am going to start another thread on what I think is an interesting question raised by the facts in the letter.

Without further ado, here it is:







The 60-2 NY-1 was the first Model 60 with the wider (1/8") front sight.

__________________
1st Signal Brigade, RVN '70

Dick, That is an awsome little piece. It looks like it is in great shape. Congtats on the nice find.

__________________
M.J.Hanna

Very nice find. Let us know how she shoots.

__________________
Stay safe people!

A True NY-1 was sold at the equipment section at one Police plaza NY NY

I was a NYPD cop, and a true NY-1 revolver had a non spur hammer,

The NY-1 on your gun looks good, we found alot of forged NY-1 that fly by night gunsmiths marked and punched (NY-1) and tried to fit a spurless hammer, the actions were horrible and were sent back to were ever the Officer purchased the firearm

Yep someone changed out the hammer on yours or it's not a real NY-1

You can tell a foney NY-1 if it if the lettering and -1 does not line up, also on the fakes there is always binding on one or two cylinders

sal1911a1:

The factory letter from S&W that I received from Roy Jinks indicates it isn't a fake, although the hammer may have been changed out. See my other thread here (https://smith-wessonforum.com/s-w-revolvers-1980-present/91478-questions-ny-1-crowd-collectors-nypd-guns-generally.html) about shipping date and such. Thanks.

__________________
1st Signal Brigade, RVN '70

I read that NYC had some problems with the DA hammers, returned the guns to S&W, who fitted normal hammers, then sold them on the commercial market.

Could this be one of those guns? It wouldn't be a fake, although it was only briefly in NYCPD hands.

Frankly, I much prefer the normal hammer, and misfires are much less likely. Granted, this is a moot point if your primary interest is in the gun as a NYPD collectible.

T-Star

Texas Star wrote:

Quote:

Frankly, I much prefer the normal hammer, and misfires are much less likely.

Me too. I'm a shooter/collector. Notice which one I put first. I do, however, like interesting guns with a different histories than the usual "it was shipped on such and such date to distributor X." And, I think you're correct about the DAO hammers being the problem; I read that they apparently lacked sufficient mass for consistent ignition.

__________________
1st Signal Brigade, RVN '70

Nope not a fake, the "NY-1" stamp looks like smith and wesson factory all the way, I don't think that spurred hammer was sold at the NYPD equipment section (I never seen it sold there) so maybe it left the factory with the NY-1 and spurred hammer and sold at some other gunshop or dealer. One last thing, someone other than S&W could of changed out the hammer, but I'm leaning that it left the factory that way.
I hope this helps

You will know a fake right away the "NY-1" stamp is not lined up and looks like someone with a punch and hammer was having a bad day, also the actions are horrible binding, not smooth etc, you know right away some jerk was trying to make money.

One S&W store in long Island got busted for that, some cops from Long Island know the name, I rather not say since it was in the late 80's maybe they learned there lesson. I have seen guns they have sold, and checked them, they were horrible and were sent back returned.

My shop was located at 396 Broome St. in New York City when the Equipment Bureau was located at 400 Broome St., and a number of years after they left.
We repaired binding cylinders and hammers on NYPD purchased models.
All of this was done to help the men so as to not have to wait for a trip out to Rodman's neck or back to S&W.
Unfortunately when I retired my records were given to the dept. so I no longer am able to give the serial numbers of the revolvers both J and K frame stainless that we took care of as well as our being a Colt warranty station.
All guns that we repaired or adjusted were test fired before their return to the owners. Frankly they mostly left our shop in better than new condition.

Hey the model 10,and 64 NY-1 had the bobbed hammers. All of the model 60 J frames issued to the detectives and vice units had the hammer on the guns. My friend is a retired NYPD detective and has several of his issued revolvers including his model 60 he carried as a detective. It has the full hammer. His model 10 2" and 64 have the bobbed hammers.

__________________
M.J.Hanna

Bobbed hammer spurs in and of themselves do NOT cause faulty ignition. This has been proven time and again by top level USPSA revolver shooters who have revolvers with DA trigger pulls as light as six pounds with most of the hammer ground away. I personally removed the spur on my own Model 60-7 and it had no effect whatsoever on reliability. If these revolvers are not functioning properly, then they have other more serious problems. It sounds like hammers were being swapped without being fitted properly.

And by the way, that's a fine looking revolver. Even if it's not original, as long as it's smooth and reliable it's still worth more than any J Frame that's made today.

Dave Sinko