Merry Christmas all!

I have a 38 Master model 52-1. It is not mine, it is a family members who inherited it from her grandfather. I was asked to tell her what it is. Since my interests are mostly late pre/early post WW II, I’m a fish out of water.

From what I read in the 3rd edition, it is a target pistol, shoots 38 wad cutters, it was a “true single action”, offered with a counterweight and was introduced in 1963.

I have not asked Roy for a ship date yet, month and year, nor has it been lettered.

It has “A box”, no label, no serial # on the bottom. So, I can not verify it is “THE box”. Heck, it may be the wrong box all together. It has zero paperwork, no cleaning kit or a counterweight.

It does have 4 S&W stamped magazines, the bushing wrench and a trigger shoe which I highly suspect was not a factory item.

It is not without flaw. A few scratches here and there. A few very noticeable on the front strap, on the frame on top of the right grip and on the “round thing” on the right side, which I assume is part of the safety/de-cocker.....???

The checkering on the grips is sharp with a few blemishes. The medallions are a gold color, not sure if this is correct or....has the nickle been polished off?

Please provide any additional good to know info and a value. I have been watching GB auctions and they are all over the place. I’ve seen completed auctions from $1100-$1900. Of course condition and accessories play a part but I have not been able to make heads or tails of the realized prices.

Thank you!
Bob

F8411ADB-C6D1-4B65-8A25-78F218453C74.jpg

38BA1F5A-9F38-47F1-8C0F-137ED358B898.jpg

E96C484E-8F46-4AD9-80AD-82E850C9A566.jpg

4763875B-5CD8-46BF-8F89-EFA6D406FEA0.jpg

3F281034-8C88-45AF-979D-D6B04FF32D0F.jpg

__________________
Keep on keepin on
SWCA #-3282

My apologies for the upside down pictures. I can not seem to figure out how to correct it.

D9C5D95D-BE5C-4AA7-B259-08E69C3637D8.jpg

AEA85802-5EC5-4CDB-B5B0-F4CB3C895AEB.jpg

39100F39-23C0-4371-AFC0-458BBE03D654.jpg

B810EF6A-3D68-49A7-838D-124A3041FF54.jpg

Attached Images

E98D8506-3496-4448-9F85-1C342C2A346C.jpg (42.9 KB, 39 views)

__________________
Keep on keepin on
SWCA #-3282

57DA94E1-A220-44F5-A177-94684ADBDD72.jpg

3FE33836-F7DE-4FAD-878F-615F2A94EE9C.jpg

66EAAF9F-FE05-42D7-8BAF-A1BA5703BB9C.jpg

Thanks for the help!

Happy new year! It’s gotta get better right?

__________________
Keep on keepin on
SWCA #-3282

Can only guess by your serial number, maybe 1968-1969 production. There would not be a SN on the bottom of the box, it would be on an end label affixed to the box lid. It would be on the opposite end from the “.38 Master” that you captured in the picture. That box may or may not be it’s original, but it is definitely the correct box for that pistol. (which would mean it is probably it’s original box...)

The trigger shoe is not original. It shipped with two mags when it was new. It also had a rod, brush, mop and a SAT. Indeed a counterweight was available but it was never an option as-new shipped with the pistol. The stock medallions are the correct color. That bushing wrench is also original and it is pure junk and it would be my wish that they never existed and that nobody would ever use one of them on any 52.

The Model 52 was made in three variants, it could be argued that is was made in 3-1/2. The first was the 52 no-dash and it debuted in 1961 with 3,500 units. This pistol was DA/SA and the DA function could be manually locked out. The 52-1 was single action only and most often report that it has the finest trigger of all three variants. The 52-1 also added the frame cut to hold the accessory counterweight.

The 52-2 was the final version, offered from 1971 until the end of production in 1993. This version has the revised, modern shorter and slimmer extractor. Because of this updated extractor, the 52-2 tends to be the most sought after of the three and also often tends to bring more demand on the open market.

Demand for any/all 52’s is tempered somewhat by the fact that these will -ONLY- function with flush full wadcutter ammo, which isn’t popular or widely available these days. It can be found, but most of us that shoot a 52 regularly are handloaders that feed it with our own ammo.

The 52 (any variant) is a truly elite handgun and if it were chambered in a mainstream, available cartridge, I’ll bet they would trade hands at twice the price that they currently do.

The safety is a simple single sided hammer block safety and not a decocker of any kind. There is a magazine disconnect safety on all (unaltered) 52 pistols.

The magazines are a whole market of their own and routinely bring beyond a hundred for each.

What is yours worth? Tough call. You have already seen the market for them — Gunbroker. There exists no larger marketplace for 52’s, Gunbroker always has the most activity on them. If you sell it, you would do better to include two magazines as it originally came and hold the two others for sale on their own.

Any other questions? Be specific! There are a number of us here that love these. I have three myself and nobody loves ‘em more than I do, not even “real competitors.” <roll eyes>

What Sevens said so well. I own 6 of them including a “no dash” I got yesterday from a member . I normally only shoot one of the 52-2’s as it is “cosmetically challenged”, and I dont mind getting it dirty. As yours sits with 2 magazines, I would probably see it priced around 1650 at a gun show.

Thank you both for the comments and info.

I do not have specific questions as I don’t know what to ask.

I don’t believe she wants to sell it, after all it was her grandfathers. But.....should the need arise, knowing a value/start point is essential.

If anyone can add to Sevens and Model52’s comments please do.

Bob

__________________
Keep on keepin on
SWCA #-3282

You have a minimally used Mod 52-1. I would est it to be in 95%+ condition from what I see. The value of $1000 to $1200 is commonly seen for ones in this condition. As Sevens pointed out being a 38 Wad Cutter "only" caliber it doesn't have a mainstream following. Look at the next variant, the Mod 952. It fires the standard 9mm round, and you see values for them from $2500 to $4000.

You need to just "try it". Once you shoot a 52 you can appreciate the accuracy capability of it. Probably the best out of the box trigger of any commercial handgun ever built. Hopefully she will let you borrow it from time to time.

__________________
H Richard
SWCA1967 SWHF244

There are many who like a 52 but will avoid the no-dash and 52-1 due to the old style long extractor. This old style extractor is very similar to the original style on the Model 39 which eventually proved to be somewhat problematic. When they redesigned the 39 extractor and moved to the newer design, they did the same thing with the 52/52-1 then the Model 52-2 was born.

I wasn’t cruising the gun culture in 1970 but in looking back, it seems that everyone who loved the 52 back then ordered extra old-style long extractors for their beloved 52 and 52-1 pistols in the event of breakage. And these days you can OFTEN find mothballed old 52-1’s pistols offered for sale with all the goodies along with it, and the extra extractor sits waiting patiently though it was never needed.

Folks that want to explore a 52 for the first time these days gravitate to the 52-2 almost exclusively and this is the reason that the market favors them.

It’s interesting, in my opinion that the “dash 2” is “more desirable” than a “no dash” or a “dash 1”. What you are saying about the extractor makes sense, each “dash” was a change of some sort to address an issue or speed/simplify the manufacturing process.

What I find interesting is that a “no dash” or “dash 1”, when speaking about revolvers, at least certain types, model 17’s, 27’s, 28’s or 29’s are more desirable. For certain I’m speaking towards “collecting” in the sense that these examples are scarce or dare I say rare.

I’m not trying to argue what you folks are telling me, remember I’m a fish out of water here. Just pointing out something I noticed.

Thank you, I appreciate the help!
Bob

__________________
Keep on keepin on
SWCA #-3282

Agreed, in this case it seems counter intuitive. By and large, when all else is equal, the market says older is better. But there are exceptions of course, and the exceptions are typically driven by a particular point.

It is my personal belief that the 52/52-1 extractor is NOT a weak point, but if you were able to poll every single participant on the globe who has an opinion, my belief would be in the minority.

The newer style extractor pivots on a pin and is held taut by a coil spring. It can snap over a cartridge rim more fluidly by design, even though it should not be subjected to this. The old style does not pivot and it isn’t really designed to move, and would not last under harsh handling conditions.

I believe the original no-dash 39 was treated harshly way back in an age where gun handling hadn’t evolved quite as much and the original design failed. While I’m sure that some 52/52-1 extractors have failed, I don’t believe it was an epidemic.

In my own experience, my test sample size is simply too small. I have only a single 52-1 pistol and my others and all the pistols I encouraged my friends to get are all 52-2 pistols. But I can say with full confidence that my 52-1 trigger is better than any 52-2 I’ve ever met. Not by a wide margin, but I can notice it easily.

Sevens, I learn from you every time you post. Aren’t there more 52-2’s around as well, so they are more available?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

That’s kind of you to say, thank you. I would certainly guess there are more 52-2 than there are 52/52-1 but by and large, 52’s are not short in supply, so it isn’t all too difficult to find one. Relatively rarity isn’t having a large effect on the market, my opinion of course.

There are a couple things said “off the cuff” a whole lot in our hobby. Three of them come to mind.

1) “They sure don’t make ‘em like they used to!”

2) “Well they aren’t making any more of ‘em!”

3) “Fewer and fewer of these are showing up and these are getting harder to find!”

Let’s examine these. With #1, I absolutely agree. It’s my opinion that S&W hasn’t made anything to the level of quality and ability of the Model 52 since roughly 2010. Personally, I think it’s absurd to suggest that S&W makes anything currently that should occupy the same room as a Model 52. The last closest thing S&W made that approaches the 52 were the true Performance Center Limited series of pistols, none made since 2011 I believe.

Number 2... for sure, S&W isn’t making any more of these, I cannot imagine they ever will. I don’t think the focus of this company is anything like what it once was. Never say never when it comes to the future, but the .38 Wadcutter is a “barely alive” specific loading and it is rarely seen or heard from outside of handloaders.

On to #3, which I disagree with vehemently. While YES, a few examples are lost to flood or fire damage or “lost in a boating accident”, this preposterous idea that long out of production guns aren’t showing up is ludicrous. Perhaps it sounds dark to say it out loud... but the fact is that folks who bought these guns in their absolute heyday are passing on to the great shooting range in the sky. These and other fantastic guns from the 60’s and 70’s are showing up routinely by heirs who have little or no interest and continuing to say “yeah, these are harder and harder to find” is wholly inaccurate.

In these days of internet gun shopping, finding a sublime S&W Model 52 is a helluva lot easier and faster than it was 10 or 20 years ago, and you are also shopping in a larger pool of available guns from which to choose.

You don’t HAVE to be a handloader to enjoy a 52 but it surely helps. And if you aren’t a handloader, a .38 Wadcutter is a fantastic place to start your journey at the load bench, and there are lots of us out there that are willing to help.

The 52/52-1 use a spring steel extractor and a controlled feed system very similar to the 1911. The cartridge rim is supposed to slide up under the extractor as the round feeds.
Never, ever drop a round in the chamber and close the slide on it. This forces the extractor to bend and jump over the rim and can lead to weakening or breaking the extractor. Always feed from the magazine only.
My guess is that this very practice is what led to breakage and distrust of the early 39s & 52/52-1.
My own 52-1 has never had a problem.

I agree with all except the part I highlighted in red. I don't believe that there actually was a huge problem of 52/52-1 extractor failure. I would love love --LOVE-- to dig through mountains of evidence on this subject but as far as I can tell, such evidence (either way!) fails to exist and the good folks who were knee deep in the Model 52 from 1961 to, say, 1980... are not posting up all of their experience for us to learn from.

I believe the 52-2 extractor upgrade was due to manufacturing streamlining and it wasn't necessarily to address a problem with the 52/52-1.

That your 52-1 extractor has never had a problem is a tiny nugget of evidence that supports my belief.

A very valid point Sir. Like most gun makers, S&W more often made changes to ease or cheapen manufacturing rather than correcting a problem.
But then, I've always believed that the extractor issues were vastly overblown.

It definitely makes sense from a manufacturing standpoint that when the 39-2 went in to production and the Model 59 around the same time, it only made good business sense to update the design on the Model 52-1 too.

The actual extractor itself is not the same between the 39 and 52, but the design is absolutely similar, and keeping those parts similar makes the most sense.

This backs up my idea that the out of production 52/52-1/52-2 would be more popular today if it were chambered in a widely available round... however it must also be pointed out that the 952 pistols are in a whole different place in the market for many reasons, not just because they are chambered in 9mm.

These guns debuted at an MSRP that was double-plus of the last, highest MSRP the 52-2 ever had, and all of the 952's added up together were produced in much smaller quantities than the 22 year run of the Model 52 variants. The 952 was made in small quantities between the year 2000 and 2011.

Sevens,
You have received alot of information on the 52, most of which I heartily agree with. What I would add is a few historical items of interest:
S&W began the 52 heritage at the request of the Army Markmanship Unit back in 1959/60. They requested a conversion of the 9mm double action Model 39 (very popular, based on the WWII P38). AMU was working on a new experimental cartridge called the .38AMU (or was it MMU?). Basically this was a .38 special with a semi-rimless design.
S&W complied with this request and produced 87 units which ended up with the designation "52A". These are particularly collectable and still show up from time to time.
S&W determined there was a market (Bullseye Competition) for this concept in .38 Special and began production in 1960 with the Model 52 (no dash). As stated earlier, these pistols were still based on the double action Model 39 which a screw detent for single-action only function. User complaints about this trigger prompted a complete redesign of the trigger which resulted in the Model 52-1 with just about the best trigger ever produced for a factory target pistol. Of particular note, each Model 52 was built by a single gunsmith, their mark can be found on the trigger guard. The triggers were tested using manual weights to around 2.5lbs trigger pull weight, again something you won't find on factory firearms.
The Model 52-2 was again the result of customer concerns with extractor breakage, and subsequent redesign in 1970 and continued in production I believe until 1993.
What is most interesting (to me) is this firearm came with an accuracy guarantee. S&W guaranteed 10-shot grouping of 3 1/8" at fifty yards (size of the Bullseye target). S&W accomplished this guarantee by shooting a 10-shot group with each pistol at fifty yards, any pistol grouping larger than 2" went back to the pistolsmith for rework.
The pictures of this 52-1 look like this pistol is in excellent condition and the number of magazines in certainly a big plus. However, I would not recommend selling it until there is a good reason to do so.

This is a very good post.
It also stands as an illuminating contrast to another post here that describes so-called "more evolved" gun handling. Ironically, it is the later uninformed use of the M52 that caused these breakages.
For trained target shooters, firing under match conditions, you dropped the slide on a five round magazine for the first shot of your course of fire, be it the slow fire stage, timed fire, or rapid fire. The M52 was designed not only specifically, but strictly, for target use. Why people try to shoehorn the M52 into something it was never intended for, when there's an abundance of other options, is incomprehensible.
For an excellent reference on the history of the S&W model 52, I strongly recommend the following book by Bill Jenkins. He provides a well researched perspective from the standpoint of the various U.S. military pistol marksmanship units.

http://www.odcmp.org/0305/JenkinsRev...%20competition.

It's also interesting to read the earlier post concerning relative values for the original 38 wadcutter vs. the later 9mm version of the M52.
From the target competition perspective, many felt that S&W really "blew it" when they announced the reintroduction of the M52....but, in 9mm!
Oh well, I guess tastes change!

See attached pic of the first review of the M52. Gun World March 1962

Attached Images

	IMG_5269.jpg (115.1 KB, 31 views)
	IMG_5273.jpg (121.4 KB, 37 views)

Certainly agree with Sixstring
The 52 and the Colt National Match MK III .38 were intended only as match target pistols.
I ordered Mr. Jenkins book almost four weeks ago, still waiting for it, and really looking forward to reading it.

Concerning Brister1984 post,
"Of particular note, each Model 52 was built by a single gunsmith, their mark can be found on the trigger guard. "
The fitter stamp is at the opening of the magazine well on the frame.
My stamp when I was building these were "C" and "O".
The same on the 9mm's. The mod 41 has the fitter stamp under the trigger guard, visible when opened.

I have a 52-2, so the question doesn't affect me for now, but since the 39 and 52 long extractors are similar, could a 39 long extractor be made to fit, maybe by re-shaping or welding, or at least drop in the same slot on a 52? Just wondering, in case I run into a 52/52-1 that needs one for a low price in the future.


BTW, my 952 is NOT the equal of my 52!

You got a beauty. Two suggestions.
1. hide the bushing wrench.
2. all ways chamber from the magazine.

__________________
Mike 2796
SoFo Bunch member

It was interesting to read the review. I wonder when it was written. In the article it states Bill is from Medina, Ohio. I have known Bill for about 10 years and he lives in Vero Beach, Florida and has a shop called 10X Gunsmithing. 10x Gunsmithing – Custom Guns and Gunsmithing

The USPS may be your problem in the wait for your book. I was lucky and bought my copy in his shop several years ago. Good book, interesting read.

I have had both the Colt Mid Range and the 52-1. I sold my Mid Range to buy my 52-1. Does that say anything as to what I think is the better pistol?

__________________
USMC 69-93 Combat Pistol Inst.

Thanks AJ - The Jenkins book finally showed up today and it is a great read.

Thanks Donk52 for correcting me on the fitters stamp, just checked my two 52-2s and found they are stamped "E" (1970) and "D" (1982).

So what does the stamp on the trigger guard represent?

Brister1984, Never thought about that stamp, it's a "T". I believe it a range stamp to show it was test fired. I always smile when someone says they have a gun that was "never fired". I've had some stubborn 52'2 that went back to the range more than a few times for various problems.

Thank you all, each and every one, for this thread. I’ve gotten almost as much out of it as all my other, previous searches combined. Brister1984, is that a pretty solid number for the total production of 38 AMU chambered guns? As stated elsewhere, the closest I’ve come to these was a 38 mag that came with Dad’s 52-2 he bought used.

If I’m not going too far astray, does anyone have similar information about the factory made 38 AMU guns/conversions for the 1911s? In my gun show days I picked up a mag for one of these too.

Again, many thanks to all of you, but now I’ve gotta break into my piggy bank and buy the Jenkins book.

Froggie

It is a good read. Have talked with Bill several times about repairs/modifications to old Match Pistols.

AJ

__________________
USMC 69-93 Combat Pistol Inst.

Wow, lots of great info here. OP You have a beautiful gun there. Save the info here as I am. For starters the magazines can seldom be found under $200 anymore and I have seen several much higher. Also I never use the supplied bushing wrench. I use a 3/4 inch 12 point socket. Just place it over the bushing, push down and gently turn by hand, and never overtighten. Have fun if You can borrow it from time to time.

Green Frog - First I don't consider myself to be an expert, just a student. Donk52 and 824TSV are the experts I always read and refer to. The numbers on the .38 AMU pistols comes from the Standard Catalog and Bill Jenkins book "U.S. Military and Marksmanship Automatic Pistols."
Here is what I have learned:
S&W produced four prototype .38 AMU pistols in the summer of 1960 S/N: T1059, T1060, T1061 and T1062 for the AMU. Two of these may have been alloy-frames. T1061 was used by Bill Blakenship to win several matches.
AMU requested additional pistols with alloy frames and S&W produced 87 units S/N range 35850-35937. Fifteen of these were delivered to the AMU in early 1961. The remaining 72 pistols stayed with S&W until June 1964 and were released for public consumption with the designation 52-A so they would not be confused with the Model 52 introduced in September 1961.

Nice pistol, one of these days one will follow me home.

thanks for showing us.

Colt received a Government Contract to produce the .38 AMU Conversions for the U.S. Army Marksmanship Unit which then lead them to produce a limited number of pistols. For anyone interested, Colt produced "about" 380-ish complete .38AMU pistols that were serialized in the Colt .38 Super serial# series. I say about "380-ish" because I don't believe anyone truly knows for sure. Only a look at Colt shipping records will confirm or deny this figure. It is "believed" that Colt produced about 100-ish .38AMU Conversions which consisted of the complete slide (without sights)/barrel with bushing/magazine/recoil spring and a #3 slide stop. Since the .38AMU Conversions were not serialized it's only speculation as to how many Colt actually produced but some theorize that about 100 were produced.