No breech face.

Possibly part of project to make a .22 caliber model 39/52??

Attached Images

	DSCN5158.jpg (93.2 KB, 247 views)
	DSCN5156.jpg (91.5 KB, 513 views)
	DSCN5157.jpg (64.6 KB, 178 views)
	DSCN5159.jpg (66.5 KB, 163 views)
	DSCN5160.jpg (64.3 KB, 161 views)

Additional pictures of mystery slide

Attached Images

	DSCN5161.jpg (72.3 KB, 94 views)
	DSCN5162.jpg (53.1 KB, 103 views)
	DSCN5163.jpg (53.6 KB, 450 views)
	DSCN5165.jpg (43.6 KB, 117 views)
	DSCN5164 (2).jpg (68.7 KB, 110 views)

Smith & Wesson did not make that slide

That is most likely from one of those blank firing replicas that were sold via Mail Order in the back of the magazines several decades ago

__________________
"Acta non verba"

By "alloy" I assume you mean aluminum? (I ask because steel is an alloy.) I am not aware of one, but did anyone manufacture a .22 conversion for the Model 39? Don't know, but if that's an aluminum slide, maybe...

__________________
Pisgah

My first guess would have been part of the old Peters-Stahl .22 conversion kit for the M39.

Seeing the S&W trademarks with the "lazy ampersand" inclines me to think it's a tool room prototype from S&W.

I've got some "interesting" slides and parts that came from an old S&W employee, so I know those kinds of things happened.

John

Yes, this came from estate of old S&W design engineer. As did the Model 39 .38 A.M.U. barrel I have listed on major auction site.

I believe this slide was part of an S&W attempt to make a .22 version of the model 39 or 59.

I previously had a very modified model 52 magazine made to shoot .22s

I'll be posting pictures of a very, very odd model 39 barrel with a .22 caliber modification.

It looks like a factory slide that got taken out of production prior to any
extractor cuts being made. The factory roll marks look good. If it is in fact an alum alloy, 22cal. seems logical. And may have come from a former employee. Dont know. In the dark.

__________________
Mike 2796
SoFo Bunch member

That IS one "lazy" ampersand.

.

__________________
Waiting for the break of day

Mike,
If you take a second look at the underside image of the slide, it is not that the breech face has not been cut, the metal is not there.

The entire firing pin tunnel and all the rest of the slides internal metal that would make this a firearm are missing. There is not even a place for the recoil spring guide rod or barrel to rest against. They have purposefully machined away the internals.

This was not an after thought, it was done prior to the slide being "blued" or whatever we are going to call the finish

If we look again at the lazy ampersand, it does not look like a Factory lazy ampersand. It is way lazier than an old model 39/59. Also the letter "O" is wrong. On the nickel 39 the "O" is slightly taller than wide, on the on the alloy slide the "O" looks like a circle.

The letter "S" looks wrong on the alloy slide as well, but that could be due to the angle of the image

If this were a tool room sample, the Factory would have used the existing roll die for the markings and the ampersand and "O" would look correct.

If you look at the slide catch notch, it is also shaped wrong.

These discrepancies are why I guessed that slide was not produced by the Factory

I still say this slide is from a non-firearm

__________________
"Acta non verba"

Like I said, Im in the dark.
Does that nickel 39 in the pic have a plated trigger?

__________________
Mike 2796
SoFo Bunch member

It would be cool if you could make a 22 LR bolt(like M41) to pin in the slide.

The notch cut out is correct for early slides from the 50s and 60s. Im looking at several. Your nickel? is an early 39-2. Probably 1971.
The roll marks are open for discussion, as several different dies were used due to wearing. Some other piece goes in the slide.

__________________
Mike 2796
SoFo Bunch member

Mike,
While I do not own model 39s from the 50s or 60s, I did just look at images of serial number 60360 and I agree the notch is consistent with the older Model 39s.

I agree, there was more than one roll die over the years. That is why I looked at several of my older Smith & Wessons when originally reading this thread and trying to make an evaluation since the ampersand looked wrong to me. I have not seen any examples of a lazy ampersand that looks like that one.

Please post an image of that roll mark from one of your Smith & Wessons for our discourse here.

It is a shame that Sal is not around to chime in. He had lots of examples of older 39s

I would agree that there theoretically could be a breech block that pins inplace like SIG used on the Early P22x pistols except that the slide pictured above shows no holes or other obvious method of securing such a breach block, so I do not think the visual evidence supports that conclusion

From your experience can you expand on how you envision such a breech being secured.

I want to know your thoughts on this

Perhaps the OP can post some images of the front and rear faces of the slide. I was wondering about the barrel bushing as well, but can not see that part of the slide in the provided images.

__________________
"Acta non verba"

There is a top view pic of the OPs slide that looks unusual. It has holes in the top that none of my slides have. If the slide was purchased from a member of the engineering dept, it could be the first try, of what we called "proof of concept". My eng. dept. had all its own machinery and parts.
If the slide had some screws/pins sticking out of it but it worked. You
proved your concept was viable and clean up was the next stage.
The first go around did not have to be production ready. Just saying.

__________________
Mike 2796
SoFo Bunch member

It came from a former S&W engineer's estate. He was actually the one who did a lot of the early design work on the model 59.

More stuff from estate...

Attached Images

	DSCN5195.jpg (86.2 KB, 63 views)
	DSCN5196.jpg (60.3 KB, 58 views)
	DSCN5198.jpg (29.9 KB, 55 views)
	DSCN5200.jpg (59.9 KB, 74 views)
	DSCN5201.jpg (65.2 KB, 54 views)

And this one.......

Attached Images

	DSCN5191.jpg (98.4 KB, 52 views)
	DSCN5194.jpg (95.6 KB, 50 views)
	DSCN5190.jpg (75.9 KB, 52 views)
	DSCN5189.jpg (82.5 KB, 48 views)
	DSCN5186.jpg (109.1 KB, 47 views)

S&W did make some aluminum slides. I had one designed for the mod 39, wide extractor. Wish I had it now.

The 6-1/2” barrel for the M52 is intriguing, not sure it would be useful as the swell on the end is for the bushing fit. Browningfn might find the slide that goes with it. ???

No idea of what the slides intended purpose was but the fat ampersand and little dimple notched slide stop slot are just like my early SW 9mm examples.

Thank you Mr. Brad. Finally a collector to chime in that knows what he is talking about. A true valued member of the pre-39 collector group. If you want to talk about them, buy one and study, study, study. I dont know about the Combat Masterpiece. Is that a pre-19?

__________________
Mike 2796
SoFo Bunch member

At risk of offending a segment of the revolver collectors, that would be the "pre Model 15". Let's call it by its real nomenclature!

BruceB, I believe I made my point!

__________________
Mike 2796
SoFo Bunch member

No comments on the .380 barrel??

browning, another example of energetic thinking in the engineering dept.
A few young engineers thought it might be neat to try a 380 and 22LR
adaptation to the existing 39 platform. They may have thought there were potential sales. They were doing their job.

__________________
Mike 2796
SoFo Bunch member

I stand corrected, pre-19 was a Combat Magnum. Still a flimsy K frame
chambered for the 357 Magnum. Im just not a revolver guy. Other than
The pre-28. Now there is a revolver.

__________________
Mike 2796
SoFo Bunch member