It's a Pre-Model 10, but, is it correct?

[tsellati]

Considering how beautiful my recent acquisition is (http://smith-wessonforum.com/s-w-ha...205146-please-welcome-newest-member-club.html) I cannot bring myself to shoot it at the range. So, although I had to dig a bit of a financial hole for myself, but I just picked up this 1953 (?) S&W Pre-Model 10 revolver to use as a shooter -

Bluing looks decent over all and here are some photos of the revolver's various markings -

It appears to be all matching except for the grips -

The mismatched grips then led me to question whether they are even correct for this vintage revolver. Here is a close up of the grips -

If the grips are correct, I do strongly suspect the screw holding them in place is not. The screw only loosely holds the grips to the frame. Where might I get a correct screw for this grip set?

Finally, are the hammer and front sight correct for a Pre-Model 10?

So, with some of the issues detailed above do you I got nicked too bad having paid $300 shipped for the revolver?

Thanks for sharing your expertise and opinions.

Tim

 

[Black_Sheep]

Grips and screw are wrong for a pre model 10, the front sight looks like it was cut for a colored insert. (not original)

$300 might be a bit high for the gun as is but if you are happy with the deal that's all that matters...

 

[Goony]

I'm thinking that hammer might also be a later production replacement.

 

[wheelgun28]

I am sure others will chime in but.

You are correct the grips are not for the gun they are newer, that gun should of had diamond magnas, also the screw is incorrect. I think the original screw had an odd thread size. When someone stuck that screw in they probably ruined the threads in the grip. You would now need to find a better screw the same size as you now have, or replace the grips with aftermarkets or something you like.

Also the front sight has been modified to take an insert, the insert is missing. This will make the gun "not a collectable" piece, but the insert can be very nice on a gun you will shoot IMHO.

That gun will sell for more that $300 around here so I think you did well!

 

[Black_Sheep]

Here's a nice pre model 10 (M&P) that was previously posted on the S&W forum, the hammer profile does look different...

 

[Dragon88]

Nope it's not correct, and honestly I see no reason to put money into correct stocks or anything like that. Get an insert installed in the front sight and then get it to the range, it should make for a fine shooter.

 

[DCWilson]

I think $300 is fine for that revolver. You bought it as a shooter and it is tough to get a decent shooter for much less than that. If you want to look for period correct stocks, go right ahead. You might want to see if the larger target stocks would be right for you on that gun. At the time the gun was shipped, you could get either relieved or non-relieved target stocks.

Yes, the front sight has been modified to take a colored insert. You could probably cut a proper insert from a piece of flexible plastic like an old coffee can lid. White, red, yellow -- the world is wide open.

The hammer is from a later period, as suggested above. In 1953 the standard hammer would have been the short-action "speed" hammer (known to some as the "fish hook" hammer) that was introduced four or five years earlier. The hammer on your gun is called the low-spur hammer, and it was standard during the 1960s and later.

The front sight modification is a very particular change, and the hammer's lower thumbpiece position is thought by many to be ergonomically better than its predecessors. I wonder if a previous owner made a couple of changes in order to get a revolver that was a little easier to use with old eyes and old hands.

 

[Art Doc]

Post 1968 stocks.

Replacement hammer.

Modified front sight.

 

[44wheelman]

Since it's a"shooter", does it shoot better than, or worse than a $300 gun?

I've gotten rid of M10's because they didn't shoot to POA, & have others because the make one hole groups at 25'.

 

[tsellati]

The hammer is from a later period, as suggested above. In 1953 the standard hammer would have been the short-action "speed" hammer (known to some as the "fish hook" hammer) that was introduced four or five years earlier. The hammer on your gun is called the low-spur hammer, and it was standard during the 1960s and later.

The front sight modification is a very particular change, and the hammer's lower thumbpiece position is thought by many to be ergonomically better than its predecessors. I wonder if a previous owner made a couple of changes in order to get a revolver that was a little easier to use with old eyes and old hands.

With the hammer being of 1960s vintage, front sight modification, and the grip set being post-1968 (as suggested by SaxonPig) is it possible this revolver was modified/updated for use during the Vietnam War?

Tim

 

[OIF2]

Here's an almost NIB M&P from '53. Notice the front sight, stocks and hammer:

 

[Oyeboteb]

I think this Revolver may also have been re-Blued sometime back...maybe when the front Sight cut was done.

 

[aHFo3]

If you go with a Hogue grip you can bypass using the factory screw all together. They mount from a strut that attaches to the stud at the butt of the frame.

I know ugly rubber grips are fairly blasphemous around here, but they work great on range guns.

 

[Mack]

With the hammer being of 1960s vintage, front sight modification, and the grip set being post-1968 (as suggested by SaxonPig) is it possible this revolver was modified/updated for use during the Vietnam War?

Tim

Anything is possible but why would you think this? It is not a military issued piece and millions of M&P's were used by police, security guards and civilians. Also the grips prove nothing, anyone can slap a set of grips on at any time.

 

[tsellati]

Anything is possible but why would you think this? It is not a military issued piece and millions of M&P's were used by police, security guards and civilians. Also the grips prove nothing, anyone can slap a set of grips on at any time.

Merely asking. But, as I have come to learn, unless it were a private purchase the revolvers issued during the Vietnam War would have markings similar to those found on USGI WWII Victory revolvers. In fact, there were quite a number of WWII era revolvers re-pressed into service during the Vietnam War.

Tim

 

[walnutred]

From a shooting revolver standpoint I think the previous owner improved it and I think the speculation about it being done for an older shooter is correct. I find the older half moon front sight to be increasingly difficult to see clearly. With replacement grips already on the revolver you lose nothing by replacing them with rubbers, if that is what you like. In fact, I would be willing to bet that all the changes were done at once. Someone simply sent their old revolver to a gunsmith for an overhaul which included a sight insert, new hammer, action job, grips and a re-blue. To me this indicates the previous owner had a good idea what they were looking for in a revolver.

 

[H Richard]

Brownell's sells a Front Sight insert kit, with various colors available.

 

[Mack]

I agree that the improvements make it a better shooter, replace that insert and enjoy.

 

[w10085]

Welcome!

Welcome to the forum! I think you will find it a very nice shooter. It shot well for me. All the mods were done to the pistol before I got it so I know no history. As we emailed before, you can probably find a set of rubber grips that fit your hand for a reasonable price. To me there is just nothing like a 5-screw K-Frame. My son has a 1981 model 10 and it just does not seem as smooth or as well finished.

And by the way, it does shoot to point of aim with 158 gr SWC in front of 3.4 grains of Bullseye.

I hope you enjoy it.

 

[Oldiron]

If you can find an old hard plastic toothbrush (color of your choice) it is very easy to cut a replacement insert. For grips I prefer a set of target stocks. I can usually find some decent shooters at the gun shows for $25-40 a set. I despise trojanmires.
Larry