What do I have???

[Calaveras Slim]

If our presumption is correct, would the British pistol have marking on the butt? The only way to tell that it is military is the British proof marks on the side plate.

 

[Waidmann]

What I can see shows a Birmingham View (BV) overlapping the crossed flags military proof and the oppossing arrowheads indicating sold out of service. The Enfield inspection/acceptance marks if they survive are under the left grip. A .455 Number 2.

I saw ths gun or its twin on an auction site within the month.

 

[handejector]

My Lord. A .44 MAGNUM cylinder in a 100-year old .455 HE2nd Frame?

That looks like what my old man used to call an "accident waiting to happen..."

And you talk about ugly... geeez. The rib on the breech end of the 29 barrel hanging out there in space is just gross.

No disrespect intended, but you'd have trouble GIVING me that frankengun. If I owned it, I'd immediately break it up and sell the parts for fear that some uninformed newby would slip a 300 grain "Sledgehammer" load into the chamber and touch it off...

Drew

I agree.
That was not a responsible conversion.
That is almost certainly a 455- 2nd Model frame. It is not up to the 44 magnum.
Early 44 mags stretched the Model 1950 frames they were built on. Open Roy's History and on page 218 you can see an "especially heat treated" Model 1950 frame used for an early experimental 44 mag.

 

[Hondo44]

Well Slim, you have a very interesting project.A few comments:

1. Conversion to 44-40 can be done in that cylinder, no problem. Plenty strong enough, plenty of length and plenty of 'meat'. It was in fact a factory caliber on the 1st model Hand Ejector but scarce.

2. You already stated that you intend to use only 44 Spl in it and that's the right decision.

3. your gun does not look buffed so thinking the markings are buffed off except for logo and proofs in actuality is because there were no other frame markings, i.e., the right side address and/or 'Made in USA' was not introduce until years after your gun was made.

4. 44 Mag 4" barrels are fairly desireable so a sale of your bar & cyl or trade for another caliber (more matching the vintage of the frame like a barrel w/o rib) is very do-able.

5. If you decide to keep it as is, I'd blue the frame to match.

6. I notice the front sideplate screw that retains the cylinder yoke is a torx head screw. It must have been the only one someone could find to replace the original. But there's lot'sa sources for correct screws.

7. I presume you meant a 586; 588 is nonexistent.
What is stamped on the butt, just the serial #?
Let us know what you decide to do with it.

 

[Jim Watson]

A .44-40 reamer will not clean up a .44 Magnum chamber.
The .44 Magnum chamber is .458" I.D. over the case mouth.
The .44-40 chamber is only .443" I.D. over the case mouth due to the smaller standard bullet and thinner brass.

I would be complaining about whoever sold me that monstrosity to the whole world, too.

 

[Hondo44]

A .44-40 reamer will not clean up a .44 Magnum chamber.
The .44 Magnum chamber is .458" I.D. over the case mouth.
The .44-40 chamber is only .443" I.D. over the case mouth due to the smaller standard bullet and thinner brass.

I would be complaining about whoever sold me that monstrosity to the whole world, too.

Jim,
That's true but as was mentioned he needs to use 429 or 430 bullets for his bore so the .443 is now .446. He may get shorter case life but the thin 44-40 case will easily expand sufficiently and work well enough.

Just resize a couple of 44-40s (solid head) cases in 44 magnum dies, shoot them in a 44 Mag and see how well they work. There was a time early on when 44 Mag cases were not so easy to obtain or to afford.

He doesn't have a complaint, he "came into possession" of it that way.

 

[Calaveras Slim]

Well Slim, you have a very interesting project.A few comments:

1. Conversion to 44-40 can be done in that cylinder, no problem. Plenty strong enough, plenty of length and plenty of 'meat'. It was in fact a factory caliber on the 1st model Hand Ejector but scarce.

2. You already stated that you intend to use only 44 Spl in it and that's the right decision.

3. your gun does not look buffed so thinking the markings are buffed off except for logo and proofs in actuality is because there were no other frame markings, i.e., the right side address and/or 'Made in USA' was not introduce until years after your gun was made.

4. 44 Mag 4" barrels are fairly desirable so a sale of your bar & cyl or trade for another caliber (more matching the vintage of the frame like a barrel w/o rib) is very do-able.

5. If you decide to keep it as is, I'd blue the frame to match.

6. I notice the front sideplate screw that retains the cylinder yoke is a torx head screw. It must have been the only one someone could find to replace the original. But there's lot'sa sources for correct screws.

7. I presume you meant a 586; 588 is nonexistent.
What is stamped on the butt, just the serial #?
Let us know what you decide to do with it.

Actually, I suffer from the old timers disease, CRS. I am referring to the Texas Wagon Train Commemorative. For some reason I thought the model was 588 but guess not.

I suspect if I can come up with the money I will have the frame blued. Money is a little tight right now.

Your comment, as well as all the comments are taken in good faith and I do appreceate the feedback

 

[DCWilson]

Slim, do any of the .44 Mag parts have serial numbers on them? Rear face of the cylinder, in the ejector rod shroud under the barrel, on the rear facing surface of the yoke? It would be nice to identify the departed donor gun if we can.

I agree that you might be able to make a project out of this. If you have a smith do any work on it, please ask him to do something about reducing the barrel rib so it will blend into the frame contours. I'm with Drew on that one. Sometimes I see prewar .38/44 Outdoorsman that has been "fixed" with one of the left over postwar OD barrels you can get from Numrich. Bad match. Just bad.

I too would consider it improvident to put a .44 Mag round down the tube of that assembly.

Is that an Allen-head screw on the sideplate?

 

[Jim Watson]

That's true but as was mentioned he needs to use 429 or 430 bullets for his bore so the .443 is now .446. He may get shorter case life but the thin 44-40 case will easily expand sufficiently and work well enough.

I expect it will shoot, David Woodruff would rechamber a .401 Herter Powermag to .38-40 on the same basis. But it will still pile kluge on top of kluge. I don't guess there is any way to fix this thing.

 

[Sebago Son]

Yeah and Dave Woodruff is dead.

 

[Jim Watson]

So's Elmer Keith, D.B. Wesson, John M. Browning, etc., etc.
We can still learn from them.

 

[Sebago Son]

I own a Woodruff converted Model 28. Frankly, it's not that hot. Compared to the work done by Stroh, Bowen, Cannon, Horvath and others, frankly, it's hack.

My point is that, based upon his work I own and have seen, I'm not sure I would hold the man's thinking up as the paragon of pistol-smithing excellence.

 

[Hondo44]

Actually, I suffer from the old timers disease, CRS. I am referring to the Texas Wagon Train Commemorative. For some reason I thought the model was 588 but guess not.

I suspect if I can come up with the money I will have the frame blued. Money is a little tight right now.

Your comment, as well as all the comments are taken in good faith and I do appreciate the feedback

Slim,
Oh yes, I should have known since yoiu were talking about 44-40, it's the 544. I think David is right, it looks like an allen head screw not a torx head as I suggested. I don't imagine re-bluing just the frame would be that much; less than the whole gun with the harder to polish barrel and cylinder.

What's the history on this gun that came into possession of?

Well please update us on your project and thanks for sharing,

 

[Hondo44]

I own a Woodruff converted Model 28. Frankly, it's not that hot. Compared to the work done by Stroh, Bowen, Cannon, Horvath and others, frankly, it's hack.

My point is that, based upon his work I own and have seen, I'm not sure I would hold the man's thinking up as the paragon of pistol-smithing excellence.

To be objective, Woodruff, like 100s of gunsmiths that have moved on now, was from another era. Those were the days before the $2-3000 custom conversions and Bowen type specialists. Like Bowen says on his website: "...we're not gunsmiths".

Gunsmiths of the time did many things that are unacceptable today in retrospect and were less sophisticated with different levels of skill. But they did what their customer base could afford or they wouldn't have had a customer base. They didn't have the technology available today or the capitol for hi tech machinery. They also didn't have the legal liability issues of today.

Things like 44 Spl conversions on K frames or old rifle sights used for revolver target conversions are no-nos in todays world.

By the way, can you post your converted 28? I'd like to see that hack job.

 

[Sebago Son]

Woodruff Conversion...

By the way, can you post your converted 28? I'd like to see that hack job.

Sure can.....

This is a late "S" frame 28-2 that I had converted in 1976 by Woodruff.

The relined .452" is tube has a rough crown and is slightly off center.

The front sight height was not changed. This gun doesn't stay on the paper with 255 or 260 grain factory loads.

Chambers are rough.

But the most damning thing is the inconsistent head spacing depth to which the chambers were cut.

And the crowning touch is the crude remarking...

Do you have a Woodruff gun? I'd like to see photos of it to compare...

And about your supposition that technology didn't exist to do a better job... when why was Magna-port, MMC and Andy Cannon able to do such fine work at the time?

Drew

 

[smokey04]

I have a new 1955 Target cylinder and barrel[6 1/2"] and a 1950 Target barrel 6 1/2" unfinished all in .45 ACP. Thats the direction I would be thinking of going.If I kept it I would at least have the .44Mag marking on the barrel removed.As a previous poster said ,"that is an accident looking to happen"[should it get into the wrong hands].Nick

 

[Hondo44]

Sure can.....


This is a late "S" frame 28-2 that I had converted in 1976 by Woodruff.

The relined .452" is tube has a rough crown and is slightly off center.

The front sight height was not changed. This gun doesn't stay on the paper with 255 or 260 grain factory loads.

Chambers are rough.

But the most damning thing is the inconsistent head spacing depth to which the chambers were cut.

And the crowning touch is the crude remarking...

Do you have a Woodruff gun? I'd like to see photos of it to compare...

And about your supposition that technology didn't exist to do a better job... when why was Magna-port, MMC and Andy Cannon able to do such fine work at the time?

Drew

Thanks Drew, you definitely have a case for complaint. A sign of the times. The caliber re-markings were truly crude compared to todays for sure. Today they rebore rather than reline the bore.

Your examples of Magna-port, MMC and Andy Cannon are good ones; they surely were on the cutting edge of true modern revolver smiths. And King before them was another pro.

No I don't have a Woodruff. But I've seen similar examples. I'm curious, what did something like that cost back then if you remember?

 

[Sebago Son]

"... I'm curious, what did something like that cost back then if you remember?

Jim,

I remember very well... $60 for the reline & rechamber, $5 for the excellent remarking job... $12.50 for the orange colored "Red Ramp"...

Hell, I only paid $120 for the 28...

That was alot of money in 1976 for a struggling young engineering student and brand new husband...

But man.... I had a .45 Colt Smith & Wesson! Just like Skeeter said I should, and I was on top of the world!

Drew

 

[Hondo44]

LOL! I remember those lean times raising three kids very well and gas lines too! Yep Skeeter was the cause of much of my gun angst at the time as well!

 

[Jim Watson]

Well, I wasn't holding Woodruff up as a paragon of pistolsmithing, I gave him as somebody willing to run a chamber reamer into a gun even though it would not clean up the old chamber. As was being promoted for the OP's creation.

I have only seen one Woodruff here, a Ruger BH rechambered and relined .357 - .41.
It was ok until the owner wanted to shorten the barrel and solder the front sight down. Everybody wondered what the stuff running out the muzzle was. He didn't melt out all the epoxy, so was happy.