I agree, this one screams for a letter! Here's what the ejector rod end looks like, hopefully Mike Priwer will be along and clarify this, He is very knowledgeable about this model.
Got hold of a S&W marked U.S.N. !!?
- Thread starter J.R.M.
- Start date
opoefc
US Veteran
David has it right, I think. That's a left over Navy contract frame used for a later commercial gun. I have seen a few others like this over the years, both Navy & the Army contract guns. Remember, S&W never threw away anything that could use to make a gun in those days. Another clue is the the grips are commercial grips, not Navy contract grips. Ed.
gkitch
Member
If it were accepted by the Navy would it not have some kind of special marking to indicate same? Where and what would that be?
"If it were accepted by the Navy would it not have some kind of special marking to indicate same? Where and what would that be?"
The Navy guns had the butt marking (shown in post # 3) with a number. This revolver has all of the correct markings EXCEPT for the number, hence the belief it is a contract overrun gun.
The Navy guns had the butt marking (shown in post # 3) with a number. This revolver has all of the correct markings EXCEPT for the number, hence the belief it is a contract overrun gun.
lshaffer
Member
It looks to me that the last character in the serial is "@" instead of a number nine.
2K7
Member
- Joined
- Jun 10, 2009
- Messages
- 360
- Reaction score
- 427
You guys are something else. Thanks a ton. I don't know if the wife will OK $50 to find out. Fixed incomes in gun collecting are a killer for those of you who aren't there yet !!
Many thanks.
At my house, I'm in charge.....oh, and my wife has given me permission to say so.
Backwards @
I have one of this type revolver serial # 25518. Mine was shipped January 20, 1903 to the United States Navy, Brooklyn Navy Yard, Brooklyn NY. Shipped with a 6" barrel. However, some time during
it's life the barrel was cut down to 4" and the Navy markings on the
butt were ground off. The letter states it's classified as a.38 Hand
Ejector, Military & Police Second Model or Model of 1902. Hope this
Helps you out J.R.M.
A few pics.
it's life the barrel was cut down to 4" and the Navy markings on the
butt were ground off. The letter states it's classified as a.38 Hand
Ejector, Military & Police Second Model or Model of 1902. Hope this
Helps you out J.R.M.
A few pics.
I have seen that odd curly 9 in other gun numbers, and I am kicking myself that I can't remember where. If it is on one of my revolvers I will spot it eventually and post a photo. If it was a photo of somebody else's gun, I will try to remember to copy its location and post a link to it.
Yeah, it had me asking questions too. I checked it out as close as I could. Maybe the pic I shot didn't do it justice. I think, base on checking and rechecking, it is a double struck "9". The other two serial number stamps are smaller dies and it looks like a "9".
I'll call it a 9 until someone proves its not I guess.
gkitch
Member
Well, I bought this gun from JRM this morning, thus taking charge of the detective work from here. I will send off for a letter and get back here with the answers.
gkitch
Member
off to Roy
I sent in the form to Roy Jinks along with the check and several good photos.
Now, Is there anybody who can help me with a replacement ejector head for this 1st Model?
I sent in the form to Roy Jinks along with the check and several good photos.
Now, Is there anybody who can help me with a replacement ejector head for this 1st Model?
This gun is not in the range of the Navy contract, which was 1000
guns in the range of 5000 to 6000.. That is, those guns
took the whole block of 1000 serial numbers. Its hard to say what
this is, exactly. My first thought was that it was an extra frame from
the Navy contract, made up later into a standard .38 M&P . But,
I doubt the factory would have made up and shipped a commercial
gun with USN stamped on the butt.
I don't think that there is any way that such a late serial number
found it way into that early Navy contract. This almost looks like
a Navy contract frame that had its serial number changed, and then
received the cylinder and barrel from a gun that originally bore that
serial number.
That gun that Muddyboot is showing is the second Navy contract, for
the 1902 model.
Mike Priwer
guns in the range of 5000 to 6000.. That is, those guns
took the whole block of 1000 serial numbers. Its hard to say what
this is, exactly. My first thought was that it was an extra frame from
the Navy contract, made up later into a standard .38 M&P . But,
I doubt the factory would have made up and shipped a commercial
gun with USN stamped on the butt.
I don't think that there is any way that such a late serial number
found it way into that early Navy contract. This almost looks like
a Navy contract frame that had its serial number changed, and then
received the cylinder and barrel from a gun that originally bore that
serial number.
That gun that Muddyboot is showing is the second Navy contract, for
the 1902 model.
Mike Priwer
Last edited:
Mike
Did the second Navy contract have the same type of lettering on the revolvers butt?
gkitch
Member
Here's a hopeful theory: perhaps a naval Officer special ordered it as a personal gun. It would have been so identical to the issue version that he could carry it without noticeably violating regulation...or perhaps a retirement gift. I guess the S&W liason officer could have presented it to the officer who helped them land the previous contract as a small token of the company's appreciation.
This is one historical letter that I sure am hoping comes through with some clues.
This is one historical letter that I sure am hoping comes through with some clues.
Do we know at what point in the mfg process the USN markings would be put on, and/or the S/N put on? Could it have been one that was USN marked, and lost in the shuffle for a time and when found S/N marked and processed?
MB
The markings are slightly different. Here is a 1902 Navy butt-marking:
The 1899 that is posted above does not have the complete Navy
marking on the butt. Below the 38 DA, there should be a line with
a triangle with a B inside of it. That is missing from this gun, as
is the Navy serial number following the No . The triange on the
1899 is replaced by the arrow on the 1902.
Also, the Navy inspector for the 1899 was Lt Charles A Brand, and his
initials C A B would be the last line of marking on the butt of a
1899 Navy. For the 1902 Navy, the inspector was Lt John A Bell,
and his initials J A B are the last line of a 1902 Navy Butt.
Its also worthwhile to note that the 1899 Navy serial numbers are
1 - 1000 , in the S&W range of 5000 to 6000, whereas the 1902
Navy serial numbers are 1001 - 2000 , in the S&W range of 25001 -
26000.
Regards, Mike Priwer
The markings are slightly different. Here is a 1902 Navy butt-marking:
The 1899 that is posted above does not have the complete Navy
marking on the butt. Below the 38 DA, there should be a line with
a triangle with a B inside of it. That is missing from this gun, as
is the Navy serial number following the No . The triange on the
1899 is replaced by the arrow on the 1902.
Also, the Navy inspector for the 1899 was Lt Charles A Brand, and his
initials C A B would be the last line of marking on the butt of a
1899 Navy. For the 1902 Navy, the inspector was Lt John A Bell,
and his initials J A B are the last line of a 1902 Navy Butt.
Its also worthwhile to note that the 1899 Navy serial numbers are
1 - 1000 , in the S&W range of 5000 to 6000, whereas the 1902
Navy serial numbers are 1001 - 2000 , in the S&W range of 25001 -
26000.
Regards, Mike Priwer
There are two other things that concern me about this gun. One is the
finish. These first-contract Navy guns were stored in barrels aboard
ship. They were just randomly tossed in. Every one that I have
ever seen had not more than 10% finish. At one time there were
bunches of them sold at several RIA auctions, and they all had the
same finish - as did the one I owned. The condition on this one
is too good . I think its been refinished, based on what I know they
should look like. Also, the forward side-plate screw hole looks dished.
Second, the serial number stamped on the front grip strap does not
look right. The "4" is tilted slightly, as though it was stamped by
hand. Also, the bottom of the "4" is not right. And, the last digit,
the "9" , looks very strange. I agree with an earlier posting - it
looks like "@", and not a 9.
Finally, there should be a star stamped on the barrel, crane, and
the rear of the cylinder. I assume it would be on the underside of
the barrel.
Mike Priwer
finish. These first-contract Navy guns were stored in barrels aboard
ship. They were just randomly tossed in. Every one that I have
ever seen had not more than 10% finish. At one time there were
bunches of them sold at several RIA auctions, and they all had the
same finish - as did the one I owned. The condition on this one
is too good . I think its been refinished, based on what I know they
should look like. Also, the forward side-plate screw hole looks dished.
Second, the serial number stamped on the front grip strap does not
look right. The "4" is tilted slightly, as though it was stamped by
hand. Also, the bottom of the "4" is not right. And, the last digit,
the "9" , looks very strange. I agree with an earlier posting - it
looks like "@", and not a 9.
Finally, there should be a star stamped on the barrel, crane, and
the rear of the cylinder. I assume it would be on the underside of
the barrel.
Mike Priwer
gkitch
Member
Mike, was the star stamp a Navy mark or something that originated at S&W?
If it was ever refinished, it was at the factory and a long, long time ago. The blueing is worn but the markings are crisp.
Last edited:
Greg
As I read Roy's book, the star was stamped at the factory, before the
guns were shipped. There was a Navy inspector present at the factory,
and its possible that he applied the star.
Does your gun have the star marking ?
Regards, Mike
As I read Roy's book, the star was stamped at the factory, before the
guns were shipped. There was a Navy inspector present at the factory,
and its possible that he applied the star.
Does your gun have the star marking ?
Regards, Mike
Similar threads
- Locked
