Mystery Gun- What is it?

[opoefc]

Jim, SWCA #819, Yes, a test of the grip screw would be better than nothing. If the grip screw will fit another pair of S&W factory grips, at least we know it's a S&W grip screw. I think the owner would be foolish not to allow a teat of a screw, as it's certainly to his advantage to determine a link to S&W by the gun's parts. I think we can pretty well discard the idea that it is a European copy, especially if it has S&W screws. Ed.

 

[bobsdad]

From the gunshop's post #65: "My customer told me that he obtained it from a close relative of his that received it as a gift from a little old lady in Rock Island, Illinois. This little old lady received it from her father-in-law, who worked at the Rock Island Arsenal from 1890-1920......"

If this is truly the case, it provides a greater chance that this might really be an employee "one off". Working at the Rock Island Arsenal, depending on his position, an employee would have seen a number of different weapons over the years and have access to materials and the expertise needed. But I don't know about the likelyhood of getting something out of the arsenal in those days.
I live near the Rock Island Arsenal. I think I'll visit their museum of weapons in the next few days and see if I can find anything similar hanging in the display cases. Not likely, but who knows?

 

[Oyeboteb]

What possible point would there be in an employee making a 'one off' which used an entirely different Frame profile? That would require enorous additional labor and time, as well as all new Lock Work...verses making a period 'one off' or
custom' using a regular production Frame or even an obsolete S & W Frame from an earlier period, where standard Lock work would be used, and, no enormous effort to produce a one-off Frame.

I just don't see that as being plausable that an employee made this from scratch for his own amusement as a Lunch Box Gun or related. There is just way too much involved in making a 'one off' which is of an entirely different Frame and Lockwork, let alone, the Swing Out Cylinder feature which is of a different size than those which followed and where the entire frame and swing out assembly would have to have it's own proprietary set-ups to be machined, etc.

 

[Varangi]

I genuflect at the feet of the masters. Greg and I have a date with a mystery gun tomorrow @2pm PST. We will inspect, measure, disassemble everything we can get away with to provide you with more tidbits of tantalizing info to stimulate the great minds.
As far as screw thread and pitch- would the proper stock screw for that period also fit on pre-war magnas or older service stocks? If not, what type of stock is the same???

Mike

 

[murphydog]

It's a square butt, and if it measures 1 3/4" on the straight lower edge it has K frame dimensions; if 1 7/8", N frame. I'd guess thinner service width, not Magna.

 

[Oyeboteb]

James, I remain dubious.

I've seen tool room mock-ups and they rarely have a commercial finish. This gun also exhibits signs of having been fielded. Seems to me that if it had been part of a Military Trial, or even a foreign contract submittal, there would have been documentation to that effect either with the gun or in the Smith & Wesson corporate records. Look how thoroughly documented the 1906 Luger Trials were.

I'd love to be proven wrong, but in this case I think that the story is better than the gun.

Drew

It could also have been a prototype which someone higher up ended up liking, which got finished up into a standard Blue of the time, given to them, and, subsequently 'fielded'.


Tool Room Guns are a different matter, and, are references for items which are in production.

This Revolver does not represent anything which any of us recall to have been produced by anybody, anywhere, ever.

Or, the only kin it seems to have far as being a Single Action Swing-Out-Cylinder design, are the Winchester Swing out Cylinder Prototypes, or, possibly, some others as well which never went into production. Kin wise, there may well have been some Colt prototypes predating their DA Swing Out Cylinder design, which were Single Action and a different Frame than the Model P.

 

[Hondo44]

Varangi, for your screw testing:

The model #3 stock screw (as tested last nite by a forum member) is the same .122" x 44 tpi as the pre war hand ejector stock screw (except the I frames which use a .095" x 48tpi close to a 3-48), and same as all HE frame sideplate screws except as noted next:

The sideplate screws on ALL handejector frame sizes pre-1942 are also .122" x 44 tpi EXCEPT the upper sideplate screw (the bug screw in factory terminology) which is .100" x 48 tpi close to 4-48.

I do not know the thread pitch of the New Model #3 sideplate screws. But if a Handejector sideplate screw or stock screw threads into the 'Mystery Gun' stocks or sideplate, then it's S&W's .122 x 44tpi.

NOTE: By eng change order, a thread size change to .125" x 44tpi (#5 x 44 NF) was initiated in 1942.

 

[Varangi]

Thanks Jim,
Thats what I needed to know- I'll bring a beater pre-war wearing service stocks and see what fits...

Mike

 

[Hondo44]

Update on NM #3 thread pitch

Varangi, for your screw testing:

The model #3 stock screw (as tested last nite by a forum member) is the same .122" x 44 tpi as the pre war hand ejector stock screw (except the I frames which use a .095" x 48tpi close to a 3-48), and same as all HE frame sideplate screws except as noted next:

The sideplate screws on ALL handejector frame sizes pre-1942 are also .122" x 44 tpi EXCEPT the upper sideplate screw (the bug screw in factory terminology) which is .100" x 48 tpi close to 4-48.

I do not know the thread pitch of the New Model #3 sideplate screws. But if a Handejector sideplate screw or stock screw threads into the 'Mystery Gun' stocks or sideplate, then it's S&W's .122 x 44tpi.

NOTE: By eng change order, a thread size change to .125" x 44tpi (#5 x 44 NF) was initiated in 1942.

Good morning Varangi,

Just a little caution: apparently there is some variation in NM #3 screw sizes depending on the vintage, although NM #3 screw sizes may not be a factor.

But a caliper and screw pitch gauge would be handy to have along when comparing screws of the mystery gun. This is probably obvious, but I would check all screws with the caliper for equal diameter before interchanging the mystery gun screws with handejector screws to insure an "apples to apples" comparison. And thereby avoid a conclusion that the screws are not S&W when in fact they might just be different sizes.

Thanks for your efforts and I hope this helps,

 

[Eddy's Shooting Sports]

http://photobucket.com/mysterysw

Mike will follow up with measurements and observations.

A quicker teaser though. The sideplate screws are .120 44 pitch.....

 

[S&W ucla]

Wow! I've been following (but not commenting) this thread because I don't know enough to make a call on this one. Thanks to the poster and all the comments for an exciting thread. I hope it turns out to be S&W, but I'll have to wait and see. Keep up the good work and someone will figure it out. Good luck!

 

[Hondo44]

Greg,
Thanks for the great photos! I appreciate the time/trouble you spent to get these for us. Still waiting to hear more details from Mike. One thing I see right off is Daniel B Wesson's side swing cylinder Pat date of May '94 on it, so that helps date it to being made after 1894.
Has a higher hump than NM #3 to make room for the cylinder bolt, plunger and spring.
Has the trigger spring of the Mod 3 Russian 2nd & 3rd models, and 1st and 2nd Model Schofields.
NM #3 1st model action and hammer spur similarity but with hammer nose (firing pin) like the double action models.

 

[deadin]

Wow!! As said in another thread, I think we just passed my pay grade!

 

[GaryS]

This thread is much more interesting than anything on TV tonight.

 

[opr1945]

Maybe it's just me but I get an error message when I try the link to pictures in post #150.


"We're sorry, we cannot find the page you requested.

Please check the URL for correct spelling and capitalization.

We thank you for your patience. If you have any questions, please visit us at photobucket.com or contact your Photobucket team. We are here to help."

 

[A10]

The link worked for me. Fantastic pictures! I must admit that I am ready to stand corrected. I am a neophyte as far as this age of Smith goes, but I gotta say there are elements that certainly look right. The detent and cylinder hold open bolt lend legitimacy, as I can't imagine a copy being made to that detail unless they were making use of existing parts.

Learning more each day!

 

[Varangi]

We met with the owner of the mystery gun earlier today. Greg put the photos up on photo-bucket earlier today.
Here are some more tantalizing details for your reading pleasure:

I brought a 455 HE 2nd with me to check the screws. The screws of the mystery gun threaded into my HE= Stock screw and side plate screws.

Barrel length is 6"- 5 lands/ groves- left hand twist
Cylinder has "PAT'D March &May 94" stamped above Springfield Mass.
Cylinder length- 1.516
Chamber length- 1.055
Cylinder bore at recoil shield- .410- 412
at forcing cone- 387-391

Detent pin on bottom of yoke- matching detent on frame flat.
Flash cutouts on top of frame above cylinder- shield and cone.

Took it apart- had some crazy things going on inside action- What say you???

Mike

 

[handejector]

Where is the waiter?
I would like my crow properly filleted and medium rare. Go ahead and load the baked potato, house salad.

You have my attention.
I do believe I was wrong.
That piece does have many, many traits that appear to be S&W.

Our two major questions now are:
When?
Why?
The answer to either may well answer the other.

Any chance of a few more pics-
top of hammer spur and fouling cups in the topstrap??

I'm tired now, but I'll be back.
Would you mind if I post the pics here in this thread?

 

[Sebago Son]

What about chamber dimensions? Any more clues as what the caliber is? It would appear to be a centerfire. Can you get some snaps of the recoil shield to confirm?

 

[Masterpiece]

Chamber length- 1.055
Cylinder bore at recoil shield- .410- 412
at forcing cone- 387-391

Hi Mike,

First off, I'd like to thank both You & Greg for the great job you did convincing the Owner to let you disassemble this Revolver to the point you did!! I'm not sure how long it took, but your efforts are greatly appreciated!! Thanks so much as up until your Post really I didn't have very high hopes of seeing too much inside this Revolver by what Greg had mentioned in one of his earlier Posts!!

Secondly, I do have a couple questions concerning the Chamber Length & Forcing Cone Measurements though if you don't mind me asking!! I'm fairly certain I know where they were taken, but I'd like you to verify them for my own piece of mind!!

(1) Is the Chamber Length measurement of 1.055" the distance from the Rear Face of the Cyl. to the shelf inside the Chamber??

(2) Where was the Forcing Cone Measurement of .387"-.391" taken??

Thanks Again Mike for the excellent work!!