Mystery Gun- What is it?

[Masterpiece]

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. That piece does have many, many traits that appear to be S&W.

Lee,

I'm not even going to say what you're thinking I'd like to, but I always thought the Pros outweighed the Cons & now even more so!!

Even so, I agree there are still a few when's, why's, & what-all's that are yet to be answered!!

 

[Hondo44]

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?

According to Mike's dimensions, and I read them as chamber diameter and chamber throat diameter; it appears to be traditional chamber sizing for the modernized .41 Colt cartridge with the inside lubricated bullet in .386" with hollow base to work in both .401" and .386" modern bores. Except for the case length, which I measure to be 1.072" for the Colt cartridge. 41 S&W perhaps?

 

[Varangi]

Pics of fouling cones and hammer spurs

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??

As to the when and why: The owner has a story-- I told him lets vet the gun then we'll get the story...

As to the pics- attached

 

[Varangi]

technical problems- more pics

More pics- used my old 455 HE 2nd as the test- screws fit

 

[Varangi]

(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??

answer #1- Yes
answer #2- taken from the forcing cone side of the cylinder end

Hope this helps

Mike

 

[Masterpiece]

answer #1- Yes
answer #2- taken from the forcing cone side of the cylinder end

Mike,

Thanks!! Just as I had assumed!!

 

[Hondo44]

Well #1. Mike, you did an excellent investigative job!! I really thank you for that.
#2. Yes you measured the chamber length (which is case length w/o rim in a non-recessed chamber) correctly. I read your dimension locations exactly as you meant them. See my post above, the case length is the only variable from the 41 Colt. However in post #19 this was posted:
"Reportedly an experimental cartridge sometime around the turn of the century. Per dimensions in Suydam the case is the same diameter as the .41 LC, slightly larger rim and length in-between the heel-based and inside lubricated variations of the .41 LC. The .41 S&W was one of several experimental cartridges S&W worked on between 1890-1910."

Now the heeled bullet and inside lubed bullet cartridges in fact use the same case length. However the author may have meant the 41 S&W was inbetween the 41 Long Colt 1.072" and the 41 Colt DA cartridge which case measures .718".

Therefore your chamber (case) length of 1.055" is indeed between those two. Conclusion: all evidence points to the gun being chambered for the .41 S&W!

Now as far as the when and why; obviously when is after the side swing cyl patent date of 1894 and before the Model 1896.

The why is much more speculative. But apparently Smith saw a potential for the 41 early on but the side swing cyl, bottom cylinder stop and the solid frame double action needed more testing/consideration. And they were anxious to bring their new .32 DA solid frame to market being so far behind Colt, a chief competitor.

Then with looming army trials in 1906, the realization that if they were to be competitive, a solid frame DA of heavier caliber was imperative. Hence the switch to the 45 S&W development. Ultimately failing acceptance by the army they moved to the 44 Spl and the rest is history.

Now that's just one scenario and I'm sure there are as many others as we have forum members.

 

[A10]

So, Hondo, are you thinking there may have been a short run of these hybrids, or perhaps some "dealer samples" made up to see if there was a market for them?

If the thing had adjustable sights, I would have thought it was a target gut of some sort....

 

[Hondo44]

So, Hondo, are you thinking there may have been a short run of these hybrids, or perhaps some "dealer samples" made up to see if there was a market for them?

If the thing had adjustable sights, I would have thought it was a target gut of some sort....

HI A10,

My best guess (and only a guess) is no, more likely a couple of protoypes at most, maybe in different calibers. The reason I say that is because of the "ancient" lockwork used. I believe the gun(s) may have been 'test mules' for the side swing cylinder concept with a tried and true lock work of the #3.

The Model 1896 prototypes (that probably existed as well) having tested the
new DA lockwork (quite different from the original DA) and been succesful enough to go to market with swing out cyl but not the bottom cyl stop.

I agree would it have had target sights, it might make a good single action target model with better potential accuracy in a solid frame.

 

[jaymoore]

Greg,
...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...

I'm curious if there's any other resemblances to the patent drawings. Sometimes there's more in them than just the one subject. BTW, and probably OT, but when were patent models no longer required? Seems that it was done away with earlier, but I just can't recall.

 

[Hondo44]

I'm curious if there's any other resemblances to the patent drawings. Sometimes there's more in them than just the one subject. BTW, and probably OT, but when were patent models no longer required? Seems that it was done away with earlier, but I just can't recall.

The side swing cylinder is patent #517,152 dated March 27, 1884. I do not have that patent or that patent drawing. I do have patent #565,245 dated Aug. 4, 1896 and it's drawing. The drawing illustrates the 32 HE 1st Model, Model of 1896 and details the cyl center locking pin, extractor star, trigger mounted cyl pawl and a partial cutaway of the entire revolver. The text description of the drawing also includes the brief description of the side swing cylinder as quoted above in my earlier post. Another patent APPLICATION #568,385 is referenced as filed on Nov. 9, 1895 with no description.

517,152 makes no mention of a patent model where referenced in #565,245.

A quick Google search turned up nothing related. But I understand google has scrubbed all firearms information from it's searches.

 

[handejector]

The side swing cylinder is patent #517,152 dated March 27, 1894. I do not have that patent or that patent drawing.

(might want to edit your dates above)

I keep seeing you refer to the "side swing" patent. I have no clue what that pat covers, but it can't be for the side swing cyl!

Drop back to the pic I posted of the Winchester pat model. It has a side swing, and is from 1876!
Colt had a side swing on the market 5 years before that patent, in 1889. Colt kept building side swings, so we can assume there was no pat restriction on that particular feature by this time, if there ever had been.

I still find the gun puzzling. It had to have been built to test something- either a caliber/cartridge, or the real life performance of a mechanical feature or features, like the locking mechanism, hand/ratchet performance, or extractor performance, or all of these.

 

[deadin]

This gun may end up waiting for the S&WHF to uncover some records pertaining to it before we will get any "solid" evidence about it.

 

[Goony]

I'm not dismissive of the possibility that this gun is genuine, but on the other hand I'm not yet entirely convinced, either. That Roy remains equivocal doesn't nudge the needle for me, to boot.

Provenance and documentation remain hurdles that unsurmounted will cripple a definitive placement of this oddity in its proper historical niche.

 

[Masterpiece]

I keep seeing you refer to the "side swing" patent. I have no clue what that pat covers, but it can't be for the side swing cyl!

Lee,

In Jim's defense, I think you might want to do a search for US Patent No.517,152!! I'm sure if you do you'll find that a Patent was applied for by Daniel Wesson on Dec.7,1893 & issued on May 27,1894!! The Patent was for a Swinging Cylinder & Trigger-Lock for Revolvers!!

Also, related to the Revolver we're discussing, you'll see in the drawing that the Revolver pictured has a Square Butt Grip Frame somewhat similar to this one as well!! Although I will admit it does have Colt related overtones, as do the Grips, the features applied for & issued to the Patent most certainly look to be the features that ended up being used on S&W's Model of 1896 Revolver as evidenced by the combined Ejector Rod & Swinging-Cylinder Release Rod as well as Top-Mounted Cylinder Lock which isn't mentioned in this specific Patent!!

 

[handejector]

I've tried to search patents before with very little success.
Do you have a link?

 

[Masterpiece]

Provenance and documentation remain hurdles that unsurmounted will cripple a definitive placement of this oddity in its proper historical niche.

Goony,

With regards to your statement above, I do agree that more information needs to be found to document this Revolver in the company's history!! The point I'm trying to make is that I believe the newest information has, within a reasonable doubt, certainly assured us it is a (*~S&W~*)!!

All that needs to be done now is find that documentation,etc!! I know I've made it out to sound fairly simple, but my point was, or is, that I would suspect there's information that must, or should have, been documented to it's Design!! Possibly it still exists, maybe it's lost to time!! That's the New Mystery!!

 

[Masterpiece]

I've tried to search patents before with very little success.
Do you have a link?

Lee,

Just do a Google Search for "US Patent 517152" exactly how I have typed it in parenthesis!! It will direct you to a link Titled as "Patent US517152-Swing Cylinder and Trigger-Lock..."!! It will take you directly to the Patent!! When you get there, click on "Drawings" in the Upper Left-Side Column & it will take you to the Drawings & all Text related to the Patent!! Hope this helps!!

 

[Dave Nash]

The side swing cylinder is patent #517,152 dated March 27, 1984. I do not have that patent or that patent drawing. I do have patent #565,245 dated Aug. 4, 1986 and it's drawing. The drawing illustrates the 32 HE 1st Model, Model of 1896 and details the cyl center locking pin, extractor star, trigger mounted cyl pawl and a partial cutaway of the entire revolver. The text description of the drawing also includes the brief description of the side swing cylinder as quoted above in my earlier post. Another patent #565,385 is referenced as filed on Nov. 9, 1895 with no description.

It makes no mention of a patent model.

A quick Google search turned up nothing related. But I understand google has scrubbed all firearms information from it's searches.

"Hondo44":

517,152 is a six page patent (for "A Swinging Cylinder and Trigger Lock for Revolvers" ) with two of those pages containing drawings and a front page that specifically states "No model".

It should be noted that a "Trigger Lock" in those days is what we would call the "Lockwork" or the "Action" today and not a "Trigger Lock" used to secure a firearm.

A fast look at 565,245 that you mention (it is for "A Revolver") also reveals the "No model" declaration.

I don't know where 565,385 was referenced but it was filed on January 10th 1896 and granted on August 4th 1896 (those were not only the good old days but the efficient good old days) and it has nothing to do with firearms that I can see in my fast look-see.

I tried a few number transpositions and found 565,358 to be for a "Target Meter" out of San Francisco but I don't see how that would relate here. The filing date is also off as well; being from 1896.

Hey, I went back and looked more closely at 565,245 and its front page lists the Serial Number under which it (the application) was filed as 565,385. That is how the application for what became 565,245 was entered into the system and tracked through the patent process before it was granted under Patent Number 565,245. It is not another (here third) patent.

Just do a Google Search for "US Patent 517152" exactly how I have typed it in parenthesis!! It will direct you to a link Titled as "Patent US517152-Swing Cylinder and Trigger-Lock..."!! It will take you directly to the Patent!! When you get there, click on "Drawings" in the Upper Left-Side Column & it will take you to the Drawings & all Text related to the Patent!! Hope this helps!!

"Masterpiece":

While you are correct in your use of the Google patents search option, you do have to be careful for in their apparent copying of the materials and not directly linking to them at the USPTO, I have seen a few errors in their links, typos in their – not the official – texts, in fact there is minor and not harmful one in your example, and sometimes poorer resolution in their images (that seems to me to be the case here as well).

So while it is a somewhat easier way to look things up (especially in terms of older patents and prior art as well as in related art and inventor searches) things can be (not always) inaccurate.

Be cautious.

Gotta run but I hope this helps you guys out.

 

[handejector]

THANK You!

OK, haven't got time to read it in depth, but a quick scan shows that patent is NOT covering a swing out cyl.

It covers improvements to a cyl carried on a swing out yoke, such as-
the spring loaded center pin as a lock, t
he extractor carrying the moving center pin,
and the odd safety that won't let the trigger be pulled unless the cyl is closed completely.