Third Model Perfected Single Shot .22

[TheTinMan]

I finally was able to pick this up last night.

The serial number on the frame, barrel, latch and right grip matches. Roy tells me it shipped in November of 1916.

 

[TheTinMan]

The auction house description rated the finish “97% original blue”. It looks fine until you put it under bright light. This photo exaggerates what I first saw last night:

I don’t know how to describe the shape on the side plate. However, it looks as if the odd shape is more polished than out toward the edges. The same odd shape shows up on the other side too. I even went to the auction preview and didn’t see this. It’s only visible under bright light.

 

[iby]

turn down the lights

 

[TheTinMan]

turn down the lights

Can do!

(How long does a post have to be?)

 

[Housepuss]

That is darn nice looking for being 107 years old. When I take my 3rd
model or straight line to the range....I get the weirdest looks, like....omg what is that? Most people there never see a revolver let along one made
of steel not to mention a single shot on top of everything.

 

[rct269]

You done good!

Don't sweat the small stuff!

The almost certain could've been better news is it very likely isn't an Olympic Model. Jinks' research tells us all of them after #9548 are Olympic Models. My research tells me damn near all of them shipped after 1920 are Olympic Models----sort of a "Same Church, Different Pew" distinction. The unknown until you check it news is there are Olympic Models more or less throughout the production---here and there.

And if you're hot for an Olympic Model, there's a bunch of them---a whole lot more than we used to think.

Other good news, if you care about such minutia is the 3rd Model is S&W's first with screw adjustable windage---a little tid-bit from a sight junkie. Another tid-bit from the same sight junkie is there are two different versions of the Olympic Model that don't have anything to do with the sights---early and late. The distinction being the later has a chamber about .025" longer than the early---a distinction without a difference when it it comes to performance. (The accuracy/group size is essentially identical---one to the other---------and the accuracy is PHENOMENAL!!.)

Ralph Tremaine

 

[Retired W4]

That's a nice one. I have enjoyed my 3rd model and at the same time wondered why S&W would make such a pistol double action. The DA trigger seems a little heavy for a target gun. SA is great, as expected.

I always imagine some rich guy in the 1920's in his basement sipping on a brandy while punching holes in a target.

 

[rct269]

Yeah, whoever heard of a double action single shot pistol----what's the point?!

Well, the point is/was we have to have something to pop the primers with----and we're all out of those frames and actions we used on the 1st and 2nd version of this gun, So, how about this?

We design and make an entirely new frame and action. We could have that up and running in no time at all! YEAH---Great idea!!

Well, maybe not. There's this mean old guy upstairs in the corner office name of Wesson. His daddy, maybe his granddaddy, taught him we were in business to make neat guns----and money. When he gets wind of this great idea, the meeting is reconvened.

It goes like this: "All those in favor of developing a brand new frame and action, signify by saying I resign. All those in favor of figuring out something else get to keep their jobs. Let's vote!"

And that's the way it happened---heading west!

Ralph Tremaine

And you know what else? It seems like a bunch of guys won the Olympics with these double action single shots-----1920 was it? I'll bet they fired every single shot double action---you reckon?

 

[RMFnLA]

Yeah, whoever heard of a double action single shot pistol----what's the point?!

Well, the point is/was we have to have something to pop the primers with----and we're all out of those frames and actions we used on the 1st and 2nd version of this gun, So, how about this?

We design and make an entirely new frame and action. We could have that up and running in no time at all! YEAH---Great idea!!

Well, maybe not. There's this mean old guy upstairs in the corner office name of Wesson. His daddy, maybe his granddaddy, taught him we were in business to make neat guns----and money. When he gets wind of this great idea, the meeting is reconvened.

It goes like this: "All those in favor of developing a brand new frame and action, signify by saying I resign. All those in favor of figuring out something else get to keep their jobs. Let's vote!"

And that's the way it happened---heading west!

Ralph Tremaine

And you know what else? It seems like a bunch of guys won the Olympics with these double action single shots-----1920 was it? I'll bet they fired every single shot double action---you reckon?

Except S&W had already made numerous SA models so it would not have required designing anything new.

 

[Retired W4]

I never got a chance to shoot my H&R USRA single shot. I heard they did pretty well in competition, single action. That was well into the 1930's though.

 

[mrcvs]

I never got a chance to shoot my H&R USRA single shot. I heard they did pretty well in competition, single action. That was well into the 1930's though.

You mean one of these?

 

[rct269]

Except S&W had already made numerous SA models so it would not have required designing anything new.

Good point!

Let's see now---1909, which single actions would those be? Well there had to be some NM #3 frames and actions laying around, right? I wonder how many? You reckon we could fit the single shot barrels to those? We can come back to that.

What else? What am I missing?

Ralph Tremaine

 

[mmaher94087]

It appears that S&W and other manufacturers (H&R in this thread) adapted an 'in production' frame to make their most current (at the time) single shot. S&W chose the DA, Hand Ejector, and it looks like H&R used a SA revolver frame as well. The big chunk of metal hanging below the axis of the barrel to fill the cylinder window of the H&R leads me to think existing production frames were chosen.

 

[rct269]

The H&R single shots make for interesting stories. At one point, it seems they were Roper's babies; and as was his bent, he was constantly changing this or that---to the point that it's said there were no more than SEVEN identical pistols ever produced. It's also said his assigned mission was to produce the best single shot pistol ever, and that during his reign H&R lost $100 per gun, and were quite well pleased.

Ralph Tremaine

 

[mrcvs]

The H&R single shots make for interesting stories. At one point, it seems they were Roper's babies; and as was his bent, he was constantly changing this or that---to the point that it's said there were no more than SEVEN identical pistols ever produced. It's also said his assigned mission was to produce the best single shot pistol ever, and that during his reign H&R lost $100 per gun, and were quite well pleased.

Ralph Tremaine

I’d like to see proof of how that no more than seven number was derived. Especially when the vast majority had 10” barrels. How does one get such variation (which is commonplace with the Registered Magnum, for example, with a wide variety of barrel lengths available)?

The one I posted is so pedestrian that I can’t see how its configuration is no more than one of seven. I would expect there to be at least another hundred out there like it.

 

[TheTinMan]

It appears that S&W and other manufacturers (H&R in this thread) adapted an 'in production' frame to make their most current (at the time) single shot. S&W chose the DA, Hand Ejector, and it looks like H&R used a SA revolver frame as well. The big chunk of metal hanging below the axis of the barrel to fill the cylinder window of the H&R leads me to think existing production frames were chosen.

Perhaps Colt did the same thing?

They didn’t just make it on a revolver frame, they made it look like it had a cylinder! By the way, this is a “pre-Camp Perry” made in 1926 when Colt first introduced the model. They labeled it “Camp Perry” only after it succeeded at that venue.

 

[rct269]

Given from what I have gleaned from his writings, I suspect Roper would, were he inclined to alter barrels, experiment with the rifling rate-----perhaps with the width of the lands and grooves--probably not give much thought to the length. He was one of those who was always wondering "What do you suppose would happen if------------------------.", and it seems unlikely altering barrel lengths would enter his mind----unless, of course, he deemed the gun to be too heavy---or poorly balanced.

Ralph Tremaine

 

[BC38]

Forgive my ignorance, but why couldn't they just leave out the DA sear to make it a SA only. Just as (I presume) they left out the hand when they made it single shot.
I'm sure there is something I'm overlooking/missing...

 

[rct269]

Forgive my ignorance, but why couldn't they just leave out the DA sear to make it a SA only. Just as (I presume) they left out the hand when they made it single shot.
I'm sure there is something I'm overlooking/missing...

Actually, at least with many/most/all(?) 1st Model Single Shots (single action from the get-go), they left all the revolver bits in place----and functioning. Owners removed them now and then---perhaps hoping for a smoother/lighter action. The same frame was used when the 2nd Model came along, but it had been modified for single shot use only---no openings for such as the hand and cylinder stop, and none of the revolver only bits and pieces in place.

Having said all that, I can't remember if the hands were left in the action of the 1st Models or not.

Ralph Tremaine

 

[series guy]

I think these are as much art as target pistols.