D.W. King Information Thread

Modified · Feb 18, 2020

daddio202 said:
Here is the article "Colt-King super target Woodsman pistols" sent to me by a forum member here. By Kevin Williams. I do not know how to post in any way other than thumbnails. Maybe somebody can blow them up to be easily read without clicking on each page.

Fantastic!

I think you have hosted them in the best spot for posterity (and I should tell everyone who feels like doing so to save copies of all of the stuff I have scanned in, feel free to distribute anything of mine as you will).

I've uploaded them to an Imgur gallery here, may be easier reading for people:

Imgur: The magic of the Internet

When you open that up you can click on images and they should get bigger. I also added a few shots of my example of a King modified woodsman for good measure. I'll also add them here:

This is the specific bit that might be of interest:

The barrel weight arrangement, which I have yet to actually be able to get the weights out of. I should go try again.

Also, because anyone looking at that is probably going to ask. The rear sight is not King, it's a John Giles.

The history on this gun is that it's a 1938 Woodsman Match Target 1st Model. The man I bought it from said it had been his dad's target pistol for Camp Perry matches. I never did get his name. I still have his email, I really should do that. In any case, the gun has been worked over by King (obviously), but also John Giles (for the sight), and has work by A.E. Berdon (his tell tale frame texturing work is actually under the stocks on the front strap).

You can see it here:

When the stocks that were on the gun when I bought it were still on it. A set of sandersons (which are too small for my hands).

Modified · Feb 18, 2020

DCWilson said:
Several of King's patents can be found on line at Google Patents (patents.google.com); search for Dean W. King. The earliest one I spotted in my hasty review regards his triple-bead rifle sight, for which he was granted a patent in 1906. He had filed the application over three years earlier, at which time his patent narrative asserted he was a resident of Denver, CO. I can believe he was in California by 1910, as census records seem to indicate.

US830442A - Gun-sight.- Google Patents

Speaking of the Triple Bead sight, I never have managed to acquire one, but I somehow have this:

The baby is currently tugging on my leg so I won't be able to do anything more. But at some point here I will photograph all the King parts I have. I found a little box that has all sorts stuff in it I appear to have acquired here or there.

Modified · Feb 18, 2020

rednichols said:
Leaving out that 'the writer' in the photo is a young Charlie Askins. Recently I was given a copy of a 1956 letter from Ed McGivern to a friend and he did. not. like. Charlie. The phrase "BS" was mentioned with his name.

The Denver catalog is a bit bothersome because Dean Wallace King Jr. is in San Jose for the 1910 census and in San Francisco for 1920's; the former as a gunpowder demonstrator and in the latter as a sales manager for Remington Rand. It is in the 1930 census that he appears first as a gunsight maker.

King's catalog number 4 is openly dated as 1931; suggesting that if King's catalogs were issued sequentially as were Heiser's in that era, then his No. 1 w/b 1928 etc. until No. 19 and No. 20 w/b 1946 and 1947 respectively. That's plausible given his 1930 census appearance as his first as a gunsight maker.

So. Anyway, my interest, after my friend and coauthor turnerriver directed me to this thread, is the notice on the page of holsters (which is his and my specialty) that one model is by Lewis Holster formerly Clark; and indeed the image is best known as a Clark. This resonates because the two brands are indistinguishable and I have long postulated they were the same company; different addresses but Lewis himself can't be found by all the usual methods.

I'd be interested to know more about this particular connection and this post has brought me a bit closer to the 'when'; the why w/b that both Clark (1947) and King (1945) died at War's end. But who is Lewis?

Trying to nail down what years the catalogs is with Catalog Number 4 dated 1931 is interesting.

The thing about the Denver address catalog that I scanned in is that it contains a bunch of testimonials dated 1914 and 1915. I would think that if you were publishing your first catalog in (if this is No. 1, and they were done yearly) 1928...you would have slightly more up to date testimonials? It seems like it would be very odd to be using testimonials that are over a decade old.

At the moment I have two adults occupying the baby, so I've been able to noodle on this topic more. One thing that I think is useful for dating these catalogs is that we have 3 different addresses.

Obviously the oldest one is the PO box in Denver, and the newest is 171-3 Second Street in SF.

The other old catalog I have there though says "Call Building". I think this is potentially useful for dating because of the history of that building; Central Tower (San Francisco - Wikipedia)

So the Call Building is just down a couple blocks from 171 Second Street. The interesting thing about this wikipedia article is that it seems to indicate that the building was re-named the Spreckels Building after its repairs from the damage in the 1906 earthquake.

The problem that I have is that the notion of King occupying that building prior to 1906 seems impossible, given the testimonial dates. So apparently the building continued to be called the Call Building. In any case it certainly is an interesting building.

Might be able to find some records of past tenants to pin down when King moved in, and out.

rct269 · Feb 18, 2020

JUST A THOUGHT--------------------

If it was my dime, I think I would not date my catalogs------and I'd put out a new one at such time as I had something of note new to offer----not whenever the calendar clicked over a certain date.

Like I said, just a thought----------

Ralph Tremaine

Another point to ponder--------------my several catalogs, both King and S&W are reprints-----of dubious veracity. The publisher, apparently aware of the aficionados thirst for dates has chosen to date some of them. My favorite is a S&W catalog noted as from 1932 singing the praises of the 357 Magnum. Hmmmmmmmmmmm---I wonder------------

Modified · Feb 18, 2020

rct269 said:
If it was my dime, I think I would not date my catalogs------and I'd put out a new one at such time as I had something of note new to offer----not whenever the calendar clicked over a certain date.

Like I said, just a thought----------

Ralph Tremaine

Another point to ponder--------------my several catalogs, both King and S&W are reprints-----of dubious veracity. The publisher, apparently aware the aficionados thirst for dates has chosen to date some of them. My favorite is a S&W catalog noted as from 1932 singing the praises of the 357 Magnum. Hmmmmmmmmmmm---I wonder------------

Those Pre-Registered Magnums are truly magical I hear.

BrianM87 · Feb 25, 2020

I'm really excited to see what further information you dig up on this subject, Sixgun. Although I unfortunately have never owned a S&W that has been King modified, I do have a couple Colts, plus the odd pseudo .38/44 that we've corresponded about. Since our emails about that particular gun I've actually spent a little time comparing it with the Colt Officer's KST I have. It's interesting seeing how both gunsmiths involved very obviously cared about getting a similar result but their work took different paths.

skilled · Mar 5, 2020

Don’t know if you guys are interested. But I have lots of king guns and Super Targets (one even in the box) all with Ropers of course. But they are all Colts. So I can contribute to some knowledge but if you prefer only S&W I totally understand.

younggun22 · Mar 5, 2020

skilled said:
Don’t know if you guys are interested. But I have lots of king guns and Super Targets (one even in the box) all with Ropers of course. But they are all Colts. So I can contribute to some knowledge but if you prefer only S&W I totally understand.

Quit holding out on us!

Kinman · Mar 5, 2020

I have a 1940 Edition of "The Shooters Bible" from Stoeger's that has three pages devoted to King paraphernalia, the pages are in excellent condition and I would be willing to attempt to scan them for you, no guarantee on how well the centers will turn out.

rednichols · Mar 5, 2020

SixgunStrumpet said:
Trying to nail down what years the catalogs is with Catalog Number 4 dated 1931 is interesting.

The thing about the Denver address catalog that I scanned in is that it contains a bunch of testimonials dated 1914 and 1915. I would think that if you were publishing your first catalog in (if this is No. 1, and they were done yearly) 1928...you would have slightly more up to date testimonials? It seems like it would be very odd to be using testimonials that are over a decade old.

At the moment I have two adults occupying the baby, so I've been able to noodle on this topic more. One thing that I think is useful for dating these catalogs is that we have 3 different addresses.

Obviously the oldest one is the PO box in Denver, and the newest is 171-3 Second Street in SF.

The other old catalog I have there though says "Call Building". I think this is potentially useful for dating because of the history of that building; Central Tower (San Francisco - Wikipedia)

So the Call Building is just down a couple blocks from 171 Second Street. The interesting thing about this wikipedia article is that it seems to indicate that the building was re-named the Spreckels Building after its repairs from the damage in the 1906 earthquake.

The problem that I have is that the notion of King occupying that building prior to 1906 seems impossible, given the testimonial dates. So apparently the building continued to be called the Call Building. In any case it certainly is an interesting building.

Might be able to find some records of past tenants to pin down when King moved in, and out.

You're on the right track, with your thinking. It's precisely what turnerriver and I did with H.H. Heiser because the company issued sequentially numbered catalogs; in which case it's the sequencing rather than if they were annual, that matters. Then, the company changed its names often and its addresses often -- and always recorded these in just that way in every city directory! Add to that, the many catalogs of the '30s and '40s that have these address and name changes -- and dates and anniversary numbers (which they struggled with because the sons used three different founding dates!) and we were able to date every one of them -- after realizing that at first the catalogs were issued every 'other' year.

So, I suppose I'm saying, that unlike us you likely don't have enough data points to be certain you have dated them conclusively. And we watch for appearances of these oldest catalogs -- the newer ones are set in stone for reasons that also include ownership changes of the company -- that would prove us right or wrong about the 'every other year' calculation we made.

Here's our chart to give an idea; we've another one that explains to us the 5ws of each year calculated, but mighty boring to you all:

Assuming it actually enlarges sufficiently on this forum (still takes a big screen). Notice the word 'sighted' -- it's a local term for 'this has actually been seen' and so the dating is consistent with the markings on the catalog itself. Doesn't say that? There are no known copies and the date has been deduced from those that have been 'sighted'.

rednichols · Mar 5, 2020

rct269 said:
If it was my dime, I think I would not date my catalogs------and I'd put out a new one at such time as I had something of note new to offer----not whenever the calendar clicked over a certain date.

Like I said, just a thought----------

Ralph Tremaine

Another point to ponder--------------my several catalogs, both King and S&W are reprints-----of dubious veracity. The publisher, apparently aware the aficionados thirst for dates has chosen to date some of them. My favorite is a S&W catalog noted as from 1932 singing the praises of the 357 Magnum. Hmmmmmmmmmmm---I wonder------------

Yes, and we know who that reprinter is! I've had to point out date errors to them on gunleather catalogs but to no avail. I suppose the big lesson there, is not to rely on them in a court of law which wants an original anyway, likely for that very reason

.

skilled · Mar 5, 2020

LLOYD17 · Mar 6, 2020

A couple more rarely seen King parts to contribute.

Checkered Trigger Shoe

lloyd17-albums-pre-war-n-frame-mechs-picture21366-834d120c-c5a3-4db4-afd5-8d55e7f5b3f1.jpeg

lloyd17-albums-pre-war-n-frame-mechs-picture21367-f43aa80d-64e8-4fc6-ad17-f153708a2b6f.jpeg

Lefty Cockeyed Hammer

lloyd17-albums-pre-war-n-frame-mechs-picture21370-9ac39c2f-4cb3-48a7-a478-9620098780a6.jpeg

lloyd17-albums-pre-war-n-frame-mechs-picture21369-13da2c1a-937b-4492-a6a7-e9c6c9e74f51.jpeg

skilled · Mar 10, 2020

You know what I have always been curious about? Is how we’re the KST ribs installed on these guns. Does anyone have one not installed? Hoping somebody can shed some light on this subject.

paplinker · Mar 10, 2020

skilled said:
You know what I have always been curious about? Is how we’re the KST ribs installed on these guns. Does anyone have one not installed? Hoping somebody can shed some light on this subject.

I have a couple unfinished King sights

kwill1911 · Mar 10, 2020

I believe the ribs are silver soldered on. It is hard to believe but King refinished the guns they modified with ribs. They were an authorized service center for both S&W and Colt and used the same Carbonia blue process that the OEMs used.

RKmesa · Mar 10, 2020

kwill1911 said:
I believe the ribs are silver soldered on. It is hard to believe but King refinished the guns they modified with ribs. They were an authorized service center for both S&W and Colt and used the same Carbonia blue process that the OEMs used.

Kevin:

I don't think they were soldered on - for sure the Super Target Ribs were not soldered on. They are pinned on the front sight/base and screwed on at the rear. Ralph (RCT269) and I corresponded back and forth while he completely disassembled the KST Triple lock he owned. It was a fun and insightful conversation - I kept the correspondence and I go back and read it every now and then when I need a smile. No re-finishing required in most cases.

I can also tell you that I see no evidence of any silver solder on the three KSTs that I own.

rednichols · Mar 11, 2020

LLOYD17 said:
A couple more rarely seen King parts to contribute.

Checkered Trigger Shoe

Lefty Cockeyed Hammer

During my earlier research attempting to find out more about King and his company, I encountered this legal finding that both the patent and the trademark for the Cockeyed hammer were held to be invalid in 1955:

King Gun Sight Company v. Micro Sight Company, 218 F.2d 825 | Casetext Search + Citator

Patents are not a lot of fun to hold! They can deter others but once one finds it necessary to stop (that's what a patent is: it's not the right to make something -- practice the invention it's called -- instead it is the right to stop someone else from doing so; called a 'negative right') someone who is already infringing, then it becomes a **** shoot for so long as everyone's money holds out. I was successful in this when Gould & Goodrich, a customer, infringed one of mine; but for a small inventor like me it could've gone either way.

kwill1911 · Mar 11, 2020

Richard,
I haven't owned a King modified revolver in quite some time so I defer to your expertise. I have owned quite a few Colt King Super Target Woodsman pistols and I think those ribs are soldered on. I also based my comments on an interview I did many years ago with a King employee who did a lot of the work on King modified guns.
Regards,

skilled · Mar 11, 2020

Its hard for me to think they re-blued them. I have lots of them and they all look like Colts original finish to me. Look at this specimen from my collection.

D.W. King Information Thread

Member

Member

Member

Member

Member

Member

Member

Member

Member

Member

Member

Member

US Veteran

Member

Member

Member

Member

Member

Member

Member

Similar threads