Hi There,


Last month, I wrote to the Historical Foundation to let letters for
my two #3 Americans and the letter pertaining to my #3 American
2nd Model came back saying "Your Smith & Wesson 3 Russian Second
Model...." but my revolver isn't a Russian 2nd Model (see pics).

So, what is the best way to contact the S&WHF and point out the
error and get a corrected letter?


Cheers!
Webb

Attached Images

	168264915_2_x.jpg (30.7 KB, 81 views)
	168264915_3_x.jpg (30.3 KB, 75 views)

I imagine you can probably just shoot them an email at [email protected] and they’ll see that it gets to the right person.

Contact Don via PM or email at the SWHF.

__________________
Mike Maher #283

I assume you have tried to chamber a 44 Russian round? If it fits it is not a 44 S&W.

Attached Images

44R vs 44A Cartridge.jpg (22.3 KB, 273 views)

__________________
Gary
SWCA 2515

Hi There,


This 2nd Model American is a 44 Henry RF.


Cheers!
Webb

Attached Images

168264915_4_x.jpg (36.6 KB, 51 views)

. . . now you tell us.

__________________
Gary
SWCA 2515

All these questions can be dealt with privately. Just contact Don. He will correct immediately and send it out to you.

__________________
Mike 2796
SoFo Bunch member

In an effort to respond quickly to all of the letter requests that come in mistakes are made. Reach out to Don and I am sure that he will correct any error.

__________________
James Redfield
LM #497

Hi There,


I would reach out to Don but I don't have his email or his user-
name. So far, I have only found the general info inquiry at the
S&WHF. Would someone send me the info? If you don't want
to post that info, you can send it to me in a private message.

Thanks for your Help!


Cheers!
Webb

Hey Don, if you are reading this Thread, thanks for all you do. Mike

__________________
Mike 2796
SoFo Bunch member

Hi There,


Here is the portion of the letter that pertains to my #3 American:


Cheers!
Webb

Attached Images

Scan_20240409.jpg (52.8 KB, 24 views)

His Forum user name is Club Gun Fan. If you see his name and the little green dot near it, he is online and you can PM him.

__________________
Alan
SWCA LM 2023, SWHF 220

As an aside, we cannot lay all mistakes (or omissions) in letters at the doorstep of the Historical Foundation folks. All they have to work from are the factory records.

I had an 8" .32 caliber Single Shot. It lettered as a 10" .22. That "mistake" came right out of the factory records. Roy sent a copy of the shipping records to me---and there it was, big as life, #14272 shipped as a 10" .22. Given a vivid imagination, I figured the nice little old lady who wraps the guns, and sticks them in a box, grabbed the wrong box----and nobody at S&W looked in the box after that----never mind I have never seen a box for a 1st Model Single Shot, and have no idea if it notes the caliber and barrel length or not.

Chapter Next: I had a New Model #3 Target---one of those chambered ONLY in 32-44 or 38-44 S&W. This one (#3914) was chambered for "38 WINCHESTER CTG"---as stamped right on the barrel. The factory records make no mention of the caliber---only that the gun appeared to be a special order for a single unit. Given a moment to think about something like that, you'll come to the realization the only two folks who needed to know what the caliber was are the fellow who made the holes in the cylinder and the barrel---and the one who stamped the caliber on the barrel. Now the only other thing anybody else needed to know was that they got paid for the gun, but that's about the end of it.

All that said, if/when the Foundation folks make a mistake, they'll fix it first thing---right after they find out about it. And if they can't "fix it", they'll explain it. That'll come as small comfort, 'cause the folks who made the real mistake (or omission) are long gone!

Ralph Tremaine

Hi There,


I never wanted to besmirch anyone. I know these searchers work
hard and have many demands on their time. In my case, I think
it is a simple mistake of using Russian instead of American.


Cheers!
Webb

Always love your stories Ralph. Can you clarify one thing for me though, since this one wasn't really complete-

What was this little old lady wearing, and how did she look? You're making me think "Granny" from the Beverly Hillbillies was working at Smith, packing up Registered Magnums....!


And why was she old, in the first place?

Why not "the single young blond bombshell who wraps the guns"..... paints a MUCH nicer picture

Thats more "Ellie May"......

The photographs from which cometh my irrefutable wisdom show two little old ladies---which may or may not comprise the entirety of the wrapping/boxing staff. Both sport what I might describe as "Granny Good Cook" hairdos common to the 1950's genre of little old ladies. Both are wearing glasses----as well as what one might think of as kitchen aprons-----and for damn sure "Granny Good Cook" shoes. The aprons are protecting looooooooooong dresses--actually just one loooooooong dress (print in nature)---that on the younger of the two (but not by much)---given both have multiple chins. The other little old lady is wearing a skirt and blouse. Both the dress and the skirt are deemed to be loooooooong by virtue of the fact both are seated (which would tend to raise the hem line), and yet the only leg showing is ankles. As to how they looked, like I said---old. As to why she was old----it's because she was born a loooooooong time before these pictures were taken.

As to "single young blond bombshells", there's only one such shown. I don't know about "bombshells", but she's kind'a cute---and is "Numbering main revolver parts to match butt number." As expected, she has a hammer in her hand, so a wee bit of caution might be wise if one were to, shall we say, approach her. Also---not blonde. There is one other (young) lady---right stylish, if her manicure is any indication. She's recording serial numbers "prior to delivery of revolvers to shipping room."

Bottom Line: Painting nice pictures is all well and good, but in this case I'm simply reporting what I see.

Among what I see are several younger ladies, all of which are inspectors----at least suggesting they are not to be messed with----if you expect your work to pass muster.

All these scenes are part of a 60 photo (essay) presented in the 8th edition of the Gun Digest (1954) titled "From Raw Steel to Smith & Wesson"---an informative and interesting work depicting the process (of from raw steel to Smith & Wesson)---back in "the good old days" when the focus was building the best possible product for the price.

Ralph Tremaine