Currently advertised on GunsAmerica. Is this legitimate, except for non-S&W grips, or is it one of those that's been chopped & changed like I saw on a recent thread here?

I'm a shooter, not a collector, but this doesn't look like any pre-33 Regulation Police I've seen photos of elsewhere, except for the chop-job in the thread mentioned above. . . .Before I plunk down any $$$, I'll ask for help from guys who know. Thanks in advance for any help you can offer!

Attached Images

pop_wm_2682502.jpg (31.8 KB, 508 views)

Look's chopped to me, based on how far the front sight is set back.

__________________
OGCA Member.

Consider the gun to be a chop job, unless the seller can furnish a factory letter confirming the barrel length, which would have to be a special order. Ed.

Chopped. Standard length barrels on the RP ended in front of the locking lug. This one is the same length.

That gun is 1920s era production and should not be called a Pre-33. It has the serial number on the forestrap, which you would expect with a Regulation Police, but the stocks appear to be round butt hard rubber. They would not mate properly to the backstrap of a rebated RP frame. How inconvenient that the photo framing accidentally clips off that portion of the gun.

I didn't find this gun on GunsAmerica, but then I didn't really look too hard for it.

__________________
David Wilson

Agreed, it's chopped. There's a rebate or notch in the rear grip strap not shown. It's like looking at a car with a standard shift lever in it. You don't have to see the clutch pedal to know that it has one. It's a Reg Police but can't be a pre 33 RP unless it was made after 1953 Model introduction.

This creates a void in the backstrap because this gun does not have it's proper sq butt grips any longer. No big deal if you want a shooter and neither is the chopped barrel for that matter. So if it works well and it is no more than $200 - 250 , OK. But if more, I'd let him keep it. Any more description useful on the listing, like bore or mechanical condition?

__________________
Jim
S&WCA #819

Jim, my concern was that someone didn't just put RB stocks on an RP, but may have filed the frame to get rid of the notch and then modified the back edge of the round butt stocks to fit the new frame contour. There was an RP like that in a thread about a year ago, if I recall. I can't tell from the single photo if something like that might have happened here.

__________________
David Wilson

David, that's certainly a valid concern and could very well be the case here. I think you hit on it originally, "How inconvenient that the photo framing accidentally clips off that portion of the gun" so it doesn't show. If the price range is appropriate, I would ask that question.

__________________
Jim
S&WCA #819

Here is my choped Regulation Police in 38 S&W, but I only paid $50 for it.
Butt was rounded.



I have some Brit rounds for it.

Weren't all RPs 4"? Were there some shorter ones made?

__________________
No life story has happy end.

That was a great buy. The RPs were made with a rounded butt grip frame with a notch out of the back strap (rebated) for a square butt pair of stocks. Except for the rebate, they are the same shape as the round butt Terriers.

__________________
Jim
S&WCA #819

Yes, pre wars were all 4", however as usual, exceptions are known
with 2" barrel.

__________________
Jim
S&WCA #819

STCM,
Now that is definitely a practical-looking Frankensmith! Easier to carry than a 33-1, better ballistics than a 32-1, AND the price was right! Heck, I'll give you $75 for it now & you can make 50% on the deal :-)

I'm sure you would......LOL!
A secondary CC back-up.
But it my be regulated to #4 when my S&W M64-6 2" shows up this week.

BTW, I meant to comment on the ammo in your photos. You can get that wadcutter going at some mean velocities. Using Lee 2nd data for .38 SPL loaded at a COL of 1.120" at 11,900 CUP IIRC, I load a hard cast 148 WC in 38 S&W at 901 fps from my 4" gun with COL of 1.090". I am less than 10 fps away from Lee's quoted velocity, so pressures should be fairly similar, I imagine, and SAAMI for 38 S&W is 13,000. (And that's to accommodate old break-top guns, which don't approach the strength of a solid-frame steel gun.) From my 32-1 snub, this load gives me 809 fps.

Also, I got to shoot a couple of those boxes of CIS MILSPEC ammo and I was impressed. They tumbled violently and penetrated a lot. If I could get my hands on factory-fresh 178g ball ammo like that to allow me to try it out more fully & verify its consistency, I would not look any farther for a carry load--seriously. I believe it's reputation as a ridiculously underpowered piece of garbage resulted from bad--or badly stored--ammo that malfunctioned and gave nothing resembling the results of this good CIS ammo.

I experienced several rounds passing thru an initial water-filled milk jug, then tumbling so viciously that jugs 2 and 3 exploded, and a couple more got penetrated. Of course, since the bullet's terminal performance was not dependent upon an expanding HP, it wasn't hindered by passing thru several layers of overcoat, either.

Those bullets were only slightly above 600fps, and I haven't seen anything else remotely resembling such ballistic performance at such low vels. I've encountered similar references to the salutary results achieved by tumbling 200g .38 caliber lead bullets, but my own non-scientific experiments with blunt 200g LRN's and flat-pointed bullets didn't duplicate such claims. My flat points sailed straight thru 6 water jugs, and my LRN's would curve--perhaps tumble--and come out the side of jug 4, 5 or 6, but w/o the devastating effects of the CIS 178g FMJ.

I have Lyman mold 358430 in the 195 gr.
I used a 10-1 lead to tin mix, not the Lyman #2 I use for all the other revolvers.
Have not tried them out yet, 2.5 gr of TB. Not a compressed load.

I think you'll find your gun eats up that 358430 and shoots it accurately, albeit somewhat high in guns regulated for 145-46g bullets. I'm enamored with Fairbairn, Sykes and Applegate-style point shooting up close, however, so the high POI in target shooting doesn't bother me for SD purposes.

Please do not think you can transfer .38 Special Load Data to the .38 S&W Cartridge - their respective Loading Densities are different, and, one would get much TOO high of pressures ( possibly far in excess of .38 Special 'Proof Load' ceilings ) in the smaller Volume Cartridge.

That gun looks like it suffered the same fate as John Wayne Bobbitt, it had its barrel trimmed too.

__________________
Vaya con Dios

Hi Oyeboteb,
Not to worry--I pay very close attention to the relative COL's. I like my head, hands, etc far too much to simply jam 38SPL's worth of powder into the much shorter 38S&W case! When loading powerful 38S&W ammo, I "load long" in order to reach a very similar cartridge overall length with a 38 SPL load using the same bullet, factor in bullet diameter, groove diameter and so forth.
For instance, many 38SPL wadcutter loads show a COL of about 1", as the bullet is seated flush with the case mouth. It's simple to seat the same bullet to 1.085" or even 1.220" in a 38S&W case, by crimping in a lube groove.
Check out Speer or Lyman data, which shows many loads more robust than the current factory 146/685 ammo that is designed to be safe in the old top breaks. These manuals specifically warn against using heavier loads in top breaks, ancient I frames, etc., as do I--emphatically. I also don't use .359-.361 bullets sized for my S&W revolvers in Colts, with their smaller groove diameters.