A friend just brought this old Smith over, and wants to trade it for an EAA Witness in .45ACP I have. I would appreciate your help/advice on what I have and should I trade or not?

It has what I have learned to be early target sights on a 3 inch bb., without the front locking lug, and I am wondering about the originality of the front sight? Bore is good & the action is tight with no endshake. Are the grips real mother of pearl?

The assembly numbers on the yoke & crane match and the serial # is 144XX.

I have $350 in the Witness, so I am going to trade for it, but what do I have and any idea how old it is or what it's worth is? I appreciate any input you can give me!

Attached Images

	S&W #1.jpg (77.8 KB, 206 views)
	S&W #2.jpg (57.9 KB, 174 views)
	S&W #3.jpg (68.7 KB, 178 views)
	S&W #4.jpg (69.8 KB, 165 views)
	S&W #5.jpg (111.5 KB, 165 views)

Based on the caliber stamping on the left barrel and other details, I would guess this is (was) a model 1899 .38 Military & Police Target. Unfortunately the barrel has been shortened; most of these would have had a 6.5" barrel, and the stocks appear to be MOP but are likely not original. Is the serial number visible on the rear cylinder face and barrel flat (above the ejector rod)?

__________________
Alan
SWCA LM 2023, SWHF 220

Before the barrel was cut, that was a rare model of 1899 .38 Hand Ejector Target Model. These did not have front locking lugs, which first appeared on this gun's successor, the Model of 1902.

I think the 1899 barrels had some other cartridge designation language, so that may be a fresh caliber stamp you see on the left side. The front sight is not original. The barrel on this would have been 6 or 6.5" long in its original configuration.

Probably shipped 1901 or 1902. Do NOT shoot +P ammo in this gun. I would probably restrict it to a diet of soft handloads or nothing stronger than commercial 148 gr wadcutter match loads.

I'd probably pay $350-400 for it as a curiosity and in testimony to what it once was. But its collector value has been ruined by the barrel cut.

EDITED TO ADD: Aha! As so often happens, Alan got in first.

__________________
David Wilson

Thank you for the help! The serial number is visible on the face of the cylinder, and the barrel flat, and match that on the butt of the gun, and there are matching numbers on the yoke & frame. I assume these are assemble numbers?

Yes, that's right. And the matching serial number on the barrel is your guarantee that the current barrel was simply cut, and not replaced with a separate shorter barrel.

Despite the chop job, not a bad piece.

__________________
David Wilson

The "story" behind it is that it belonged to a Los Angeles detective, and he had it chopped to carry as a duty weapon. Is there a chance that this was a factory job, and if so would"lettering" it indicate so?

If it had factory work, it may have a 3- or 4-digit date code stamped on the left grip frame, under the stocks, indicating when the work was done. Having said that, it is relatively uncommon (but not unheard of) for the factory to shorten barrels.

__________________
Alan
SWCA LM 2023, SWHF 220

Thank you all for your information! This is an interesting gun, a trade I will happily do. There is no date code, so it must not have been a factory job, but whoever did it did a good job on it. The front sight is perfectly aligned with the rear, and the crown is good as well. Kind of cool, I have always liked three inch Smiths, and now I have one over a hundred years old. I can't wait to see how it will shoot (mild reloads)!

Thank you all again for your help!

Another thought comes to mind, since the collectability is ruined because of the chop job, what if I were to refinish it? Would you bother with it or not? I was thinking of rust blueing it.

The adjustable rear sight is also not factory. That would account for the tall front sight. Also check lock-up as to the movement of the front of the cylinder when it is in battery since there is no forward locking mechanism. Lead shaving has been known to occur in this instance.

Personally, if it is not rusty I would leave the original finish alone, but you certainly won't affect its value with a refinish.

__________________
Alan
SWCA LM 2023, SWHF 220

It has the appearance of a factory pre-war target rear sight (which was very different from the post-war version), but someone very skilled could have performed a conversion from a fixed-sight 1899.

__________________
Alan
SWCA LM 2023, SWHF 220

My impression was that the rear sight is very likely to be factory; it resembles factory-original adjustable sights I have seen on other S&Ws from the early 20th century. I think sights also carried the serial number of the gun on their underside, so if you are feeling adventurous you can remove the rear sight, which is held on by the screw at the front of the foot near the muzzle, and see if it is so marked. But be careful not to lose any tiny pieces if you try this. You might need to put a drop of penetrating oil on the screw head and let it sit for a few hours to help release it.

I would not refinish the gun. The only change I might make would be to find a gunsmith to restore a period-correct front sight. (But these are very thin, and unless you have good eyes that would not result in any notable increase in accuracy.)

__________________
David Wilson

Good comments again. I will remove the sight to see if the serial number is under there. Lockup is tight on every cylinder so I don't see lead shaving as a problem. I believe the sight is factory correct, I looked at a sticky on the forum that showed examples of this type of rear sight, but with a different style front sight of course. I am undecided as to what to do, I just want to do no harm. It really is a piece of history as it is. For a weapon over 100 years old it is in pretty good condition. I know that I could not ruin the collector value any more than it already is, but anything else I do would be too "modern" for it. Bubba I am not!

Been a while since I posted about this revolver. I ended up getting it for $150, for which I am very happy. I popped off the sideplate...and need some help with disassembly/reassembly. I am familiar with newer Smith's, but not one this old. It is caked with old grease & goo and need soaked & scrubbed. My question is how do you get the trigger & trigger return assembly in & out?
Appreciate all the help you all have provided so far!

You can get it back together, but it takes three hands to do it.

Actually, it's not quite that bad. The Model of 1902 is similar on the inside. Here's a thread that may be of benefit.

Inside a 1902

Check out post no. 8 in that thread. You need a short length of dowel to help reassemble the trigger return mechanism. After that's in place, everything else is a snap.

__________________
David Wilson

Perfect! Thank you for the link, that is just the information I needed.

Better yet, don't disassemble it. Simply hose the guts with gun scrubber and keep brushing. If you break anything, it is NOT easy to replace.

I would bet $100 that rear sight is original. Note that it is polished to the frame, and I think the finish is original. Is the crown blued?

Others have said the barrel was originally 6 or 6.5.
MAYBE, maybe not.
Target sights could be ordered on any barrel length offered.
That one has been cut, and the non- factory front sight added.

The caliber marking is PROPER for a later Mod 1899.

ALL collector value destroyed?
I disagree.
Neat customizations do not destroy all collector value. Witness the high value of many King custom jobs. However, a refinish could accomplish that destruction. Leave it as-is is my advice.
If you can DOCUMENT the police story, it won't hurt the value a bit. If you can prove it drew blood, that helps more.
Neat old gun!

__________________
Regards,
Lee Jarrett

Thank you for a much better idea! The barrel crown is blued, and the rear sight is I believe original. It is perfectly fitted to the top strap of the gun. I looked around on the forum and found pictures of early Smith's that had sights just like this one. I am checking on documentation on the Police story. The man I got it from's Father got it from a friend who told him the story, and there are supposed to be papers in his estate documenting his service as well as pictures of him with this revolver. That is kind of "thin" but he is looking into it.

“Rhema”:

(First, I apologize for the late response…)

I can’t agree enough with “handejector” in regard to his remarks about leaving the gun alone, NOT refinishing it, and that the collector value (albeit not a traditionally defined collector value) has not yet been destroyed but would be if it were to be redone.

I am constantly amazed at the people on this site who sneer at, make fun of, or otherwise bad mouth people who modify the guns they own. I can see feeling upset about bad work or careless butchering but I see people attack those who in recent years merely Magnaported their heavy recoiling revolvers or who think that a gun like yours only has a nominal value.

First, let me say that none of the people so far posting in this thread have taken that position but as you imply that you have read other things on this site, I am sure that you have seen evidence of what I am saying. Second, I am not saying that the collector’s value that otherwise might be assigned to this gun if it were original (and at the moment, without a factory letter hopefully documenting how it left the factory we can only assume that it has been modified) has not been diminished for it certainly appears to have been drastically affected.

But what I am saying (as “handejector” alluded), is that there is already a strong interest in older “custom” guns from certain “known” gunsmiths of long past decades (King, Fitz, etc.) and a growing interest in others from later times (Pachmayr, Giles, Theodore, Kelsey, etc.) as well as strong appreciation for the great work from the huge number of locally-known artisans, many of whom were only known within the community they served or by the shops in which they worked.

At the moment, and from the pictures you supplied, your gun would at least fit into this last category:
· It is something that sadly, is probably not original
· (Right now this is not a known fact but only a logical assumption)
· It might or might not be a relatively uncommon target gun
· (I tend to think that it might be but this belief too is only an assumption at this point)
· But in any case, the work appears to have been nicely done by an at-the-moment-unknown craftsman
· The end result is also something that didn’t involve the marking-and-edge obliteration that is so often the hallmark of shoddy work, which would have really made this piece worthless (except perhaps for its still unknown historical value).

For what it’s worth, I would sincerely suggest that you do the following:
1) Send away for a factory letter.
a) You can find a link on this site to the form required to do so.
2) To assist Roy Jinks in his analysis in regard to that letter and to perhaps further aid those more knowledgeable than I on this site in helping you as well, I would take a few more pictures of the gun.
a) I would retake the one looking downward on the rear sight for the one you have currently supplied is a bit out of focus (your camera locked on the background and not the topstrap).
b) Then I would inch forward along the barrel and take a complete “look down” shot of that front sight (showing it in its entirety instead of the only partial such view that you have now) – again making sure of your focus.
c) You already have a nice side view (elevation of the sight and barrel) but you might want to take another one halfway between it and the “lookdown” view I suggested above
i) In essence, this would be a shot aimed at the full-length junction of the sight and barrel.
ii) This will give us a better idea as to how (and how well) the blade was installed on to (in to) the barrel.
d) Finally, take an angular shot of the muzzle in such a way as it is easy to discern its shape/contouring.
i) I’m sure that this too would be of interest to many of the more experienced people reading this for its shape is just as important as its being blued.
e) Several shots of the grips and gun butt would be good too.
i) Right now the pearl stocks appear to be nicely fitted and installed (again a possible testimony to good workmanship; although sometimes such a fit is merely nothing more that dumb luck) but some (again in-focus) dead on and angular shots of the butt, backstrap and frontstrap will give everybody a better idea of how good the fit here might be.
f) And just for the hell of it, I would carefully (very carefully) remove those stocks from the frame (using a properly fitting driver in the screw slot and also NOT prying them off if they stick to the metal) and then shoot very close up, detailed pictures of any and all stampings on the both the right and left hand sides of the metal grip frame.
i) More than likely, they will be nothing but assembly numbers and inspection stamps BUT one never knows.
3) You might also want to take a close look at the inside of the grips when you take them off BEFORE wiping them down and see if there are any markings or writing (pencil or ink) on the inner surfaces.
a) I would also rotate them under a bright light and look for even the (ghost-like) remnants of such things that might appear as nothing more than a reflection these days.
4) By the way, any attempts that you make to work on or clean up the gun should be done with the grips OFF so that any oils, chemicals and washed away residue doesn’t damage or stain them.
a) And if you do lightly wipe down the metal with an oily cloth when you are done, make sure there is not such much left anywhere near wear the grips contact the metal or that you haven’t put so much oil into the lockwork that it runs down into the grip frame and on to the stocks when they are reinstalled.
5) As to that cleaning, again, I am in agreement with “handejector” about NOT taking the gun apart but it sounds like it is too late for that.
a) Just be careful for he is correct in his remarks about trying to find anything in the way of replacements: it won’t be easy if such a thing becomes necessary.
6) One other thing is to be really careful about the chemicals you use and about NOT soaking the gun in a bore solvent for that can sometimes actually attack the finish you are attempting to clean up.
7) I would also suggest that you stick with conventional gun cleaning and lubricating materials and not things from outside the industry unless you KNOW that what you are using will not harm what remains of what appears to be the original bluing.
8) Finally, while a bronze bore brush could be used for the bore and chambers (NO stainless steel ones), I would stick with a nylon bristle brush (of the toothbrush type) for cleaning everything else.
9) And even then, I would be very careful to only lightly brush away anything that concerns you so as to not further wear down the bluing.

As others (like “handejector” and “DCWilson”) have suggested, I would NOT reblue of refinish the gun for you will not only never get that money back but it will certainly affect the revolver’s current value in a negative manner.

I would also, as others have suggested, very carefully remove the rear sight after you have taken the picture(s) I suggested above.

Once again, make sure that you use a properly fitting screwdriver and, as stated elsewhere in this thread by “DCWilson”, you might have to preloosen the screw before attempting to use the driver.

Once you have it off, you not only want to check for the serial number people have mentioned but you might want to take several in-focus, detail shots of the sight for posting here including one of the serial number if it is there.

About the serial number: if you don’t want to share it here (and to be honest, I wouldn’t), use your computer software to block out the last two digits in any photos as you did in the text of your initial post.

Finally, I would really pursue those estate documents and pictures that you mentioned. Anything that you can get about the gun and its original owner would be fantastic. And if you can’t get the actual documents, then try to get copies. And if you can’t get that, then try to at least get the man’s name and EXACTLY who he worked. For there is not only “LA the city” and “LA the county” but also a myriad of other agencies in the area that could have been (over time and retelling) just thought to be “LA”.

Knowing who he was and who he worked for could allow you to track things down from the other side if you can’t obtain the estate papers.

And in regard to all that, while the best thing would be to find that the gun had gone somewhere related to the department or in the immediate geographical area, don’t panic if the factory letter has it going somewhere else for even in those days, guns shipped one place often got “sold” (either at retail or wholesales) somewhere else after they left the factory.

And then too, start considering the age of this gun and age of who used it. You say “The man I got it from's Father got it from a friend who told him the story…” and that kind of second-cousin-twice-removed storytelling is very common in this field. But how old was the man and did the gun just end up sitting somewhere for a long time or did the “Detective” buy it used? For the gun would have been new at the turn of the century. In those days, even if an officer was good, politically connected, or “whatever”, more than likely, he still wouldn’t have been a real young man as a detective.

So at best, let’s say he was thirty. OK, that would have him being born in 1870! But let’s say he bought or was issued the gun was he was twenty one as a recruit (and yes I know 21 is not necessarily the right number) and he didn’t get it cut down until twenty years later when he got promoted, that would still put him as being born in 1880. So let’s say he kept the gun and lived to be 80 or 90; that would at best bring him to 1960 or maybe 1970.

So if he got the gun new, either it sat or it floated around a bit after his death (on the back end). And if he got it used, then who knows where it was on the front end. Maybe the department? Maybe his family? Maybe one or more completely unrelated people?

That’s what makes collecting this stuff so much fun.

Get the factory letter. Get those estate papers and pictures (or at least the information they contain). And get started in finding out what it is you’ve really got. It will not only enrich you but it might make for an interesting story or display to someday enrich the rest of us.

And even if it turns out that you can’t find out anything, you still have what looks to be a wonderfully crafted piece of work that is reflective of the kind of carryable weapon from a fascinating period in time.

And when you have a moment, take a look at this thread and you’ll see that "handejector" and I aren’t the only one’s here who really appreciate such early “custom” carry work like yours: http://smith-wessonforum.com/s-w-hand-ejectors-1896-1961/84271-belly-guns.html

Thank you Mr. Nash for a well thought out response. I appreciate all the input this thread has generated, and will take it under advisement. (I think I'm in over my head) I spoke with the friend I got the revolver from today for further clarification as to where it came from, and there is no hearsay to it. It belonged to his fathers cousin who was a San Francisco detective. He has documentation to the fact as well as pictures that he is going to provide me with. My brother in law (a Chicago detective) who was visiting over Thanksgiving said when I get this info to let him know and he will make an inquiry from the Chicago PD to the Frisco PD for any information they may have on the gentleman. It's a start!

“Rhema”:

You’re far from being in over your head.

It’s like any other problem-to-be-solved: just do it by the numbers.

1) Take the additional photos and post them here so people can help you out.
2) Attach them to your request for a factory letter and send that in to S&W.
3) Get all the paperwork from your friend.
4) Carefully preserve whatever you get but use the information it contains and your brother-in-law’s help to find out more about the previous owner and his work with the SFPD.

(NOTE: I joked about the second-cousin-twice-removed stuff as well as how over time and retelling, some things change and you have already seen that: First, it was Los Angeles and now it is San Francisco. They might be in the same state but they are like two different planets. Things like that happen all the time.)

You already have a nice “find” and it could develop into something even more interesting.
Just keep at it and Congratulations!

Please keep us posted on what you find and how it turns out; this is fascinating.