I've gotten hold of an older S&W I can't fine anything about. The grip is rather small for the rest of the gun. Barrel is 6", on the bottom of the grip it is marked "U.S.N.". Under that is an anchor and under that is ".38 D.A." and "No."
Serial # is 1643X is on the grip.
Left side of the barrel is "S&W 38 Mil". 4 side plate screws.

Does anyone know anything about this revolver ?

This is one of a thousand .38 Military & Police model 1899 USN contract guns from 1900. It should have a number between 1-1000 on the bottom of the grip frame and 5001-6000 on the rear cylinder face and barrel flat above the ejector rod. It looks well-preserved for a gun of this age and era. Do you have a story behind it? Hope this is helpful.

__________________
Alan
SWCA LM 2023, SWHF 220

Well, it is helpful and it ain't !! The frame, barrel and cylinder have matching #'s. I just do not see the other numbers you are talking about. See the pics. On top of the barrel, the last date stamp is "Oct 4 98". On the inside of the right grip panel is written in pencil "16439", same as the frame, barrel and cylinder.

I'm lost on this one. Does this one have any value ? $300-400 ?

That Navy stamp is very neat, you piece wins the cool factor.

Well, the markings are puzzling. As was indicated, the Navy bought a thousand of these in 1900; the serial numbers ran from 5001 to 6000 if I am reading the sources correctly. These guns also had separate Navy sequence numbers stamped on the butt that ran from 1 - 1000. Your gun has the "No." stamp in the right place on the butt, but no Navy number. And the serial number is more than 10,000 too high to be part of that one known contract. Could this be a sample the company turned out in preparation for a second contract that never materialized?

If this is a true Navy contract gun and not a clever forgery (faked rarities do exist, unfortunately), it is collectible and of historical significance. I don't know what it would sell for, but it would be more than the $300-400 you mentioned.

The stocks look age-appropriate and could be original. You are missing a threaded knob that screwed into the end of the ejector rod.

I don't understand exactly where you found the five-digit serial number. Can you post a photo of that? Can you also get a photo of the rear surface of the cylinder? Is anything stamped on the flat underside of the barrel? What is the last patent date you can read on top of the barrel?

Interesting gun.

__________________
David Wilson

The number 16439 is on the front grip strap, on the back of the cylinder and on the flat on the bottom of the barrel.

The last date on top of the barrel is Oct. 4 98. In front of that date is a long list of dates. Above that is the date July 1 84.

If you still need the pic of the back of the cylinder I'll shoot it tomorrow. The only thing on the back is the same serial number.
Thanks.

"I don't understand exactly where you found the five-digit serial number."

David, look at the photo in post # 3. You can see the SN on the front grip strap.

__________________
John 3:16
WAR EAGLE!

Sorry guys, I had a problem with the first pic of the front strap. This one is better.
Thanks.

Thank you. No need for the back of cylinder photo if the number is the same.

Gil, you're right. I just didn't look far enough into the shadows to see that something was stamped there.

I would spend the $50 to letter this gun, and specifically ask if it was part of a serial-number range that was produced under a Navy contract.

I like that gun a lot. That is a nice piece of history, and it seems to open a window on an undocumented (or least not widely known ) production run for the US military.

Or possibly it was just a left over Navy frame later adapted for commercial production on a waste-not, want-not basis.

__________________
David Wilson

That's a really cool gun. Wish I could find something like that.

Where is mikepriwer when you need him??

__________________
Dean
SWCA #680 SWHF #446

My guess exactly - that would explain the lack of the Navy SN, under the "No." on the bottom of the grip frame. It doesn't appear a number was ever stamped/rollmarked there.

__________________
Alan
SWCA LM 2023, SWHF 220

You could go to S&W website and then find customer service or something like that.
Then search for dept. that will research for that gun using the serial number.
It costs $50.00 but worth every penny with an old one like you have.
I did mine and discovered it to be a 1905 model sold to hardware company in Chicago.
Good luck
Bill H.

You guys are something else. Thanks a ton. I don't know if the wife will OK $50 to find out. Fixed incomes in gun collecting are a killer for those of you who aren't there yet !!
Many thanks.

I'm sorry that I don't remember anything about the serial numbers etc, but I do remember seeing a few of these in our Air Police armory in the sixties. We were issued the model 15 as a side arm, but a few Navy .38s found their way into our inventory. I now have both a model 10 and 15.

__________________
Endeavor to persevere. <><

I bet 50 members here would chip in a buck to letter this piece. I'm intrigued by the history and Navy stamp. Dumb question of the day- Is that gun .38 special?

JRM showed me the gun yeaterday. It is not marked for 38 Special but we could put an empty 38 Special case in the cylinder. Its a nice gun and we are hoping that the ejector head can be located. It is in sound condition and we sure hope these mysteries about it will eventually make sense.
It has been my week for S&W mysteries, that's for sure.

The ".38 Mil" is the .38 Long Colt, the standard service revolver of the time. It is a short .38 Special like the Special is a short .357. Since the 1899 was made in .38 Special primarily, perhaps they did not make cylinders with shorter chambers specifically for the military contract? Or since this was a later gun, they put a .38 Special cylinder on it.

Mike Priwer here on the Forum has (or had) replacement ejector rod heads.

__________________
Alan
SWCA LM 2023, SWHF 220

Hello. I was also a USAF cop in that time frame and carried the ex-Navy .38's. But they were WW II Victory Models, with the usual front cylinder lock under the barrel, which arrived in 1902.

The gun under discussion was made between 1899-1902, and is not the sort that you recall. The Navy bought quite a few of these later M&P guns through the years, as did the Coast Guard. Many were issued to aviators in WW II and after.

The M-15 Combat Masterpiece was official USAF standard from about 1962-1985, but was often supplemented during the 1960's by transfers of Victory Models and some Colt Official Police and Commando .38's from Naval stores. Some of those did indeed bear U.S. Navy markings on the topstraps. At some bases, the .45 auto remained available for years after the .38 replacement was adopted. Currently, the USAF issues the Beretta M-9, but some bases have bought Glock 19's and other items with unit funds.

I hope this is of interest, and clears up any confusion.

David, I think you've likely hit it on the head with the latter scenario. But that gun absolutely screams for a letter to be certain. Another case here of "just when you think you've seen everything...."

__________________
SWCA #590
"Colligo ergo sum"

I agree, this one screams for a letter! Here's what the ejector rod end looks like, hopefully Mike Priwer will be along and clarify this, He is very knowledgeable about this model.

__________________
H Richard
SWCA1967 SWHF244

David has it right, I think. That's a left over Navy contract frame used for a later commercial gun. I have seen a few others like this over the years, both Navy & the Army contract guns. Remember, S&W never threw away anything that could use to make a gun in those days. Another clue is the the grips are commercial grips, not Navy contract grips. Ed.

If it were accepted by the Navy would it not have some kind of special marking to indicate same? Where and what would that be?

"If it were accepted by the Navy would it not have some kind of special marking to indicate same? Where and what would that be?"

The Navy guns had the butt marking (shown in post # 3) with a number. This revolver has all of the correct markings EXCEPT for the number, hence the belief it is a contract overrun gun.

__________________
John 3:16
WAR EAGLE!

It looks to me that the last character in the serial is "@" instead of a number nine.

At my house, I'm in charge.....oh, and my wife has given me permission to say so.

Backwards @

I have one of this type revolver serial # 25518. Mine was shipped January 20, 1903 to the United States Navy, Brooklyn Navy Yard, Brooklyn NY. Shipped with a 6" barrel. However, some time during
it's life the barrel was cut down to 4" and the Navy markings on the
butt were ground off. The letter states it's classified as a.38 Hand
Ejector, Military & Police Second Model or Model of 1902. Hope this
Helps you out J.R.M.
A few pics.

__________________
OGCA Member.

I have seen that odd curly 9 in other gun numbers, and I am kicking myself that I can't remember where. If it is on one of my revolvers I will spot it eventually and post a photo. If it was a photo of somebody else's gun, I will try to remember to copy its location and post a link to it.

__________________
David Wilson

Yeah, it had me asking questions too. I checked it out as close as I could. Maybe the pic I shot didn't do it justice. I think, base on checking and rechecking, it is a double struck "9". The other two serial number stamps are smaller dies and it looks like a "9".
I'll call it a 9 until someone proves its not I guess.

Well, I bought this gun from JRM this morning, thus taking charge of the detective work from here. I will send off for a letter and get back here with the answers.

I sent in the form to Roy Jinks along with the check and several good photos.

Now, Is there anybody who can help me with a replacement ejector head for this 1st Model?

This gun is not in the range of the Navy contract, which was 1000
guns in the range of 5000 to 6000.. That is, those guns
took the whole block of 1000 serial numbers. Its hard to say what
this is, exactly. My first thought was that it was an extra frame from
the Navy contract, made up later into a standard .38 M&P . But,
I doubt the factory would have made up and shipped a commercial
gun with USN stamped on the butt.

I don't think that there is any way that such a late serial number
found it way into that early Navy contract. This almost looks like
a Navy contract frame that had its serial number changed, and then
received the cylinder and barrel from a gun that originally bore that
serial number.

That gun that Muddyboot is showing is the second Navy contract, for
the 1902 model.

Mike Priwer

Mike
Did the second Navy contract have the same type of lettering on the revolvers butt?

__________________
OGCA Member.

Here's a hopeful theory: perhaps a naval Officer special ordered it as a personal gun. It would have been so identical to the issue version that he could carry it without noticeably violating regulation...or perhaps a retirement gift. I guess the S&W liason officer could have presented it to the officer who helped them land the previous contract as a small token of the company's appreciation.
This is one historical letter that I sure am hoping comes through with some clues.

Do we know at what point in the mfg process the USN markings would be put on, and/or the S/N put on? Could it have been one that was USN marked, and lost in the shuffle for a time and when found S/N marked and processed?

__________________
H Richard
SWCA1967 SWHF244

MB

The markings are slightly different. Here is a 1902 Navy butt-marking:



The 1899 that is posted above does not have the complete Navy
marking on the butt. Below the 38 DA, there should be a line with
a triangle with a B inside of it. That is missing from this gun, as
is the Navy serial number following the No . The triange on the
1899 is replaced by the arrow on the 1902.

Also, the Navy inspector for the 1899 was Lt Charles A Brand, and his
initials C A B would be the last line of marking on the butt of a
1899 Navy. For the 1902 Navy, the inspector was Lt John A Bell,
and his initials J A B are the last line of a 1902 Navy Butt.

Its also worthwhile to note that the 1899 Navy serial numbers are
1 - 1000 , in the S&W range of 5000 to 6000, whereas the 1902
Navy serial numbers are 1001 - 2000 , in the S&W range of 25001 -
26000.

Regards, Mike Priwer

There are two other things that concern me about this gun. One is the
finish. These first-contract Navy guns were stored in barrels aboard
ship. They were just randomly tossed in. Every one that I have
ever seen had not more than 10% finish. At one time there were
bunches of them sold at several RIA auctions, and they all had the
same finish - as did the one I owned. The condition on this one
is too good . I think its been refinished, based on what I know they
should look like. Also, the forward side-plate screw hole looks dished.

Second, the serial number stamped on the front grip strap does not
look right. The "4" is tilted slightly, as though it was stamped by
hand. Also, the bottom of the "4" is not right. And, the last digit,
the "9" , looks very strange. I agree with an earlier posting - it
looks like "@", and not a 9.

Finally, there should be a star stamped on the barrel, crane, and
the rear of the cylinder. I assume it would be on the underside of
the barrel.

Mike Priwer

Mike, was the star stamp a Navy mark or something that originated at S&W?

If it was ever refinished, it was at the factory and a long, long time ago. The blueing is worn but the markings are crisp.

Greg

As I read Roy's book, the star was stamped at the factory, before the
guns were shipped. There was a Navy inspector present at the factory,
and its possible that he applied the star.

Does your gun have the star marking ?

Regards, Mike

No, not a star on it. With no star and no Navy number, it is doubtful that this revolver was sold to the Navy/US Govt. It would still make sense, however, as a private sale/gift to a Navy VIP.

Guess we'll just have to wait, and see what the letter says.

Another possibility is that someone inside the factory made the gun
up - sometimes called lunch-box guns. They could have found an
overrun Navy frame, and maybe some parts from a rejected production
gun, and made up something for themselves. In such a case, the
gun would never have been shipped, and would be open on the books.

Mike Priwer

I had not thought of the lunch box possibility! If the records are missing, this would be the most likely scenario would it not?

IF the gun was a lunch-box creation, then its entry on the shipping
records would be open, meaning it was not shipped from the
shipping department. Someone would have carried it out in their
lunch box.

This is just one possibility, based on my presumption that its not
one of the 1000 1899 Navy contract guns, at this serial number.

Regards, Mike

Man, this is better than an adventure movie !!! It's getting better and better, gkitch !!! Can't wait to see what it is !

This one peeks my intrest.

Well, the form and $50 were launched several days ago. What is the typical turn-around on a factory historical letter?
Of course, the letter is unlikely to provide concrete answers. It will, at the very least, provide us with more clues and eliminate some of our theories.

I feel we already have enough clues to presume this gun was not sold and transferred directly to the Navy as part of the known contract. No Navy number, wrong serial range, no star proofs...no way. Yet it is identical in every other way to those revolvers.

Mike Priwer did, indeed, provide the missing knob and now the Mystery Navy 1899 is complete. Still waiting for the S&W letter.

Attached Images

DSC01152.jpg (133.9 KB, 177 views)

Now - that is a whole lot better. What a difference a nob makes !



Regards, Mike Priwer

Looking forward to the answer, in about 2-6 weeks .

__________________
Alan
SWCA LM 2023, SWHF 220