I am sure some of you cringed when you saw this on GB.

Right up my alley though.

What do you think about "serial number" 455?

Just bought the gun from a legitimate gun store, so I assume
we are clean on the number.

Seems somewhat unlikely but possible.

Thank You ahead for any insight you can share.

Attached Images

	455 1.jpg (49.8 KB, 742 views)
	455 2.jpg (27.4 KB, 563 views)

__________________
I Love This Site

A conversation piece to say the least! The grips kind of remind me of bananas. Tell us more! Bob

It would be funny if it was .455. Like Achilles, his name was Achilles and he had an Achilles heel.- E.I.

Sir you are correct your new revolver does have potential. Look at it this way, its' been modified enough that you would not feel bad about making any further changes to it.

I'm seeing what I think are British proofs on the cylinder, so the odds are that it WAS a .455 Mark II, 1st British Contract and has been whizzed to .45 AR.
Too bad. A .455 with serial 455 would be kind of neat.

__________________
Dean
SWCA #680 SWHF #446

I think you did just fine for the price paid. I was watching on GB as well. The only thing I was concerned about was the thinning of the trigger guard. Should be a good shooter. Please post some pics when you get it.

Exactamenty

The front sight is way too large, speaking to how it looks.

I am thinking 31/2"-31/4" with a minimal fixed sight at the rear and a minimized front sight.

I wish Keiths' chop shop was available. His customs look just
right to my eye.

The pictures are lifted from the GB auction, so I am unsure
about any other serial numbers.

I have seen the banana grips a few times on the net. I think they may be catalin, an early plastic. Somehow, they look
OK in a weird vintage way on this possibly well done Bubba.

I still wonder if this is in fact #455 sent to the British.
Just that alone would make the gun more interesting.

No matter what happened along the way, she is still a triple lock. My first and only.

What should I do to lose the oh so custom "jeweling" on the trigger,hammer and ejector rod [a first to me]?

John

__________________
I Love This Site

"still a triplelock". I agree completely. The front sight bugs me but modifications are part of the history of this horse.

__________________
Dennis

I would leave the jeweling alone, it looks very pretty to me. Maybe put a band on the barrel front sight like Indiana Jones' revolver?

__________________
Always bet on stupidity.

If I could peal it off, I would mail it to you......

The barrel band has a sort of beefy retro flavor, some how
more New Service than TL.......so in case I run into a loose one
............I will mail that with the jeweling

__________________
I Love This Site

The serial number stamping looks correct to me.

__________________
John 3:16
WAR EAGLE!

Neat project gun!,,not that it can't be use just like it is however.
I'd cut the bbl to 3 1/2 and put an orig fixed type front site back on.
Fill the adj rear slot and return it to a fixed site revolver.
Fill the swivel hole w/an original lanyard swivel. They look nice on any S&W revolver I think.
A full careful repolish and then nickle plate job would make a unique revolver and hide any silver solder attachment lines of the reworked front and rear sights.

If I did anything at all, I'd replace the grips and remove the jeweling.

The MOP grips (Mother of Plastic),,I'd replace with some service style wood,,but I know most dislike those in favor of magna style. Just a personal favorite.
(Ivory looks nice w/nickle!,,see above..)

Jeweling is actually cut into surface, though ever so slightly.
It can be polished out of the parts. Keep the flats flat and don't round the edges.
You'll end up with bright polished steel parts of course. They can be then re-case colored (hammer & trigger) if you wish, or left in the white, ect.

Now that there's got all kinds of possibilities...Maybe a low profile 'King'
style reflector front ramp and patridge blade.
Followed by a contoured pre-war type of rear adj. sight.

Could be shortened to 3 1/2"...If the crown is good and it shoots well, ya might want to leave it as is on the length.

Nice ol revolver anyways.

Su Amigo,
Dave

__________________
"IN GOD WE TRUST"

It does look a little strange, but, assuming it shoots okay, it's still a S&W. That should take the sting out of it. Maybe just start with
the grips; that'll tell you where you want to end up.
These old devils are out of my price range right now, but if I
had that one, I'd go straight to the range. TACC1

As deadin said, your gun is one of the 1st British contract TL guns, numbered from 1 to between 5000 & 6000. Yours shipped in 4/8/1912, the first shipment of 33 shipments, the last of which was 4/28/1916.

My suggestions would be to replace the ugly front sight & base to a factory version of the same period as the rear sight shown below with red insert:


Or without insert:


Get the machine turned hammer and trigger polished and color case hardened by Turnbull (cheap for just those two parts) and polish out the ejector rod and reblue.

I'd also replace the lanyard loop easily available.

Ditch the plastic grips and get some factory walnut grips of your choice, perhaps factory targets to match the period of the sights. But I would also get the period correct service grips with sunken gold medallions. If you use the lahyadr ring and want target grips you can do this:




If the rear face of the cylinder was shaved (serial number will be missing) to permit use of 45 Auto Rim cartridges, you should also be able to use 45 ACP with 1/2 or full moon clips. Or were the chambers recessed for use with 45 AR?

__________________
Jim
S&WCA #819

If you ever decide to sell I would be interested. I collect 455 serial number guns from my love of all things do to with Pontiac Musclecars. 455 was the largest factory engine used at Pontiac.
Matt

Hondo

Very fine looking gun and very useful advise.
First shipment, #455..........still surprises me.

I am leaning toward something unconventional.

The look of fixed sight N frames is very appealing to me, as well as a well done 31/2" barrel.

Docs "one of three" round butt 44 mag snubby is the pinnacle of beauty to my eye, as well as Keith's various custom Nframes.

Pontiaker

Always thought your name was interesting, now I understand.

I will keep you in mind, although it seems like most Smiths are on a one way trip when they come in my direction.
Sort of like a friendly Black Hole.

I just mailed payment and because of handgun permit timing,
it will probably be three weeks before she is mine. Hawaii.

Really appreciate the info. and interest. It IS a TL

__________________
I Love This Site

gaucho1,

Before it makes the long journey across the sea, you may want to consider a trade for a TL that starts out much closer to the configuration you are ultimately looking for; already w/fixed sights & 3 1/2" barrel. Do you like nickel? Do you specifically want a 45 ACP?

__________________
Jim
S&WCA #819

Hondo44

PM sent.

John

__________________
I Love This Site

Jim,
That date is for the first shipment of converted TL's from the regular production .44 Specials.
#455 isn't on the list of serial's assigned to these converted guns, so I believe it is from the Contract for the .455 MkII which was first shipped on 10/21/1914. (I have #718 and it letters as shipping in this batch)

__________________
Dean
SWCA #680 SWHF #446

Wow!!!

I was worried about the advanced age. This takes a load off.

Really, I am always amazed at the depth and precision of
knowledge and a willingness to refine and modify information.

I can finally share a Smith that has some degree of novelty
to figure out.

Now for that full dress court rig, after acceptable mods of course.

__________________
I Love This Site

Hi Dean,
As I stated # 455 is part of the 1- to 5-6000 military contract guns so we agree there. Any gun below a 4 digit # has to be from the 5-6000 contract. But the 4/8/12 date is not from the 666 (808 including com’l guns) converted 44 Spls since those were made and shipped later during WW I. The 1st shipment of the 1 to 5-6000 was in 4/8/12 with the majority of the guns shipped in the 10/21/14 batch (yours being one). Maybe I shouldn't have presumed his low # of 455 was in the 4/8/12 1st shipment of the 5-6000, but the only way to tell for sure would be for gaucho to letter his gun.

These 455s always make for interesting discussion.

__________________
Jim
S&WCA #819

Jim,
Now I am confused! I just went back and reread Neal & Jinks and the SCSW3. I can see where you are coming from with the 1912 date, but there are some inconsistencies in the books. Both N&J and SCSW3 have the .455 Mk II HE 1st Model as being made 1914-1915. N&J also says that the conversions were done during the war. So how could any of them be shipped in 1912 as stated in N&J? The war didn’t start until 1914. I always assumed (dangerous word) that the conversions were pre-war and the Brits then contracted for the MkII’s when the balloon went up.
I also find it kind of hard to accept that serial 455 was shipped 2 years before 718. Especially when they were filling war orders.
You’re right, a letter should be in order……

(This next bit doesn’t really prove or disprove anything, but it came up in my research and I hate to waste it, so…………………………)

To confuse the issue even further according to Ezell in his Handguns of the World, there were a plethora of .455 Brit military cartridges starting in 1894.
.455 Webley Cordite Mk I; approved 9/14/1894; obsolete 4/19/1946
(This one was the older longer case)
.455 Webley Cordite Mk II; app. 2/5/1898; obs.9/18/1939 (Short case, long tapered lead bullet. (I think this is the one that the MK II TL was named after even though it would handle the Mk I cartridge without any problems.)
Then there were a couple of what look like full lead wadcutters, the Mk III 1898-1902 and the Mk IV 1904-1914. I imagine these were considered “dum-dums” and were discontinued. There also a Mk V approved 1914 and obsolete the same year. Ezell doesn’t have a picture of this one, but the bullet weight puts it as another flat nose of some sort.
The final offering is the Mk VI which was WW2 (9/18/1939) easily identified by the jacketed bullet instead of lead.

__________________
Dean
SWCA #680 SWHF #446

Well, I certainly agree with you Dean. I had to read it over a couple of times myself because it is inconsistent! I now believe the reference to shipping on 4/8/12 per N&J pg 203 refers to the 666 conversions because the shipping dates and serial #s are written in and are therefore in the context of the 44 HE 1st Model section of N&J. Even though it’s clearly stated on the same page they were done during the war which would be after 1914 as you say.

SCSW 3rd refers to both the 666 44 HE 1st Model conversions to 455 on pg 158 and the 455 HE 1st Model contract guns "introduced Sept of 1914" pg 166 (the “contract” guns #’d 1 to 5 or 6K) as “conversions”.

This is erroneous as only the 666 were converted from assembled 44 HEs. However, both groups can be correctly referred to as HE 1st Models, but the 1st are 44 HE 1st Models, changed to 455s and the next were made as 455 HE 1st Models. The serial #’s of the 666 44 HE 1st Model 455s were in the 44 HE range and therefore have duplicate #s with the later 455 1st Model contract guns in their own serial range of the 1 to 5-6000.

So where are we w/gaucho's gun? It’s certainly a 1st Model “contract” gun and I’m changing my original position on the shipping date because I’m convinced that you’re right. As a contract gun his #455 could not have shipped before 1914 and probably in the same group as yours.

Lingering questions:
Why did it take 33 shipments to ship only 666 guns? What were the shipment dates of the contract guns? Were any conversion guns shipped with contract guns?

__________________
Jim
S&WCA #819

gaucho1,

One last question, I don't think we have established a cartridge marking on your gun; is the barrel roll marked for 455?

Mine is marked Smith & Wesson 455 on the left side.
Thx,

__________________
Jim
S&WCA #819

My #718 has no cartridge markings on the barrel.

I'm wondering if the "33" shipments might include all shipments of the conversions, the 1st models and the 2nd Models? (Or some combination thereof..)

__________________
Dean
SWCA #680 SWHF #446

The 2nd Model opens another pandora's box! N&J says it "was designated as the 44 HE 1`st Model" on pg 215 which must be a misprint!!!!

And 691 were made from 1st Model frames...was the TL cam tab milled-slot in the frame filled or were the frames assembled into 455s before the slot was milled?

__________________
Jim
S&WCA #819

No markings visible in the close-up pictures, either side.

Obvious re-blue, so anything could have happened.

__________________
I Love This Site