Not sure whom "rescued" whom...it could be argued this gem prevented me from spending a whole lot more and purchasing way less.

This beauty was advertised in a recent auction, and was a bargain as it sold at the high end range of a standard model and did not realize the premium garnered by the coveted Target Model. The Target Model configuration was little more than a footnote in the description. Disclaimer: I did ask for photographs of the rear sight to ensure it was not an after market modification.

The auction house described as 80% condition. I rate it as 95%. Maybe a little trekking of the front sight and the trigger, but certainly no light pitting, as described by the auction house. Needless to say, I'm thrilled!

Okay, as I received it. Those awful goncalo alves grips make one's blood pressure rise, don't they?

Attached Images

	20190501_190941.jpg (66.3 KB, 733 views)
	20190501_190955.jpg (62.1 KB, 696 views)

And the "rescue" part. Aaaah! That's better already!

Attached Images

20190501_191522_Burst01.jpg (123.6 KB, 370 views)

And with the appropriate pre war n frame stocks installed. A lucky find from a forum member. I definitely could not have slept well tonight if these had not been properly installed. The other grips are for sale, any ideas as to value and is anyone interested? Also, I intend to send for a factory letter soon. I think this revolver looks good with the exception of the front sight which may (or may not) be an after market modification.

Attached Images

	20190501_191837.jpg (70.1 KB, 398 views)
	20190501_191903.jpg (72.2 KB, 354 views)

Very Nice!! I think the front sight is correct, but not 100% sure. You should "sleep well" tonight!

__________________
PTLAPTA!

Oh man, you hit the money shot with that one.
Great catch!

__________________
SWCA #3356, SWHF#611

That's a true "Bobby Dazzler" as the Brits say!! Congrats!

The front sight is the proper shape for that vintage. Does it have a square gold insert at the top? A close up photo will help.

I have two targets with numbers matching front sight blades shaped the same as yours and one has the insert which I think yours has:



With factory optional sq gold insert:



I had to push the pins out on both to see the factory stamped serial #s.

__________________
Jim
S&WCA #819

Welcome to the club. Here's my 7.5".

Attached Images

TL%20Target.JPG (134.1 KB, 160 views)

__________________
Chris
SWCA #2243 SWHF #292

When I looked at the front sight, it seemed a bit high, but I did not have the other two Target Models I own to compare to. Now that you have posted yours, the size and height appear identical, thus this makes it more likely the front sight is indeed original. Thank you!

Fortunately, I've belonged to the Target Model Triple Lock club for awhile. This one, shipped January 1918, joins its two older brothers, shipped June 1910 and April 1916.

Here's a closeup of the front sight of mine for comparison. I think you're good.

__________________
SWCA #3356, SWHF#611

Hot dang! Now I gotta new grail gun...
Congrats on that one, sir.

__________________
Randy
Provenance nerd

Further review suggests the front sight is original as the shape and height are similar to the ones you posted. And, probably identical to my other two, except these are not readily accessible at this time.

No gold insert is evident at this time.

It should be noted that the front sight contains the only finish inconsistent with the rest of the firearm as it appears as more of a patina. But that doesn't mean someone didn't alter the finish of the sight at one time, maybe to prevent glare. I'm not curious enough at this point to push the pin out and look for a serial number.

Value, anyone, as she is, with the N frame stocks?

In a bit, I'll reveal what the damage was to my checkbook.

And more detailed photographs of the front sight. I cannot determine at this time if original, or not, but obvious evidence of a somewhat sloppy attempt to remove the pin at one time.

Attached Images

	20190502_214218.jpg (54.7 KB, 149 views)
	20190502_214203.jpg (58.3 KB, 157 views)
	20190502_214241.jpg (60.4 KB, 138 views)

And, since I have photographs, the rear sight...

Attached Images

	17-1027x4.jpg (63.9 KB, 179 views)
	17-1027x3.jpg (31.3 KB, 175 views)

I believe it is an original front sight blade but not 'the' original. Perhaps it had an aftermarket sight blade and someone tried to put an original back on it. The front sight pin is not original; it should be domed and exposed on each end like decrossv's in post #10 and mine in post #8. I'd replace the pin with a correct one and confirm the serial # on it while it's out.

__________________
Jim
S&WCA #819

Would the "U" notch rear sight imply a Paine bead on the front?

Nice TL Target for sure!

Curl

These are things only obvious when one takes photographs and can enlarge. Not obvious otherwise as my eyesight is not as keen as it once was.

Since the condition of the blade is worse than the rest of the firearm, and significantly so, I had originally thought the blade was a replacement. This may still very well be the case, but I am also thinking it may have been removed to intentionally dull it. I will know for sure once I replace the pin.

Where do I obtain the proper replacement pin?

That's an excellent question! Does anyone know the answer to this one? Or, is there any relationship between the style of the notch and the type of front sight typically installed?

I have an M&P target from about the same time frame and it has a bead front but a square notch rear which I believe is original. Actually, I am looking for a U notch to tighten up the sight picture.

So

__________________
SWCA #3356, SWHF#611

Miracles do happen. That is what keeps me going...

I don't know but I have some evidence:

My two TL Targets shown above both have front sight blades numbered to the gun and they are both post/Patridge square blades.

But the earlier gun 2XXX # range has a U notch and the later gun 5XXX # range has a sq notch. Again both rear sight blades are #d to the guns.

So it likely has more to do with the vintage of the gun's assembly (not ship date) than the type of front sight blade.

__________________
Jim
S&WCA #819

I had asked if anyone cared to place a valuation on this one, and no responses. I also stated I would reveal my cost at some point. Some individuals get really funny about the cost of things, but I don't. I think it's important to know. How can you determine what anything is worth if you have nothing concrete to compare it to?

My cost on this one was, as follows: I wrote a check to the auction house for $2,742.75 (commission plus sales tax). Shipping to my FFL was $60.39. My FFL's fees were $15. Total cost was $2,818.04, as is, with the goncalo alves stocks. I purchased a pair of nice pre-war N-frame stocks for $200. That put me at $3,018.04, but I traded them for another pair of pre-war N-frame stocks, and I value the trade at $100, so we can deduct that from the total cost, which puts me at $2,918.04. Oh, I forgot the postage to mail the check. So, there it is! $2,918.59, more or less!

Which makes me wonder what the reasoning of my competition (e.g., the other bidders) on this one? Seems like a bit low for a target model in this condition these days. Seems like a bit on the high end for a standard, non target model these days, but maybe not. Perhaps another bidder bid a bit high on it wanting it badly and believing it to be just the standard model?

I have ordered a factory letter on this one, so that will be posted in a bit. I guess you can thus add another $65 plus a 55 cent stamp to the total cost, LOL.

Some folks who know me fairly well are amazed I never became an accountant or at least something involving finances or figures.

Important final message: Due to the Supreme Court ruling (which I disagree with, but that's neither here nor there), you are now charged state sales tax when purchasing from an out of state auction house so you need to figure that out in your computations. That was never the case before!

You did well, Grasshopper!

__________________
Randy
Provenance nerd

I alluded to the request for a factory letter, above. I already know this revolver shipped in January of 1918. It will be interesting to see if this one shipped 01 Jan 1918 to Shapleigh Hardware. That is the latest date I've noted and it comes up not infrequently, shipped to Shapleigh Hardware. Has anyone noted a later date of shipment for a Triple Lock? As Triple Lock revolvers, in the end, were notoriously poor sellers, I'm wondering if Shapleigh Hardware purchased any remaining inventory from Smith & Wesson on that date? Of course, my receipt of the letter could negate that theory.

Interesting to note that Smith & Wesson was open for business and a shipment could occur, at least New Year's Day of 1918.

What a beauty! My wife gets hung up on grips. I keep telling her they are like shoes, if you don't like the pair you're wearing, find another pair. If it were mine, I'd have to shoot it. Some of the best shooters I have come across are the old Smiths.

I intend to shoot it on occasion.

Once again it just goes to show you...they are still out there.
I'm stickin to my "sock drawer" theory, who knows whats still out there sitting in the sock drawer of some old guy whos been dead for God knows how long only to be stumbled upon by whoever finally cleans the old man's stuff out.

I show none later than Jan 1918 in my database.

Hard to beat that actual gun price w/o commission! And even the price with commission, outside of an auction house is still not a bad price for that 95% TL even with wrong grips IMO.

__________________
Jim
S&WCA #819

Is that the 01/01/1918 shipment to Shapleigh Hardware, or were there others?

I certainly cannot complain about the price I paid. Certainly not the $530 bargain a member of this forum paid for a really nice Registered Magnum last year, but that was a once in many lifetimes bargain. Mine was a great buy, uncommon but not unheard of. I am certainly very happy.

I think, if marketed properly on Gunbroker by a savvy merchant such as Woodlawn Boys, this one would easily break $4k, and might surpass $5k if a few bidders wanted it badly enough. However, that's a moot point as I don't intend to sell this one anytime soon.

Well, seeing how a refinished gun with no logo went for over $4k recently, that's not much of a stretch for yours.

__________________
SWCA #3356, SWHF#611

Yes, a few refinished ones have brought over $4k recently (Target Models). I had forgotten that. It's good to remember that as it makes mine seem even more of a bargain.

For #14285 I only have Jan 1918 because the owner only called for the date, didn't get a letter.

I can't imagine anyone seeing the auction photos could not have seen that it was a target.

__________________
Jim
S&WCA #819

I'm not all that convinced that the auction house recognized that this one is a Target Model as the pre-auction estimate was $1250 to $1750, which is what this one would be worth in this condition if a standard, non Target Model after adding buyer's premium to the total.

As discussed in another thread, the pin was removed earlier today. I am aware the base of the blade is sickle shaped and I was under the impression it would pop right out. Not so! I applied Kroil to it, and unless it eventually pops out easily, I might not know if this is stamped with the serial number, confirming factory originality, or not.