PJGP
Member
If one has one of these revolvers (not me, mine is sn3989) is it possible to determine its origin? By this I mean converted 44 TL or new manufacture. If so then how?
Thanks
Peter
Thanks
Peter
Duplicate Serial Number 455 Triple Lock Question
- Thread starter PJGP
- Start date
Register to hide this ad
Without knowing beans from apple butter about where you're going with this, my knee-jerk reaction is new manufacture is going to have matching serial numbers (frame/cylinder/barrel), whereas a converted is likely to have matching (or at least different) barrel and cylinder numbers---different from the frame.
Make sense??
Ralph Tremaine
Make sense??
Ralph Tremaine
Last edited:
I think he is talking about the fact that there actually are some 455 TL that left the factory with duplicated serial numbers as some of a later batch were made up by the factory using what were originally numbered to become 44 specials.
Hondo pretty much covered it in the 455 research thread
http://smith-wessonforum.com/s-w-ha...olver-research-thread.html?highlight=research
3. A. 455 Hand Ejector-2nd Model #5801 (formerly #5462) thru 74755.
4. 44 Hand Ejector-1st Model Triple Lock: 691 assembled at the end of the British contract but sold on the commercial market 1916-17, numbered in the 44 Spl # series ~ 12,XXX range.
So those last batch 4 691 455 Triple locks would have matched 691 of the batch 3 triple locks that had numbers in the 12XXX
However I believe that a match has yet to be found
Hondo pretty much covered it in the 455 research thread
http://smith-wessonforum.com/s-w-ha...olver-research-thread.html?highlight=research
3. A. 455 Hand Ejector-2nd Model #5801 (formerly #5462) thru 74755.
4. 44 Hand Ejector-1st Model Triple Lock: 691 assembled at the end of the British contract but sold on the commercial market 1916-17, numbered in the 44 Spl # series ~ 12,XXX range.
So those last batch 4 691 455 Triple locks would have matched 691 of the batch 3 triple locks that had numbers in the 12XXX
However I believe that a match has yet to be found
Last edited:
StrawHat
Member
- Joined
- Mar 17, 2005
- Messages
- 26,056
- Reaction score
- 48,156
I think you are talking about the first 455s built for the British contract in 1914, which were 44 Specials that were pulled from the vault and converted to 455. Around 65 of then have numbers low enough to be duplicated in the separate 455 number series.
I have often wondered the same thing.
For example, #1104 is the lowest number on the list of converted 44s.
So, if one is holding a 455 TL with #1104, is it the converted 44, or the one originally built as a 455? I have no clue if there is any way to tell them apart.
Theoretically, one could have TWO 455 Tls with the #1104. I have often wondered if a pair have ever been put together.
As I said, about 65 of the converted 44 TLs had numbers low enough to be duplicated in the first 5800 of the 455 TLs, so it is possible that 65 pairs of 455 TLs once existed with duplicate serial numbers!
Last edited:
I think you mean those numbered 1 through at least 5802, in which each and every number could surface twice, one being in .455 Webley and the other in .44 S & W Special. Here’s one such example of that:
Serial number 225 in .455 Webley:
http://smith-wessonforum.com/s-w-ha...ck-good-bad-maybe.html?posted=1#post140347596
And, attached are photographs of serial number 225 in .44 S & W Special which I own. Note: Revolver would have shipped originally with concave non medallion stocks.
Serial number 225 in .455 Webley:
http://smith-wessonforum.com/s-w-ha...ck-good-bad-maybe.html?posted=1#post140347596
And, attached are photographs of serial number 225 in .44 S & W Special which I own. Note: Revolver would have shipped originally with concave non medallion stocks.
Attachments
I think you are talking about the first 455s built for the British contract in 1914, which were 44 Specials that were pulled from the vault and converted to 455. Around 65 of then have numbers low enough to be duplicated in the separate 455 number series.
I have often wondered the same thing.
For example, #1104 is the lowest number on the list of converted 44s.
So, if one is holding a 455 TL with #1104, is it the converted 44, or the one originally built as a 455? I have no clue if there is any way to tell them apart.
Theoretically, one could have TWO 455 Tls with the #1104. I have often wondered if a pair have ever been put together.
Yes Lee, you are quite correct. That is exactly my question. I wonder if Roy Jinks might have anything to add?
Peter
If 3989 is listed as a type 1 .455 converted 44 Spl TL in the 44 serial range it will have a duplicate in the type 2 .455 TL in the British contract serial range.
I’ll check my type 1 serial # list when I get home later.
Neither will have the caliber marked on the barrel. The only differentiation I’ve been able to determine is the lanyard swivel. Does #3989 have a lanyard swivel that’s drilled and mounted thru the serial number? And the serial number stamped on the left side of the grip frame under the grip?
Last edited:
#3989 is not a duplicate: it's a Type 2 .455 TL in the British contract serial range that began with #1.
It likely has a duplicate in a 44 Spl but not another .455 TL or a 2nd Model .455.
It likely has a duplicate in a 44 Spl but not another .455 TL or a 2nd Model .455.
I think that you misread my post Jim. Yes, I know that my 455 TL is not one ofthe duplicate ones; I have Neal & Jinks with the full list of SN.
It is just that, like Lee, I have often wondered how you would know the difference (if any) between a 44 converted and a newly made 455. Your comment about the lanyard swivel woul appear to anwer the question.
Peter
In my research thread (link above), I list #1616, a type 1 TL with a lanyard swivel drilled thru butt serial #. It’s the only one reported that way. The 44 TLs didn’t normally have swivels. And since the type 1 .455s were reportedly converted from completed and serial # stamped 44s in inventory, they would have all needed swivels.
Those .455s made from scratch with swivels (any pre war gun made with a swivel) of course had the serial # stamped offset and therefore not drilled thru.
I need to find those type 1s reported in my thread with #s listed and ask the owners if the swivels are thru the serial #. Maybe we’ll find a trend to determine a way to differentiate between duplicate numbered type 1 and type 2 TLs.
Those .455s made from scratch with swivels (any pre war gun made with a swivel) of course had the serial # stamped offset and therefore not drilled thru.
I need to find those type 1s reported in my thread with #s listed and ask the owners if the swivels are thru the serial #. Maybe we’ll find a trend to determine a way to differentiate between duplicate numbered type 1 and type 2 TLs.
Well you're right except of course not "each and every # thru 5857" because:
812 .44 #s were used on Type 1 .455s.
not every # of the .44 serial #s was used (not every gun was built).
and some of the #s were used on TLs made in other calibers; 44-40, 45 Colt, .455 non-contract Commercial guns, etc.
In addition to the drilled through serial number, another attribute worth studying on the .44 hand ejectors that were factory converted to .455 for the British government, are the inspection stamps. The sampling is small, because I have only seen about five or six (between one I handled and pictures of the others) that shipped to the British government on October 21, 1914. All of them have the inspection stamp on the frame above the grip, where it is normally for the MkII (as Hondo44 refers to in his post as a type 3). All other British military .455 triple locks, that I have seen, have the inspection stamp on the frame in front of the hammer. It looks like the first large shipment of hand ejectors had their inspection stamps in a unique location.
As Neal and Jinks say that the majority of the 666 converted British military hand ejectors shipped on October 21, 1914 and by the looks of it, about another 800 shipped in October from the group 2. “455 Mark II Hand Ejector-1st Model” Triple Lock, but none of those serial numbers from the latter group are high enough to be duplicates. So those couldn't be confused with a factory converted .44 hand ejectors.
To note: the HE serial # 713 posted above is within the known serial numbers shipped on October 21, 1914. It also has the inspection stamp in that unique location.
As Neal and Jinks say that the majority of the 666 converted British military hand ejectors shipped on October 21, 1914 and by the looks of it, about another 800 shipped in October from the group 2. “455 Mark II Hand Ejector-1st Model” Triple Lock, but none of those serial numbers from the latter group are high enough to be duplicates. So those couldn't be confused with a factory converted .44 hand ejectors.
To note: the HE serial # 713 posted above is within the known serial numbers shipped on October 21, 1914. It also has the inspection stamp in that unique location.
You may be right about the inspection stamps being a clue to differentiate between Type 1 and Type 2 .455 TLs.
Since this thread was written a few more Type 1 TLs (factory converted .44 TLs to .455) have been identified with lanyard swivels drilled thru the serial number.
Unfortunately the owners of the earliest examples of Type 1 TLs did not report about the swivels and I hadn't made the discovery until a few years later. Thx to you we have two more Type 1s with drilled thru swivels.
So all though not conclusive with such a small sampling. It appears that it could be a key indicator to differentiate duplicate numbered Type 1s from Type 2s. We'll just have to wait for more examples.
Since this thread was written a few more Type 1 TLs (factory converted .44 TLs to .455) have been identified with lanyard swivels drilled thru the serial number.
Unfortunately the owners of the earliest examples of Type 1 TLs did not report about the swivels and I hadn't made the discovery until a few years later. Thx to you we have two more Type 1s with drilled thru swivels.
So all though not conclusive with such a small sampling. It appears that it could be a key indicator to differentiate duplicate numbered Type 1s from Type 2s. We'll just have to wait for more examples.
