I like it.
Bob Loveless is an icon in knife making. So having his name attached to it is interesting for sure.
Even without his name attached to it I like it. Not everyone buys a revolver and keeps it hermetically sealed for posterity. Some just like them, modify them to their taste and shoot them. Enjoy them with their friends and don’t even think about tomorrow.
Think about Elmer Keith’s SSAs that he modified to his taste.
I think it is a very cool revolver and if I saw it in a gun shop and could afford it I would buy it. YMMV and after reading this thread it certainly does. 😂😎

The Gerber Guardian is a nice boot knife designed by Loveless.
I still have one and gave others as gifts to family members.
Not sure if the Guardian II has his name on blade.

A Loveless knife in picture.
From the old Gun Digest Book of Knives.
Not being a metal man I made my blades from
Gaboon Ebony and Carbon Fiber in the '70s.
Not quite sharp enough to shave with, but stick it in,
snap it off, and leave a lasting impression.

Attached Images

	IMG_2231.jpg (96.7 KB, 63 views)
	IMG_2229.jpg (22.5 KB, 47 views)

__________________
Have Fun/Stay Safe

Well, I don't know about that!

Once upon a time, I was prowling around in David Carroll's back room---and came upon one of many pistol rugs with a tag on it---said "Triple Lock-King". I figured it for a fixed sight gun with maybe a King front sight on it--or maybe a Cockeyed Hammer. I opened it up anyway.

I almost dropped my teeth at that point! Here in my grubby little paws was a King Super Target Triple Lock---pretty much brand spanking new!! I'd always wanted one of these things---probably wanted a K frame more than anything else, but then we all have to make sacrifices now and then---and home it goes with me.

The real point of this little ditty is I knew it was a King Super Target right off---probably could have figured it out in the dark---as could a good number of folks in this forum. I dare say a goodly number more could do the same if I was to show a picture of it----all without any documentation of its provenance whatsoever. This gun here presents as exactly what it looks like----a nicely refinished Triple Lock.

Given the desire to have it present as something more, more work needs to be done.

The end.

Ralph Tremaine

I’m not sure why he would after essentially being called a liar in the post right above your’s.

I’m sure he has read my pre-warning first post, (#9,) about comments and speculations that would be given. I had a feeling.

I mean no intended offense to anyone who was offering their opinion. We all have them.

Jim

Offering an opinion is one thing.

mckay44 said Bob Loveless personally gave him the gun and the specific statement proffered was…

That’s not an opinion that’s an accusation.

He SAID Loveless gave him the gun.

You either believe that or you don’t and if you tell a man that you don’t believe the words he offered, you’re calling him a liar.

Which is pretty easy to do from behind a keyboard.

And lest my statement be anything but clear, I personally consider behavior like that cowardly.

That’s not how you treat people in any community virtual or otherwise.

No, I’ve been around long enough to see many “claims” fail to hold up due to facts proving otherwise, intentional or not. Many firearms are bringing big bucks simply with claims such as “attributed to”, “reported to be”, etc.

You have irrefutable claims, those that can be proven as true, 100%:

A revolver with a factory letter stating this revolver shipped to the 26th President of the United States, a revolver used as evidence in a trial, listed by make, model, and serial number, matching a revolver in hand, assuming, of course, that serial numbers have not been altered, which is usually the case.

Then you have claims that may or may not be provable, but are possible. A revolver shipped to Frank Butler. Which one? The one associated with Annie Oakley, or one of the other 65 or so Frank Butlers in America during that time frame. As opposed to shipping to Frank Butler of a specific address associated with Annie Oakley’s husband. Or the reverse, such as Frank Butler of Portland Oregon, for example, a place Annie Oakley and her husband never resided.

Then you have claims passed down by family folklore. Such as my father was friends with a lawyer who had a client whose father was on the RMS Titanic and this revolver my father gave me was given to him by this lawyer who stated his client from many years ago whose father was on the Titanic that he had this revolver with him on the Titanic. Might or might not be true.

Or, the above situation is an actual event, involving a revolver shipped around 1900. Let’s say this revolver had this story associated with it, and a factory letter showed that this revolver shipped 2 years after the Titanic went down. Then the claim is easily disproven.

Then there are claims that are not quite right, but are proven or disproven by the factory letter. Folks forget things over time. Someone inherits a few revolvers, says a particular revolver was given to him by Ed McGivern. Letters are obtained for these several revolvers. The one given to this individual, as per their claim, shipped to a hardware store, but the other revolver the individual didn’t say anything about letters as shipped to Ed McGivern.

Then there are claims that can’t be proven or disproven, but add little or no value to a firearm. The individual who says that he was given this revolver by Bob Loveless AND states it was reblued elsewhere, most likely the facts. He’s not even trying to claim Bob Loveless did the work, or at least the reblue, on this revolver.

Then there are outright fabrications, intended for financial gain. My revolver was used by Jesse James. How do I know this? His mother sold my grandfather his gun. Jesse James’ mother bought old guns and sold them in her later years for profit, these guns having no association with Jesse James whatsoever.

Then there are claims that must be true because they have a notarized letter. The notary only affirms the individual before them is that individual and signs the letter in front of the notary. The notary is not verifying claims as factual, or not.

So, in this case, the individual who claims this revolver was given to him by Bob Loveless and even gave information that did not enhance the status of the revolver—there’s a 99%+ chance his statement is true.

The claim I’m going to make about my Smith & Wesson revolver belonging to Teddy Roosevelt. I’m doing that to reap vast rewards. Probably a 99% chance my claim is false. When I tell you it’s a Registered Magnum and you tell me my revolver cannot have been manufactured before 1935 and President Roosevelt passed away in 1919–well, now you’ve just proven I’m a liar.

You have to be careful out there! One big name auction house makes a fortune for their clients based on a very shaky “attributed to” and gives a long story about the times, the individual, etc, while very craftily ignoring or proving the very weak claim.

Revolver guys know about Keith, Givens, Miculek, Musicians know about Elvis, Berry, Hendrix, Beatles, Car guys know about Shelby, Stephenson, McLaren. Knife guys know about Loveless, Ruana, Randal

One thing to consider here is that no one here is trying to profit from this gun. It was a generous gift and the provenance is now proven. Like any type of art its relevance and beauty is subjective. Bashing such a gift is callus and low class.

As it turns out, the donor even stated this revolver was not reblued by Bob Loveless, which supposedly devalues this revolver, if it even deserved a premium if Bob Lovelless did the work, which remains baffling to me.

If Carol Shelby cut the barrel on a Smith & Wesson revolver and reblued it, would you pay more for it? I wouldn’t. My cardiologist does a great job and is well known for being a top notch cardiologist. But if he offered me a revolver that he modified and reblued, would I pay more for it? Absolutely not.

The OPs revolver is a generous gift from a friend. Fun to shoot, but worth as much as any other Triple Lock revolver reblued with a chopped barrel and replaced stocks. For goodness sakes, Roy Jinks has done more with regards to Smith & Wesson revolvers than anyone else, saving the records when the old factory was demolished circa 1970, writing various books and articles about Smith & Wesson revolvers, etc and he has sold off his top notch collection, original, rare, and with condition, and my observations are that none of his revolvers brought any more because he owned them.

Edit: How is being truthful bashing a gift? I never bashed it. I simply am of the opinion that I wouldn’t pay a premium no matter who did the work, as modified from original. Others seemed to think a premium was warranted if Bob Loveless did the work, for whatever reason that escapes me.

This revolver is an interesting shooter. If someone offered it to me, I’d be tickled pink, but I would also have no delusions as to its actual value. To me, a value of $1000 for such a heavily modified revolver would be a stretch.

If I was given this revolver as a gift from a special friend, I would cherish it and keep it forever. Which the OP likely will do. If I obtained this revolver in a trade with a few other revolvers or bought it really cheaply, I’d keep it for awhile, then probably trade it for something else, or sell it to buy something better. I think others might as well. I have a gun given to me by a now deceased friend shortly before he died. Does it serve any purpose? No. I really cannot shoot it as it has Damascus barrels (although studies by Sherman Bell about 20 years ago seem to disprove the notion that Damascus barrels are unsafe to shoot). But will I ever part with this wallhanger? Unlikely.

Patton wasn't a gunsmith, stuck aftermarket grips and an adapter on his 357 and it has a lot of blue missing. Must be near worthless to many collectors.

Elvis's model 53 would have sold for good money even if he had sawed the barrel off with a hack saw.

how about J Edgar's gun?

Some people wouldn't pay $2000 for an original register magnum because they can buy a used model 28 for $700

May people would not pay extra for a set of rosewood grips made by Orville Gibson, but I bet Rusty would.

Point is guns are worth what a buyer who wants them will pay for them

PS
I went looking and many of Bob Loveless's knives sell for as much or more than a registered magnum.

He was an excellent metal worker. But, I doubt they cut or hold an edge any better the ones I make. You can by others with the same excellent fit and finish. A good part of the value is that his name is attached.

Only thing I can tell you is he didn't do it any favors.

__________________
Grumpy Old Man With a Gun

What about a gun like a 1950 5" M&P 44 special that was engraved by Tom Hartliep. Would that be considered a modified & reblued gun with no collector value? Or would it be desirable if done well?

Never heard of him, I am aware of Neil Hartleip though. What has been done to this revolver regardless of who did it or who owned it is in no way comparable to a high quality professional engraving job. With enough work this could be a very nice shooter but it will never be a collector gun again. That ship has sailed. Loveless knives are works of art but apparently his gun work was not ,if this is supposed to be a shining example of what work he did. That's a personal opinion of course but it is one that will be shared by anyone who values an unmolested Triple Lock , and I'm one.

__________________
Grumpy Old Man With a Gun

As were thousands of others , don't see the first shred of proof in this.

__________________
Grumpy Old Man With a Gun

Something I ran into today (plenty on Ebay) for those who doubt a knifemaker could be a gunsmith too…

Attached Images

	762B16B9-D963-403D-9352-10409F934838.jpg (23.5 KB, 55 views)
	BB21DAC0-0CAD-48E6-8C41-3CB89030F981.jpg (23.4 KB, 56 views)
	94434730-96B3-419D-8202-1EDE1D3BD799.jpg (22.5 KB, 49 views)

__________________
Uvidíme se později, aligátore.

I wouldn't think any more or less of it if it were owned by Patty Loveless. The value is the gun, not the provenance.

__________________
Where we go one, we go all

To a certain extent, I'll have to disagree...Every gun, and every gun's owner all have history...For me as a history student, any provenance attached to a gun increases my interest, and therefore its perceived value to me......Ben

__________________
Cogito, ergo BOOM!...

To ones liking or not just watch one Rock Island Auction. Provenance to a historical or well known person will 100% increase value. Depending on who the person is. This is not disputable. Buyers do pay more for provenance, condition and scarcity.

May not be the best example of a what if but…
If and when RM Reg #1 ever shows I would love to buy it for the cost of a normal like condition RM but I don’t think that will be the case.

I'm in the "Name adds value" camp, but there's room for everybody - vote with your wallet!

It's interesting because, almost by definition, the most perfect possible collector gun - in terms of condition and originality - is a gun with NO story.

__________________
Uvidíme se později, aligátore.

In 1978-1979, Kuzan Oda, a Japanese swordsmith worked with Bob for awhile. Bob taught him some things, Kuzan taught Bob some things. I think they worked together for about a year. Here is a drop point hunter done by Kuzan that has all the features of a Bob Loveless drop point hunter, same craftsmanship level, exact same method of construction and same taper to the tang but is worth only 1/10-1/20th of a Loveless version. The only difference in the knives is that Bob pinned his scales while Kuzan worked a taper on the front of the scale and the hilt that eliminated the need to pin.

Stu

Attached Images

Sheath left side.jpg (99.1 KB, 128 views)

Since he was the most influential Knifemaker of this Age,
Loveless Designs are copied by a multitude of makers.
Only a few were officially sanctioned by Loveless.
Here’s one that was.

Attached Images

IMG_0420.jpg (30.7 KB, 36 views)

__________________
NRA LIFE MEMBER

And here’s one probably not officially authorized.
Bark River’s rendition of the Loveless City Knife.

Attached Images

B7BEE852-5BC1-4CEF-AB96-8F801AAE5AC5.jpg (80.5 KB, 25 views)

__________________
NRA LIFE MEMBER

Nice representation of the Guardless Drop Point Hunter. Bob also designed for Gerber, their Guardian series. I had one years ago I gave to one of my kids (who, of course, lost it), still looking for another. As with anything directly associated with Bob, they are a little spendy now.....

__________________
Even older, even crankier....

Im thinking his answer to that goes something like this:

But it's a gun made by S&W not a knife made by Loveless.

__________________
Where we go one, we go all

I was expecting the addition of a bayonet.

So, with all due respect, does that mean that if someone had sent a Registered Magnum to Churchill for engraving, that you would not pay even one cent over the current value of an non-engraved RM, since it would be a non factory modified and refinished revolver?

__________________
Have Canon, Will Travel

I don’t know if you refer to Churchill, an engraver, or Winston Churchill, the statesman, but the revolver of engraved, would be worth the value of the engraving as it enhances the revolver, and if owned by Winston Churchill, increased due to that provenance.

R W Loveless isn’t a household name nor is he a renowned engraver, so I value this revolver just for what it is in its current state. YMMV