A comparative rarity of Hand Ejector First Model (Triple Lock) revolvers in all calibers, most commonly .44 Smith & Wesson Special, followed by .455 Webley, and then, less commonly, .45 Colt (factory chambered), .44 Russian, .44-40, .38-40, and .22 LR; as well as barrel length (4”, 5”, 6”, 6 1/2”, & 7 1/2”), and finish and embellishment (Blued, Nickeled, Other, and engraved or not), has long been in order, and so I will attempt to tackle that, using published data (which isn’t always necessarily correct, or doesn’t seem practically correct—in that observations belie “what the data says”—and my personal observations, which are likely not statistically significant, and may differ from the observations of others on the forum. And so, this is a working document, I’ll take my best guess and modify based on the observations of others. And, as certain configurations become increasingly rare in occurrence/as observed, the comparative rarity of one unusual configuration vs another becomes increasingly complex.

And so, let’s begin. Of the 15,375 “.44” Hand Ejector First Model Revolvers, SCSW4 states that 13,753 were in .44 S & W Special, 23 were factory chambered in .45 Colt, and 1226 in .450 Eley. Surely, this last figure is incorrect, as I’ve never observed even one in .450 Eley. Not to say one or more don’t exist, but with supposedly 1226 in this caliber, they should surface more often. It most probably references 1226 units commercially produced and numbered in this series, but in .455 Webley, as such revolvers exist, and in numbers suggesting that 1226 of these might be about right. But, when you take these 1226 revolvers and add in the 13,753 in .44 S & W Special and those in factory chambered .45 Colt, the figure is 15,002. Which suggests that the remaining 373 revolvers are chambered in .44 Russian, .44-40, .38-40, and .22 LR. That’s possible, but since these calibers surface so very rarely, it seems 373 to be an overestimate. But it’s the best data available.

Then there’s those in .455 Webley in their own serial number ranges, 812 being .44 Hand Ejector First Model revolvers converted to .455 Webley and ~5802 being manufactured in .455 Webley.

15,375 + ~5802 + 812 = ~21,989 in total.

The .455 Webley revolvers were exclusively blued. All, or nearly all, were manufactured with a 6 1/2” barrel, so this is about 30% of production.

The remaining 70% of production was the commercial production, already briefly addressed. My observations are that about 1 in 3 or 1 in 4 revolvers were nickeled, probably closer to 1 in 3, when you take into account the fact that the Target Model variation is nearly exclusively blued.

In order, most common to least common:

6 1/2”, blued, standard configuration, .44 S & W Special

61/2”, Nickel, standard configuration, .44 S & W Special; about a third as common as the 6 1/2” blued, standard configuration, but still more common than shorter barrel lengths.

5” blued, standard configuration, .44 S & W Special

Now, it starts to get a bit more complicated. I’ll have to group various configurations together and explain why.

The .44 S & W Target Model seems to be about 10% of these 15,375 revolvers. So, about 1500 or 1600, the vast majority with a 6 1/2” barrel, those grouped here. The nickel 5” standard configuration seems to abound with similar frequency.

1226 in .450 Eley in this series (probably .455 Eley).

4” barrel, blued, .44 S & W Special, about 375. Reasoning: About 1 in 3 revolvers are blued, and 3 times 125 is 375. See 4” barrel, nickel, below.

Any potential barrel length and finish, in .44 Russian, .44-40, 38-40, and “reported” .22 LR: 373

7 1/2” barrel, blued, Target configuration. My guess is in the 300 to 500 range.

4”, nickel, .44 S & W Special, somewhere I had read “about 100” or “about 125” of these were manufactured. That seems about right.

In the 4100 to 4300 serial number range, a few Target Model .455 Webley revolvers were produced, presumably all blued. So, perhaps 25 or 50? Perhaps the same number of factory engraved examples in all barrel lengths, finishes, and configurations? Also included in this range, give or take, would be Target Model revolvers with a barrel length of less than 7 1/2” or 6 1/2”, being a Target Model revolver. And, we should consider production in this range of revolvers of various barrel lengths with a target rear sight and fixed front sight.

Out of production numbers of ~21989, some were scrapped. I am open to input here, but let’s guess 1 out of a thousand didn’t pass muster. So, less than two dozen here. -21,989 - ~22 (1 per thousand), suggests total production might be closer to $21,967.

12 prototypes, serial numbered 088 to 099, 7 1/2” barrel, Target sights. Perhaps another dozen, maybe less, were Target Model examples of various barrel lengths, most or all 6 1/2”, with nickel finish.

<20 Bisley Target Models, for use at Bisley, England. Fixed front sight, windage-adjustable-only rear sight.

<20 (< 10 each), chambered in .44-40 and .38-40.

Roy stated in a question I posed to him that 98% of revolvers with 71/2” barrels were target Model revolvers, and so, when you extrapolate, the figure here should be 10 or less.

<10: Early production 4 screw models.

Probably 2: In SCSW4, a pre production revolver in .45 Special (probably.45 Frankfort) serial number 09. Edit: Probably a second existed as well. Both were likely destroyed during army trials rust testing.

0 (Zero): Smith & Wesson revolvers with 6” barrels. Mentioned in publications and various contemporary documents, but, to date, I don’t think one has ever surfaced.

This is my best attempt to quantify this data. Comments and corrections welcome.

12 prototypes, serial numbered 088 to 099, all nickel, 7 1/2” barrel, Target sights. Perhaps an equal number, give or take, were produced as nickel Target Model revolvers over the years commercially.
The 12 088-099 were not nickel. They were all blue. The Calkins gun, the sn escapes me, was plated later. Here is mine 088. I've also included my other
TL 0444.

Attached Images

	Triple Lock 088 right.jpg (70.4 KB, 79 views)
	Triple Lock 088 butt.jpg (47.0 KB, 62 views)
	Triple Lock 088 left.jpg (29.1 KB, 74 views)
	.0444 name.jpg (18.5 KB, 73 views)

__________________
Don Mundell

Thank you Don, now I recall yours was blued. I edited the first post.

Really good analysis. Thank you.

__________________
Randy
Provenance nerd

Great info.
Some folks no longer like current day gun shows.
But...to have a Smith that maybe one of less than a dozen
sounds like a pretty good find.
Just never know.

And, here’s another one of those. I didn’t realize the comparative rarity of these when I purchased this one. 7 1/2” barrel, standard configuration.

Attached Images

	IMG_1272.jpg (123.8 KB, 58 views)
	IMG_1273.jpg (119.8 KB, 44 views)

Don's pics reoriented

Attached Images

	Triple Lock 088 left.jpg (44.0 KB, 34 views)
	Triple Lock 088 right.jpg (121.7 KB, 19 views)

Very nice job for a difficult task. A few comments just off the top of my head:

At the end of British 455 production there was an additional 691 TLs shipped commercially.

A very few of the earliest TLs were 4 screw models (no trigger guard screw).

The lack of finding .450/.455 Eley chambering is no doubt because they were shipped to England commercially and few came back to the US.

There are a very few Bisley Target models (rear adjustable sight for windage only per Bisley match rules) shipped to England.

There were more than one TL chambered in the 45 S&W Special (45 Frankfort) for the 1906 Army Trials. At least one was destroyed in testing.

And not every serial number in the TL number range was likely shipped owing to possible frames that didn’t pass final inspection, etc.

Hope this helps.

__________________
Jim
S&WCA #819

I have one of the few TL shipped in the .44/40 caliber. It was sent to Astlett Co. New York, NY. in late Dec.1913. It may have been a special order gun as it is missing in the list of guns shipped to the British Commonwealth around this time. Sn. 7436

Richard

The 44-40 TL is a real prize! And was definitely special ordered. But neither will any TLs in the 1st Model .44 serial number range not chambered in the British .455 be on that list of TL serial numbers shipped to the British.

__________________
Jim
S&WCA #819

Good information. You have made a thorough study of the TL revolvers. Instead of mrcvs, you should go by the handle, mrTL.

Curly

Well, my handle was chosen about the time I received licensure in the UK to practice veterinary medicine. Across the pond, one is an MRCVS, Member of the Royal College of Veterinary Surgeons. This is what James Herriot (Alf Wight), of All Creatures Great and Small fame had. I signed my name once in the same book he did, of course many years after he did.

But, it is perceived as having to do with the drugstore chain CVS, which, of course, it has nothing to do with whatsoever.

If I had it to do over again, my handle would be MrBojangles, which is a handle I now use if I join a new forum, and have used on forums I have joined much more recently than this one.


Back to the subject matter of this thread. Yes, I study the Triple Lock revolver religiously and my observations and research, while not gospel, at least deserve an honorable mention.

Very honorable mention, indeed!

Curly

Thank you.

And so, before I update the first post, how many of the earliest Triple Lock revolvers were 4 screw examples? It might only be that pre production group of 12, serial numbers 088-099, which would lead to a double count of these, but I can revise the description. Assuming these revolvers are 4 screw examples. And we’re there others? Or were these not 4 screw models?

.455 Webley is common. .450 Webley, I’ve not seen even one surface. Given the internet and the posting of revolvers by aficionados even in foreign countries, the fact I’ve not seen one in .450 Webley leads me to believe these are all in .455 Webley. If anyone can produce one chambered in .450 Webley, please prove me wrong!

I think the Bisley Target Model is what I had in mind when I addressed the fixed front sight and Target Model rear sight. But, that sight is different than the Target Model rear sight. And so, this should probably be a separate category. My guess is 20 or less?

Is the number for Army Trials known? It can’t be many. 5 or less?

And, of the nearly 22,000 manufactured, how many were serial numbered and then scrapped? My guess is none. I would think the failure to pass muster would occur prior to serialization. Really wild guess here, but that might be one of every thousand frames, meaning my total production numbers would then. E bumped up to approximately 22 more, but then backed down to that which actually left the factory.

You may have heard of Tim Mullen’s S&W books. In the last couple of years an excerpt from one of his books was printed in the S&WCA Journal magazine showing a very early TL 4 screw with a single digit (IIRC, maybe number 3) serial number. So it couldn’t be one of the prototypes; I know it didn’t start with a zero.

That’s the only documented 4 screw TL that I know of. Perhaps contacting owners of other low serial number, prototypes or military trials TLs could produce more examples. SCSW4 lists # 09 as a 4 screw with the trigger guard screw hole plugged.

__________________
Jim
S&WCA #819

The first step in assembling the gun is to sand the grip blanks to fit the grip frame exactly, then fit the side-plate to the frame, and then serial-number these three parts together.

The grips are sent to be carved and checkered, and the assembly then continues with the rest of the parts. Checks are made all along this process, and if something is not right, it has to be fixed, somehow, or the assembly is scrapped.

The answer to your question is that everything that is scrapped already has a serial number.

Mike Priwer

If this is the case, any idea as to what might be listed in the shipping ledgers for a serial number associated with a scrapped revolver?

Likely nothing since they did not ship.

Sent from my SM-A136U using Tapatalk

__________________
Robert
SWCA #2906, SWHF #760

It had to be something or left blank. They didn’t skip numbers. But most left blank are “open on the books” and entered commerce through other than normal channels. I have one such revolver, a Model of 1903.

If they didnt ship in serial number sequence, how can we know if a number was skipped. I would think a scrapped serial numbered frame would be in a production log as scrapped, not in a shipping log?

Sent from my SM-A136U using Tapatalk

__________________
Robert
SWCA #2906, SWHF #760

Shipping ledgers are in preprinted numerical sequence, numbers are not skipped. Ship locations are entered, dates are entered, common ship locations appear to be stamped with rubber stamps, often abbreviated. For example, M W Robinson might just be M W R, IIRC.

Jerry Jeff needs to make an appearance here.

__________________
S&WHF #946
S&WCA #3824

Original post updated to reflect your input. Please look for these changes and comment as to the validity of my incorporation, or if I am way off the mark.

To avoid confusion especially for novice readers:

With regard to the British contract service revolvers, the cartridge is more commonly labeled the .455 Mk II in S&W sources like the original boxes and in the books discussing these, rather than .455 Webley, especially when acknowledging they were all chambered for the longer .455 Mk I cartridge.

"<20 Bisley Target Models, for use at Bisley, England. Fixed front sight, adjustable rear sight." For clarity should be described as windage-adjustable-only rear sight.

"Only 1: In SCSW4, a pre production revolver in .45 [S&W] Special (.45 Frankfort) serial number 09. Edit: For practical reasons, more than one of these existed, at least one of which was scrapped. Guess here, but 5 or less?" Rather than "scrapped", destroyed during army trials rust testing is a more informative description. I seem to recall sources indicating only two guns in .45 Frankfort were submitted to the Army for testing.

Hope this helps.

__________________
Jim
S&WCA #819

Thank you, Jim. Post #1 edited to reflect these changes.

You’re welcome!

__________________
Jim
S&WCA #819