1899 Army

[zoisrus]

'Morning everybody.
I'm looking at a rough-looking 1899 army. Did all 1000 of them have the "KSM" on the right grip? This one has a regular walnut grip with the inspector's mark on the frame.

Was this the .38 Long Colt revolver that started the army on a search for an automatic .45?

My wallet's not on fire yet but it's smokin' hard.
Thanks, Chris

 

[murphydog]

I seem to recall these had the inspector's stamps in the stocks, but someone here has an original and can let you know for sure.

The primary culprit in the .38 Long Colt situation was the Colt .38 DA, also called the New Army and Navy, which was produced in 1889 until 1905 or so. The 1899 S & W was simply chambered for the then-current service cartridge.

 

[DWalt]

"Was this the .38 Long Colt revolver that started the army on a search for an automatic .45?"

The Colt Army & Navy DA revolver, in several variations and chambered in .38 Long Colt (the "U.S. Service Cartridge"), was the official U. S. military revolver at the turn of the 20th Century. The reputed poor performance of the revolver and cartridge in the Philippines prompted a search for something more effective. Wesson's answer was S&W's Model of 1899 revolver in .38 S&W Special, which was more powerful. And of course, both .38 LC and the .38 S&W Special cartridges could be used with it (the .38 Special being only a longer version of the .38 LC). Apparently, this was not the answer the military sought. So. I'd say that the answer to your question is no, it was the Colt.

Starting in 1905, the Army got serious about a better handgun and through a series of tests and trials, finally adopted the Colt Model of 1909 (Colt New Service) revolver, chambered for a cartridge which was essentially the .45 Colt cartridge (mainly for stopgap use in the Philippines), and shortly thereafter, the Model of 1911 in .45 ACP.

 

[zoisrus]

Thanks Walt and Murphy. I love historical backstories.

I keep making offers on the gun, the owner keeps rejecting them.

Chris

 

[Memphis]

I've been having a "jones" for one of those also. If you're looking at the same one I'm following it does have incorrect grips...nice but incorrect. The correct ones one would definitly have markings. I believe on both stocks. Every now and then these guns come up for auction. I've seen about 3 in the last 7 or 8 months. Two of them were pretty nice. I even saw a pair of correct grips up for auction. That probably won't happen again. Good luck on your search and if you get one please post some pics. I'll do the same.

Roger