1902 Target?

[Chukar60]

190? UPDATE

I had a short time between the information that was initially provided to me here and when I had to get to work last night.
I took advantage of it and went to look at the gun in question.
I bought the gun and brought it home. for those engaged in the discussion over the model, the SN is 59779.
What came home with me is my first venture into HE's. IMO the gun retains between 60 & 65 % of original finish. I have been informed here the stocks are not correct. So if someone could show me what the correct wood stocks are, I can start that search. If someone can tell me what the current stocks are, as soon as I locate the correct ones, these will go up for sale.
The gun is indeed a 5" bbl, and the rear sight is the target type.
The action is well timed, and still very tight. lock up is very good. The bore is shiny with no dark spots, pits or rings. cylinder chambers are in the same condition. The recoil shield is barely worn and shows no cartridge imprints in the blue.
I cannot get the initial photos to load from my computer. I sent Mike 3 pictures of the gun as I received it and the SN for his data base. perhaps he can get them to load. I am going to clean it up and take more pics. I will try to load those when I have them.
I can now see why you all love these guns. the action on this is incredible to me. It feels quite different than my model #'d Smiths. The SA trigger is as good as any other Smith I own and better than some. The DA while heavy, is quite smooth. I marvel at the quality of this gun. Considering the manufacturing technology of this time period this seems a work of art.
I will be sending off the form to get this lettered. Due to the debate I really want the factory "official" determination. Mike, thank you for sharing your letter.
Aside from the ethical stand point, is this safe to shoot? I really want to shoot it.The barrel is stamped "38 S&W special & US service ctg's" does anyone have a load recipe they would recommend?
Thank you all for your input, it has been invaluable to me. I would like to compliment all of you. While this gun has stirred some lively debate as to it's proper categorization, you have all been civil, and the discussion has not fallen into disrespectful discourse. This forum is one of the finest and most valued parts of my Smith hobby.

 

[DWalt]

Addressing only your ammunition question, it should be safe to shoot. It's recommended that only standard velocity lead bullet loads be fired. It's probably best to use only wadcutter target loads as they have the lowest chamber pressure. If you are a reloader, the ancient, time-tested target load of 2.8-3.0 grains of Bullseye and a 148 grain wadcutter bullet is ideal. The "U. S. Service" cartridge refers to the old .38 Long Colt, which was the official U. S. military revolver cartridge of that time. It's simply a little shorter and weaker than the later .38 Special, but either size will chamber. The .38 Long Colt is all but obsolete, but can be made by shortening a .38 Special case to a length of 1.03". No real need to do that, however.

 

[mikepriwer]

Here are two of his pictures.

Mike Priwer

 

[Chukar60]

Thanks Mike. Business has me hammered for time right now and it will be a bit before I can get some better pics loaded. Will get some more detailed pictures when time allows

 

[DWalt]

It definitely has the 1920s grips.

 

[jmace57]

I hesitate to jump into this conversation as my experience level is so much less, but am I reading SCSW correctly that the stocks would look similar to the ones that are on it, but with the medallion area flattened?

 

[rct269]

CONFUSION REIGNS SUPREME!!

Ralph

What is the date of your letter ? Over the years, these guns have lettered in a
variety of ways.

There is clearly a conceptual problem here. A square butt is a model, not an engineering
change, as you and I both know. It was introduced right in the middle of the two
engineering changes to the model of 1902. Both models continued to be offered, as
separate catalog entries, for decades. Other than the butt configuration, they are
identical guns. To say it another way, other than their model name, and corresponding
frame difference, they are identical.

So - how to classify two different models that are otherwise identical guns - that is the
problem.

It is slowly, but only partially, getting resolved, with the recognition of the 4-screw 1905.

Regards, Mike

The letter identifying my four screw square butt gun (#59794, shipped February 26, 1906) as a Model of 1902 First Change Target is dated August 11, 2004---suggesting, in this context at least, it's old news. Am I to understand a new letter is (at least) likely to identify it as a four screw Model of 1905?

Ralph Tremaine

 

[mikepriwer]

Ralph

I have a copy of your original letter ( I think you sent it to me ), and parts of it confuse
me. It states that the gun has a square butt, that it is in the round-butt serial number
series, and that it was shipped after the square butt was introduced. I find this confusing
because I am only aware of two M&P serial number series; .38 and .32 Winchester,
neither of which relates to the butt configuration. I do think that this letter is trying
to reconcile an inconsistency that arises from the introduction of a square-butt frame.

In the letter to Mike Pacella regarding his 4-screw square-butt .38, it says that the
gun is a model of 1905, as determined by the square butt. ( I sent you a copy of this
letter.) Here we see that there is now a recognition, 4 years later, of these early
square-butt revolvers as a model of 1905, and not a model of 1902.

Likewise, in my letter of last year, posted above in this thread, we see the same
thing.

So, Yes, I believe that a request for a new letter, identifying your revolver as an
early 4-screw 1905 (square butt), will produce a more appropriate definition of the gun.
Over the last couple of years, I have accumulated over a dozen serial numbers of
known 4-screw 1905's, and have been in communication with the historian about
these guns. As confusing as it is, there is a recognition of these guns as early 1905's .

Regards, Mike

 

[DWalt]

I hesitate to jump into this conversation as my experience level is so much less, but am I reading SCSW correctly that the stocks would look similar to the ones that are on it, but with the medallion area flattened?

Yes - early ones are slightly concave, later ones (1920s) are convex. And no medallions on either. Those from the 'teens have a deep dish gold S&W medallion.

 

[rct269]

Mike

I think the round butt series of serial numbers Roy refers to is probably the serial numbers posted in the "daily log"/"daily production log"/whatever kept by "the foreman" (plant manager??) which apparently tracked the progress/status of any particular "lot"/"batch" of frames they were working on at any given time.

Ralph Tremaine

And no, I didn't send a copy of the earlier letter to you. I've only had the gun/letter for a few weeks. Maybe you got it from Burghoff, or someone in between. I may have sent another letter on a similar gun.

And I reckon I'll have to send off for a new letter/identity---a four screw 1905 has got to be a pretty rare bird----probably at least triple the value----or something----maybe. Would there be a capital gains tax on that? I won't tell if you won't!!

 

[mikepriwer]

Ralph

There is no separate serial number series for round-butts and square-butts. There is
only one serial number series for .38's . All the way from serial 1 to serial 58000 there
were only round butts, and I think that was on him mind.

The real problem is that the definitions in Neal & Jinks do not provide for the reality
of early 4-screw 1905's . Those definitions were put together by Roper for the service
department, and for that purpose only, they work fine - because round and square
butt guns use identical parts, other than the frame and grips. For identifying models,
they do not work correctly, and that is the problem. The historian is the first to
acknowledge that the definition of a 1905 is a square butt. About that he is 100% clear.
However, there is no provision for that in Neal & Jinks.

Yes - 4-screw 1905's are rare birds. But - as Ray Brazille would have said
"The only thing rarer than a 4-screw 1905 is a 4-screw 1905 collector."

And that speaks to the value !

Get back to me if this results in some large capital gain. We can deal with that
if it should be a problem.

Regards, Mike

 

[DWalt]

"Would there be a capital gains tax on that?"

Long term capital gains treatment does not apply to collectibles, if you worry about such things. Or another way to look at it is that all collectible capital gains are short-term.

 

[Chukar60]

UPDATE: I finally got a chance to shoot this gun. absolutely loved the gun. it shot well and seemed pretty accurate for the circumstances.
The problem I am having is my eyes are not what they used to be and the notch in the rear sight blade is very narrow. I had one heck of a time finding and focusing on the front blade in the rear sight notch. Has anyone else had this issue? and if so, does anyone have any ideas how to overcome this.
The gun shot about 2.5" high @ 25 yards. I was shooting 158 gr cast over 2.8 gr of Bullseye. I will try some 148 gr. cast. that should lower the POI.

 

[S&W ucla]

Chukar, 148's should help with POI. As to old eyes, I sometimes use low power 1.25X reading glasses that help me focus on front sight. Good luck, you found a neat one! 5" targets are my favorites