.22 Masterpiece (pre 17) and Model 17

[tipoc]

Here are two 22s both with 6" barrels.

The above model is K708xx a Target Masterpiece. Has a Speed hammer, a tapered rib and barrel, the .100" wide front sight (which was, I read, deleted in 1952). Has a 4 line address so probably sometime after 1948. 5 screws.

Below that is K3316xx with the heavier and milder tapered barrel. The rib is not tapered. The front sight is thicker at .125". It is marked M17 on the yoke with no dash. 4 screws.

Both guns have the original stocks numbered to the guns. All numbers match on both.





Note the difference in the shape of the star extractors.







A few other points.

Holes in the frames that fit a fixture. Notice the added thickness in the frame of the M17 where the strain screw enters the bottom of the frame.







tipoc

 

[tipoc]

A few more pics. Both are very good shooters by the way. Well used but well cared for.









Note the chamfer on the top of the frame of the Masterpiece just above where the frame mates to the barrel. A small touch to ease holstering missing from the M17.





tipoc

 

[smitholdtimer]

tipoc

Great post tipoc, kinda like hiding in plain sight, you never notice the difference until you see them together. Even then you must concentrate.

 

[Igiveup]

Thank you for the education. Now I have to check mine out.

 

[PeterDE]

Now I'll have to get out my Combat Masterpiece and compare them. It was made in the same time frame as yours. Mine has a 4" barrel, but otherwise a lot of the same features as your Target Masterpiece.

Just Curious: Mine has the serial number on the cylinder. I don't see that on yours, or did you photoshop it out?

 

[Waveski]

Can anyone explain that change in the ejector stars?

 

[kscharlie]

Can anyone explain that change in the ejector stars?

I would also like to know about that ejector. I have a one line address 1947 Masterpiece and a 1953 Masterpiece and they both have the "normal" pattern ejector. Have never seen one like this.

 

[tipoc]

Now I'll have to get out my Combat Masterpiece and compare them. It was made in the same time frame as yours. Mine has a 4" barrel, but otherwise a lot of the same features as your Target Masterpiece.

Just Curious: Mine has the serial number on the cylinder. I don't see that on yours, or did you photoshop it out?

No I did not photo shop them out.

Neither gun has the serial number on the face of the cylinder. The M17 has the serial number on the rear of the star extractor as is usual for the time period. The Masterpiece however does not. This is unusual. Could use a letter!

The Masterpiece has the serial number on the butt and the flat of the barrel
but no place else unless it's under the rear sights.

The M17 has the SN on the butt, the yoke and behind the star extractor. Maybe under the rear sight. Not on the barrel flat.

The diameter of the cylinders are 1.445" for the Masterpiece and 1.440" for the M17.

Interesting!

 

[tipoc]

I would also like to know about that ejector. I have a one line address 1947 Masterpiece and a 1953 Masterpiece and they both have the "normal" pattern ejector. Have never seen one like this.

Do they also have the serial number on the face of the cylinders?

tipoc

 

[kscharlie]

Do they also have the serial number on the face of the cylinders?

tipoc

Yes, both of the cylinders are serial numbered. I have my doubts that the cylinder in your Masterpiece is factory. But if it's not, a true master craftsman did a marvelous job. At any rate, it would be nice to know for sure.

 

[Memphis]

Uh, Yea... I have my hand raised regarding that "square" looking ejector pictured above. I've NEVER seen one like that and I'm smart as hel... I mean I've see tons of the ejectors without ever seeing one like that.

Roger

 

[tipoc]

You may be right. But who would be making replacement cylinders for a factory gun? From a Spanish copy?

Interesting, I need a letter.

tipoc

 

[PeterDE]

Anyway: Beautiful pair of guns. You should apply for a letter. I haven't been to the range since fishing season opened in May. I'll have to get mine out and get to the range. You've inspired me.

 

[lscocoa]

I'm confused on the extracters as the square one is modern S&W . I had a 648 with a factory cylinder added and it came with a square extracter . S&W replaced a cylinder for me on a used 29-3 I picked up that had a blown chamber they said , and replaced it for me with a new cylinder and it had a square extracter . Could the cylinder have been replaced , a letter would be in order I think .

 

[tipoc]

The cylinder could well have been replaced. The more I look closely at the gun I also think the rear sight may be a replacement as well. Or at least modified in some way.

Does anyone have a more modern M17 who can look at the "star" ejector. Of note is that there are no pins in this cylinder that mate with the holes in the ejector as was common.

 

[Engine49guy]

Nice pair,
The cylinder on the Pre 17 "Masterpiece" is a modern replacement,
the rear site unit is likely for a later -3 or above K frame or an N frame as it sits too far to the rear.

 

[JP@AK]

Note the chamfer on the top of the frame of the Masterpiece just above where the frame mates to the barrel. A small touch to ease holstering missing from the M17.

It has nothing to do with holstering. The taper on the frame at that point was changed when the barrel contour was changed. This was done also on the K-38 Masterpiece when the early tapered barrel was eliminated in favor of the "Heavy Masterpiece" (early 1950s). The frame taper was retained on the .38 Combat Masterpiece because the tapered barrel was also retained.

These facts have been documented and illustrated on this Forum multiple times.

Thanks for sharing nice pics of your two K-22 Masterpiece revolvers. The odd cylinder is interesting . . .

 

[tipoc]

Thanks Jack.

tipoc

 

[lscocoa]

Here's a pic of my 17-9 cylinder.

 

[tipoc]

Thanks also.