32-20 Hand Ejector

[Acrobat]

I understand that some of these were not heat treated.

This one is serial # 896xx.

The nickel is freckled (not flaking or pitted but it looks like the copper is showing through in places). The stocks are close to perfect as is the bore.

Can anyone give me a DOB and an idea if this one would have a heat treated cylinder.

 

[DCWilson]

Tough call. It's my recollection that heat treating was introduced across the entire S&W line beginning in 1920. But 1920 is also the year in which .32-20s hit the 89000-90000 range.

But even if this revolver does not have a heat treated cylinder, that doesn't mean it would be unsafe to shoot modern .32-20 ammunition that is designed for revolver use. I have some earlier revolvers (including a 1915 .32-20) that would not have been heat treated, and I am completely comfortable shooting standard or low pressure target loads in them.

You wouldn't want to shoot rifle loads in a .32-20 revolver regardless of heat treating.

There was an interesting discussion about the benefits of heat treating a year or so back in which a consensus seemed to develop that this wasn't about hardening steel to allow heavier loads or guarantee cylinder integrity, but hardening so that the friction points -- cylinder stop notches -- wouldn't wear out or shoot loose so quickly in revolvers that received heavy use. In some early revolvers, there were actually small hardened shims introduced on one side of the cylinder stop notches to prevent wear and the development of a side-to-side rotational play that could affect accuracy. The suggestion was that it was cheaper to heat treat every cylinder than to maintain the more complex manufacturing process that required installation of the hardened shims.

 

[Alk8944]

I understand that some of these were not heat treated.

This one is serial # 896xx.

The nickel is freckled (not flaking or pitted but it looks like the copper is showing through in places). The stocks are close to perfect as is the bore.

Can anyone give me a DOB and an idea if this one would have a heat treated cylinder.

Heat treating began at nominally SN 81287, so yours should be heat treated.

I don't know what you are seeing, but S&W never used a Copper under-strike on Nickel plated guns. This has been discussed extensively in the past. If there is Copper on this gun then it is a bumper shop after-market plating job. Nickel is naturally a soft, slightly yellow color, not a hard silvery-white as is Chromium.

All modern, current production .32-20 can be fired in your revolver. If there is any that is rifle specific, such as possibly from Buffalo Bore, it will be clearly marked as not for handguns. The factory load that this advice applied to has not been produced for at least 45 years. The load was the Hi-Speed, or equivalent, 80 gr. jacketed hollow-point that is a round-nose hollow-point bullet. All flat-point Lead or jacketed ammunition is OK.

 

[gerald mcdonald]

If y'all dont mind give me some education. I thought electroless was the only nickle that didnt use an undercoating of copper? Was the Smith guns electroless? Also I have seen caveats about using Hoppes on nickle guns, if there is no copper base for the solvent to affect then it shouldnt be a problem should it?

 

[Alk8944]

If y'all dont mind give me some education. I thought electroless was the only nickle that didnt use an undercoating of copper? Was the Smith guns electroless? Also I have seen caveats about using Hoppes on nickle guns, if there is no copper base for the solvent to affect then it shouldn't be a problem should it?

Electroless Nickel is a relatively new invention. At least into the late 1970s, and probably the 1990s, S&W used electrolytic Nickel. A Copper under-strike is not needed with Nickel, regardless of application method. Plating directly onto the base metal is referred to as "Hard plating" readless of the metal used. So-called "Hard Chrome" refers to the plating method, not that the Chromium plating is hard!

The Copper used on on automotive brightwork is there as a filler, not a primer. It is a heavy coat of Copper and it is used to fill imperfections. The Copper is easier to polish than the bare steel.

Again, S&W never used a Copper under-strike. There was a short time in the 1970-80s when Colt farmed it's Nickel work to a sub-contractor who used a Copper under-strike, and they had extensive finish quality problems and warrantee returns as a result. The Copper is softer than either the Nickel plate or the base steel. When the Copper gets dented the bond with the Nickel is broken and the plate begins to peel.

FWIW, In the past I used Hoppes #9, not the current formulation, on Nickel plated revolvers with impunity. I have never seen the least damage done by Hoppes, but I have not soaked any parts in it either. For the past 30 years I have used Break-Free CLP almost exclusively with no problems. This isn't because Hoppes causes any problems, I have developed an allergic reaction to it and it's fumes make me physically ill. I don't think the frequently seen clouding of Nickel has anything to do with cleaning methods as The most severe clouding I have seen is on older guns in NIB condition that have been stored but never cleaned and oiled as using guns are.

Just a clarification too. The metal is spelled Nickel. Nickle is an American 5 cent coin. No, I have no idea why!

 

[Acrobat]

Thanks for the great information. I always thought all nickel plating was done over copper.

The lettering is all very sharp and the finish looks factory. I assume that a letter is the only way to know for sure.

 

[gerald mcdonald]

Thanks Alk, I learned today. I just assumed (yeah yeah, we all know what assumed stands for LOL) that since so many folks said never get hoppes near "nickel" LOL that there must be a copper base. Good to know different.