32-44 target sight

[alanfir]

I have seen a reference to a rare target sight for the 32-44 New Model #3 Target revolver. This one is not adjustable and is a part of the barrel catch casting. How rare are these and are they only found on the 32-44 New Model #3 Target? Thanks, alanfir.

 

[rct269]

This is a Type 5 (or design #5) sight. (See The Evolution of Smith & Wesson Target Sights by Bob Neal----Arms Gazette.) It is considered a target sight, although as you noted, it is not adjustable. It was applied only to the NM #3 in 32-44 caliber----and then only to early production (1887-1889). It is very rare.

Ralph Tremaine

 

[alanfir]

Thanks Ralph, was this the only sight used on the early production NM #3 32-44 caliber or did some early production guns have adjustable or other types of sights? I guess an early 3 digit serial numbered 32-44 target with this sight would have some extra value or maybe not. This is kind of making me feel a little worse about my 32-44 target NM # 3 with this type 5 sight because mine has been refinished and modified to 38 special caliber. alanfir.

 

[rct269]

Yeah, your gun is pretty much junk as a collectible. And that said, I'd be pretty leary about shooting modern .38 Special loads in it. We are now into an area about which I know next to nothing--------but here goes anyway: Smokeless powder makes for pressures and pressure waves/"spikes" which are entirely different than those produced by black powder. I'm told they will cause a black powder gun to "stretch"----and after some stretching, they break. Where the pieces go when they break is anybody's guess. It's likely someone in a white coat will be picking some of those pieces out of your face-----unless you're dead; in which case there will be no need to remove the pieces. I personally would have no qualms about shooting black powder loads in your gun, but that's just me.

Accurate answers to your questions will come from Jinks (factory letter), but I'll tell you what I think. (And when I say I think---or believe, that means I don't know for sure.) Here goes!! The sight was used only on early guns, but not exclusively-----some/most early guns had adjustable sights. You may recall there were two different loads for the 32-44. One was "regular"---whatever that means. The other was a "gallery" load. The "gallery" load was a low power round intended for short range target shooting. Given that S&W put a non-adjustable "Target" sight on a target gun, it stands to reason the gun was intended to be used at a fixed range with a fixed load----see "Gallery". I submit that as fact for the simple reason it makes sense. Perhaps there was a course of fire in the various competitions which was shot at close range-----and which required "fixed" sights. I know there were Triplelock target guns fitted with "target" sights which were drift adjustable (for windage---only) to comply with some sort of cockamamie rule promulgated by the British for some of their matches.

Any 32-44 fitted with these sights would bring a premium price----never mind whether it had a three digit serial number or not. Needless to say, a three digit number wouldn't hurt----nor would a one or two digit number----don't hold your breath!!

Ralph Tremaine

 

[rct269]

Okay, now I have some questions. You say you have a 32-44 converted to .38 Special. That makes absolutely no sense to me at all, if for no other reason than it's a monumental amount of work for somone to do. My knee-jerk rection to all this is you have a 38-44 barrel and cylinder on what may be a 32-44 frame. Or maybe you have a 38-44 barrel and a 32-44 cylinder (bored out for .38 Special) on a 32-44 frame.

Just for drill, I put a .38 Special round into my 38-44 cylinder. It rattles around----fits like socks on a rooster. I put the .38 Special round into the barrel. It SEEMS to be loose there too----seems to fit better/tighter in a.38 Special barrel. That said, I have no idea of the correct bore diameter of a 38-44, but it wouldn't surprise me to learn that it's larger than the .357" bore of a .38 Special------just as the .38 S&W diameter is larger than the .38 Special. I don't recall the diameter of the .38 S&W right off----.361" maybe, but I am constantly amused when I hear about folks who have bored out .38 S&W cylinders to accept .38 Specials-------------and then wonder why the gun is staggeringly inaccurate.

So, to my questions: How do you know your gun was a 32-44? (You mentioned a three digit serial number. If yours has a three digit number, and it's below 552 (the first 38-44), then yours was a 32-44 for sure and certain!) Are your cylinder, barrel latch, and barrel numbered to the frame? (If you know for certain your frame was a 32-44 and all the other numbers match the frame, then it was for certain a 32-44 converted to .38 Special----never mind how much work was involved----unless, of course, your matching numbers came about because of somebody with a hammer and a set of number punches-----which happened to me-----once!)

That's enough for now----let's see where that takes us.

Ralph Tremaine

And then again, maybe you know your barrel was a 32-44 because that's what's stamped on the barrel----the later guns carried the caliber markings.

 

[DWalt]

"We are now into an area about which I know next to nothing--------but here goes anyway: Smokeless powder makes for pressures and pressure waves/"spikes" which are entirely different than those produced by black powder."

At least the first part of your statement is absolutely correct. To my knowledge, there is absolutely no evidence of anything else you say. If you can cite a valid reference to the contrary indicating proof that a smokeless load equivalent to a black powder load has some sort of a different pressure spike, and is not someone's uninformed guess or BS, please do so.

 

[alanfir]

My NM # 3 Target serial number is in the 300 range and all the numbers match(barrel, catch,cylinder and frame). The real telling part of this gun is that the barrel is not only bored but also sleeved. When the cylinder was bored out they left a step near the end of each cylinder bore for the 38 special round. I have only shot this gun once with wadcutter reloads that barely get the bullet out of the barrel. I bought this S&W about 20 years ago and it has been quite a learning experience. It would have been nice not to have to learn this the hard way however. alanfir.

 

[rct269]

The next to nothing I know about smokeless/black powder comes from Dave Chicoine. The reason I know next to nothing about this topic is because I wasn't paying close attention. I wasn't paying close attention because I don't shoot smokeless loads in blackpowder guns-----and have no intention of doing so. There was a time (way back when I was young and not quite bright) when I was about to. It was my good fortune that my friend wanted to shoot first. That would be the same friend who now has no thumb and no (functioning) elbow on the right side. That said, I do not regard anything Dave has had to say about firearms-----especially older firearms as an uninformed guess. You, of course, are certainly entitled to believe anything you choose----and good luck to you!

Ralph Tremaine

 

[rct269]

And on to more pleasant chit-chat------------- It would appear your gun was certainly done right. On the one hand, the lunatic fringe purist will bemoan the fact that someone messed with such an attractive piece. On the other hand, the lunatic fringe shooter/target shooter knows no bounds, and knows no cost limits when it comes to making his pet gun more to his liking. I have any number of target guns that have been "messed with" (mostly the sights). The absolute classic example is a 1st Model Single Shot with a standard front sight which has been "wrapped"---------both sides and on top with copper sheet----ostensibly to enhance the visibility of the sight. The copper sheeting has been fitted to absolute perfection and pinned through the sight blade-----and the pin has been finished absolutey flat against the copper sheet on both sides. I have no way of knowing for sure, but it appears this work was done without removing the sight from the barrel. It makes for something to look at and think about when you're pondering a task you think might be too difficult.

I think you might want to consider the fact that you own what is very likely a one of a kind firearm. If the refinishing work was done by a professional, and therefore results in an attractive piece, take a measure of satisfaction in the fact you have something no one else does.

Ralph Tremaine