I have a friend who has a nickel plated .32 long ctg with pearl handle grips. The ser# on the bottom of handle is 68135. On top of the barrel are these dates: pat'd april 9, 1889 march 27, 1894 aug 4, 1896 dec 22, 1896 oct 8, 1901 dec 17, 1901 sept 22, 1902 july 7, 1903. It has a 4.25" barrel its got the s&w stamped on the left side frame under the release. It all so has a full half moon front site and a long grove for the back site. I have no access to a camera or I'd send pictures.
.32 long ctg
- Thread starter lacrux14
- Start date
Register to hide this ad
The small-frame S&W .32 revolvers were popular in the first half of the 20th century. The company produced nearly half a million of these over the 40 years before WW II. The gun you describe is called a .32 Hand Ejector Model of 1903, Second Change. About 44,000 of this particular variety were produced. Based on the serial number, it was probably shipped in 1907 or 1908.
These guns aren't exactly rare, but then you don't see them on every consignment shelf of every gun store, either. Value depends on condition. The best condition specimens of this model, if they have the original box, might bring close to $1000 at auction. Without the box and in just good condition, maybe $300.
Without photos or a hands-on inspection, it's hard to make an estimate of condition.
If the gun is shootable, don't use modern ammunition in it. [Ignore this sentence. I have no idea what I meant when I wrote it nearly four years ago. Of course you can use modern ammo in a prewar .32 HE.]
First post, I see. Welcome to the forum.
These guns aren't exactly rare, but then you don't see them on every consignment shelf of every gun store, either. Value depends on condition. The best condition specimens of this model, if they have the original box, might bring close to $1000 at auction. Without the box and in just good condition, maybe $300.
Without photos or a hands-on inspection, it's hard to make an estimate of condition.
If the gun is shootable, don't use modern ammunition in it. [Ignore this sentence. I have no idea what I meant when I wrote it nearly four years ago. Of course you can use modern ammo in a prewar .32 HE.]
First post, I see. Welcome to the forum.
Last edited:
jsmith
Member
lacrux14 - The .32 S&W Long Cartridge has been around since 1896 when S&W developed its first modern hand ejector revolver in that year to chamber the new cartridge. This cartridge started out as a blackpowder load but made the transition to smokeless powder very early in its life. It has been a smokeless powder cartridge for nearly its entire life.
I own two early S&W .32 revolvers, a Model 1896 shipped in 1897, and a Model 1903 made in 1903-1904, and I shoot modern ammunition in them all the time. These guns were built heavy and strong enough to handle smokeless powder, which originally was called Nitro powder. The original blackpowder loading for the .32 S&W Long was actually hotter than the modern loading in smokeless. The modern loadings are equivalent, sometimes slightly less, to the original black powder loadings.
As long as this gun is mechanically safe, there will be no problem shooting it with factory ammunition. If reloads are used, be careful not to use hot loads! The .32 S&W Long is not a round to hot rod in older guns.
jsmith
I own two early S&W .32 revolvers, a Model 1896 shipped in 1897, and a Model 1903 made in 1903-1904, and I shoot modern ammunition in them all the time. These guns were built heavy and strong enough to handle smokeless powder, which originally was called Nitro powder. The original blackpowder loading for the .32 S&W Long was actually hotter than the modern loading in smokeless. The modern loadings are equivalent, sometimes slightly less, to the original black powder loadings.
As long as this gun is mechanically safe, there will be no problem shooting it with factory ammunition. If reloads are used, be careful not to use hot loads! The .32 S&W Long is not a round to hot rod in older guns.
jsmith
Hey I have just inherited a S&W .32 long ctg. It was my great grandfathers and I was just wondering if it safe to shoot and what ammo to load it with. It seems to be in good working order. I have photos of it on my computer but cannot seem to post them. When I try to post them it asks me for a URL? Any help would be greatly appreciated
Capco33, here's a cheat sheet to using PhotoBucket for image hosting:
http://smith-wessonforum.com/smith-wesson-forum-office/78728-posting-photos-forum-new-format.html
You can also upload photos directly to the forum server. On the page where you compose your message, scroll down until you see a button that says "Manage Attachments." Click on that, then you can pick up the image files directly from your own hard drive or memory card.
Hello-
About 10 years ago I bought my first pistol used and it was a 32 s&w long CTG.
The serial number on the bottom of the hand grip and on the bottom of the barrel is ( B 3660 ). But on the inside of the right side plate, cylinder yoke and the cylinder housing the number is ( 8840). The last date on the patent list on the top of the barrel is ( Sept 2, 1902 ). It has black plastic grips (That may or may not be original).
I am just curious about the year and possible value of the pistol.
Any help would be appreciated.
About 10 years ago I bought my first pistol used and it was a 32 s&w long CTG.
The serial number on the bottom of the hand grip and on the bottom of the barrel is ( B 3660 ). But on the inside of the right side plate, cylinder yoke and the cylinder housing the number is ( 8840). The last date on the patent list on the top of the barrel is ( Sept 2, 1902 ). It has black plastic grips (That may or may not be original).
I am just curious about the year and possible value of the pistol.
Any help would be appreciated.
Hello Balemaster, and welcome to the S&W forum. Sounds like what you have is a .32 Hand Ejector, Second Model. A four-digit serial number indicates production in 1903. Unless your gun has been completely thrashed, it is probably worth at least a couple of hundred. If it is in really good shape, value would go higher. Can you post pictures? Look back a couple of posts in this thread for instructions on how to do it.
These older S&Ws can be great fun to own and (with the proper ammo) shoot.
WILDCATT
Member
32 S&W
I have a 32 hand ejecter.serial no.1228**it also has the 1902 date.
there still is a little factory blue on barrel,action works fine and I shoot it
with my handloads.I am very care full to keep them at low side.It has 6" barrle and is acurrate.the rest of gun has patina[rust].just as I bought it,20 yrs ago for $20 at gun show.I should have got the colt with it.same price.
I have a 32 hand ejecter.serial no.1228**it also has the 1902 date.
there still is a little factory blue on barrel,action works fine and I shoot it
with my handloads.I am very care full to keep them at low side.It has 6" barrle and is acurrate.the rest of gun has patina[rust].just as I bought it,20 yrs ago for $20 at gun show.I should have got the colt with it.same price.
The hand grips on my 32 Hand Ejector, Second Model are cracked and chipped. Does anyone know where I can get new ones or if that is even a good idea?
wraco
Member
I picked up a nice one made in 1910, a 1903, 32 S&W HE a week or so ago for $275 shipped. It's tight, lots of bluing, no pitting, excellent bore and nice hard rubber S&W stocks. Here's a couple of pictures the seller sent me. The camera flash doesn't do the gun justice, but here it is nevertheless.
Rod
.
Rod
.
- Joined
- Feb 7, 2011
- Messages
- 1
- Reaction score
- 0
i too have a s&w 32 long ctg. nickle plated in very good condition. however, the s&w logo is on the right side..if your holding it to shoot...in all the pics ive seen the logo is under the cylinder release. why is this?
Last edited:
ar15ed
Member
you probably have an earlier 32 he 1st model, or 2nd model. they used the right side (sideplate) trademark til about serial number 19425, then at 19426 went to the left side (frame) stamp, with the "first change".
There was a production order in the late 1930s relocating the logo to the side plate, so thunderchild's gun could be late prewar production.
Does the ejector rod knob have two diameters, like a mushroom, with a narrow knurled band? or only one, with a wider knurled area? The two-step knob is from the 'aughts, 'teens and early '20s, and the single diameter knob is from the very late '20s and '30s.
Or you could just tell us the serial number, xing out the last couple of digits if you want to.
Does the ejector rod knob have two diameters, like a mushroom, with a narrow knurled band? or only one, with a wider knurled area? The two-step knob is from the 'aughts, 'teens and early '20s, and the single diameter knob is from the very late '20s and '30s.
Or you could just tell us the serial number, xing out the last couple of digits if you want to.
CAJUNLAWYER
Member
Dave-my .32 is 520520-you say not to shoot modern ammo in it? What gives? I thought it was safe to shoot with .32 S&W and .32 longs. BTW my .32 has the S&W logo on the side plate AND under the cylinder release.
Hmm... I wrote that in August 2009 and no longer have any idea what I meant. Since then I have acquired a couple of prewar .32s and while I shoot mostly S&B target wadcutter ammo in them, I wouldn't hesitate to shoot standard factory ammo that was produced yesterday.
Maybe I said that just to see if anyone was paying attention.
Logos on both sides? Your gun was undoubtedly produced during the company's short-lived belt-and-suspenders frame marking policy. It lasted a whole afternoon, I think.
Seriously, no clue why. I don't recall seeing other guns with logos on both sides, but I'm not surprised to hear that they exist.
CAJUNLAWYER
Member
So this is a one off, valuable, rare, one of a kind, VALUABLE, worth whatever the market will bear handgun????????????
Or not
I don't care-I like the little bugger, me.
Or not
I don't care-I like the little bugger, me.
JF3D
Member
Interesting Fact. Teddy Roosevelt was the Police Commish in NY City around 1985. He issued the .32 S&W to the NYPD. At the time, it was considered a Quantom leap for them. 
Green Frog
Member
Assuming it is marked .32 S&W on the side of the barrel and that is the relatively small I-frame gun, you probably have a .32 Hand Ejector Model of 1903 - 5th Change. It would probably have been made early in 1911. It came standard in 3 1/4, 4 1/4 and 6" barrel lengths (measured from the front of the cylinder to the muzzle of the barrel.) Something over 160,000 or them were made between 1910 and 1917. All of this info is available from the book, Standard Catalog of Smith & Wesson by Supica and Nahas. I trust this will be of some help to you.
Regards,
the Green Frog
Regards,
the Green Frog
Green Frog
Member
With that repeating serial number and the double S&W stamps, your revolver is redundant is redundant.
Froggie Froggie
tom turner
US Veteran
Here's my Model 1903 - 5th Change, made in 1916 and a really decent shape "shooter." Barrel length is the 4 3/4 version:
For fun a couple of weekends ago, I took the little .32 to shoot an area "steel" handgun match where they have one category for .22 rim fire revolvers. I figured they would not object to me shooting the .32 Long in the .22 class, since the stouter recoil would make it harder for me to compete. They let me shoot it.
Heck, I ended up winning the class with the M1903 - 5th change!!! It has a really sweet trigger action and it is quite accurate.
I LOVE shooting .32 long revolvers, and have for many years now.
Enjoy your vintage M1903!
Malysh
Member
Modern 32 S&W Long and/or 32 Colt New Police ammo is perfectly safe to shoot in a 32 Long S&W HE revolver.
Here's a test I did recently using my 1952 Colt Detective Special in 32 Colt NP caliber. I would assume all ballistic figures for this ammo and most others is generally done with barrels of 4 inches or longer. My test gun has a 2 inch barrel, so aside from advertising claims that could be a tad ambitious, using a barrel half the length of a test barrel would affect the figures the manufacturers claim.
I posted the results at the Coltforum originally.
"Range Report - Sellier & Bellot 32 Colt New Police/32 S&W Long & Rem. 32 S&W Long
My friend with the chronograph & I finally got to the range today to clock the two 32 long loads I found to shoot in my 1952 Colt Detective Special 32 Colt New Police revolver. See this thread for some background:
Fed Personal Defense 32 S&W Long ammo any better?
Here's the results for a 5 shot group of Remington 98 gr. and a 5 shot group of Sellier & Bellot 100 gr.
Remington 98 gr. lead round nose
Muzzle Velocity/ Ft. Lbs. Energy
652 f.p.s./ 93 ft.lbs.
689 f.p.s./ 103 ft.lbs.
678 f.p.s./ 100 ft.lbs.
677 f.p.s./ 100 ft.lbs.
703 f.p.s./ 108 ft.lb.s
Average muzzle velocity (5 shots) - 680 f.p.s.
Average foot lbs. of energy (5 shots) - 101 ft.lbs.
Sellier & Bellot 100 gr. lead flat point (round nose)
Muzzle Velocity/ Ft. Lbs. Energy
763 f.p.s./ 129 ft.lbs.
798 f.p.s./ 141 ft.lbs.
766 f.p.s./ 130 ft.lbs.
804 f.p.s./ 144 ft.lbs.
846 f.p.s./ 159 ft.lbs.
Average muzzle velocity (5 shots) - 795 f.p.s.
Average foot lbs. of energy (5 shots) - 140 ft.lbs.
I did some informal researching in various older reloading manuals that were hand-me-downs from my friend, including Speer, Hornady, etc., and the tables in the classic Smith's "Pistols and Revolvers of the World". The average/standard listing for the classic 32 Colt New Police and the identical S&W 32 Long rounds with 98 gr. bullets are 705 f.p.s. delivering 108 ft.lbs. of energy. Pretty anemic.
The S&B round was the highest velocity and ft.lbs. advertised anywhere on the internet compared to Remington, Winchester, Magtech, etc. The 2nd hotest performing brand advertised was the Magtech which one of our members recommended, but I did not purchase any of it.
Neither the Remington or the Sellier & Bellot shot quite as fast or delivered quite as much energy as they advertised at (which I expected). The Remington advertised at 705 f.p.s. and 115 ft. lbs. The Sellier & Bellot advertised at 886 f.p.s. and 174 ft.lbs. I expected both brands would chrono at a little less than advertised claims. My main interest in doing these tests were to see if the S&B ammo came close to their claims because the f.p.s. and ft.lbs. they claimed made the round a little more viable as a close range self defense rd. to me. After all, standard 38 Special goes at about 780 f.p.s. and gets about 195 ft.lbs. But, the 38 Special does have an advantage in a larger cross sectional density.
I am happy to report that the Sellier & Bellot ammo is indeed much "hotter" than any other brand's advertised claims, and is a better self defense round in this loading than the other ammo makers offer.
The figures I reported from the S&B ammo are definitely higher enough compared to the standard offerings citing well established averages for this old chambering. Therefore, to me it is worth buying instead of Remington, Winchester, etc. I initially ordered two boxes of 50 rds. I think I will order two more to make sure I have a good supply of it. It also has the added feature of having a flat nose for Colt fans instead of the round nose profile of the S&W 32 long lead round nose that everybody else makes. But that adds nothing to performance, of course.
Tenths of decimals were rounded off from f.p.s. and ft.lbs. of energy for this casual report."
As far as I can tell, neither the Remington 32 Long or the S&B loading had any adverse effects on the D.S. There was no signs of heavy leading, either. Both brands were actually very clean. I don't really know if I'd trust a 32 Long as a self defense carry round, but it's gratifying to know there are a few loadings available that perform better than the historical ballistics provided for this cartridge. Magtech also makes a 32 Long HP loading that advertises as above the standard FPS and Ft. Lbs. of Energy for the 32 Long cartridge. I don't think a hollow point bullet would actually expand given the cartridges ballistics and using short barrels. Ideally, I'd use LSW or the ubiquitous round nose bullets in this cartridge.
Here's a test I did recently using my 1952 Colt Detective Special in 32 Colt NP caliber. I would assume all ballistic figures for this ammo and most others is generally done with barrels of 4 inches or longer. My test gun has a 2 inch barrel, so aside from advertising claims that could be a tad ambitious, using a barrel half the length of a test barrel would affect the figures the manufacturers claim.
I posted the results at the Coltforum originally.
"Range Report - Sellier & Bellot 32 Colt New Police/32 S&W Long & Rem. 32 S&W Long
My friend with the chronograph & I finally got to the range today to clock the two 32 long loads I found to shoot in my 1952 Colt Detective Special 32 Colt New Police revolver. See this thread for some background:
Fed Personal Defense 32 S&W Long ammo any better?
Here's the results for a 5 shot group of Remington 98 gr. and a 5 shot group of Sellier & Bellot 100 gr.
Remington 98 gr. lead round nose
Muzzle Velocity/ Ft. Lbs. Energy
652 f.p.s./ 93 ft.lbs.
689 f.p.s./ 103 ft.lbs.
678 f.p.s./ 100 ft.lbs.
677 f.p.s./ 100 ft.lbs.
703 f.p.s./ 108 ft.lb.s
Average muzzle velocity (5 shots) - 680 f.p.s.
Average foot lbs. of energy (5 shots) - 101 ft.lbs.
Sellier & Bellot 100 gr. lead flat point (round nose)
Muzzle Velocity/ Ft. Lbs. Energy
763 f.p.s./ 129 ft.lbs.
798 f.p.s./ 141 ft.lbs.
766 f.p.s./ 130 ft.lbs.
804 f.p.s./ 144 ft.lbs.
846 f.p.s./ 159 ft.lbs.
Average muzzle velocity (5 shots) - 795 f.p.s.
Average foot lbs. of energy (5 shots) - 140 ft.lbs.
I did some informal researching in various older reloading manuals that were hand-me-downs from my friend, including Speer, Hornady, etc., and the tables in the classic Smith's "Pistols and Revolvers of the World". The average/standard listing for the classic 32 Colt New Police and the identical S&W 32 Long rounds with 98 gr. bullets are 705 f.p.s. delivering 108 ft.lbs. of energy. Pretty anemic.
The S&B round was the highest velocity and ft.lbs. advertised anywhere on the internet compared to Remington, Winchester, Magtech, etc. The 2nd hotest performing brand advertised was the Magtech which one of our members recommended, but I did not purchase any of it.
Neither the Remington or the Sellier & Bellot shot quite as fast or delivered quite as much energy as they advertised at (which I expected). The Remington advertised at 705 f.p.s. and 115 ft. lbs. The Sellier & Bellot advertised at 886 f.p.s. and 174 ft.lbs. I expected both brands would chrono at a little less than advertised claims. My main interest in doing these tests were to see if the S&B ammo came close to their claims because the f.p.s. and ft.lbs. they claimed made the round a little more viable as a close range self defense rd. to me. After all, standard 38 Special goes at about 780 f.p.s. and gets about 195 ft.lbs. But, the 38 Special does have an advantage in a larger cross sectional density.
I am happy to report that the Sellier & Bellot ammo is indeed much "hotter" than any other brand's advertised claims, and is a better self defense round in this loading than the other ammo makers offer.
The figures I reported from the S&B ammo are definitely higher enough compared to the standard offerings citing well established averages for this old chambering. Therefore, to me it is worth buying instead of Remington, Winchester, etc. I initially ordered two boxes of 50 rds. I think I will order two more to make sure I have a good supply of it. It also has the added feature of having a flat nose for Colt fans instead of the round nose profile of the S&W 32 long lead round nose that everybody else makes. But that adds nothing to performance, of course.
Tenths of decimals were rounded off from f.p.s. and ft.lbs. of energy for this casual report."
As far as I can tell, neither the Remington 32 Long or the S&B loading had any adverse effects on the D.S. There was no signs of heavy leading, either. Both brands were actually very clean. I don't really know if I'd trust a 32 Long as a self defense carry round, but it's gratifying to know there are a few loadings available that perform better than the historical ballistics provided for this cartridge. Magtech also makes a 32 Long HP loading that advertises as above the standard FPS and Ft. Lbs. of Energy for the 32 Long cartridge. I don't think a hollow point bullet would actually expand given the cartridges ballistics and using short barrels. Ideally, I'd use LSW or the ubiquitous round nose bullets in this cartridge.
Last edited:
32 Long CTG
I recently aquired a 32 Long CTG revolver from my Grandfather. I was attempting to determine the age and approx. value. The serial number is 293303. I will attach a couple pictures
I would appreciate any information about this weapon.
Thanks
I recently aquired a 32 Long CTG revolver from my Grandfather. I was attempting to determine the age and approx. value. The serial number is 293303. I will attach a couple pictures
I would appreciate any information about this weapon.
Thanks
Welcome to the forum.
That's a .32 Regulation Police with the 3.25" barrel -- the shortest option for this model. You could also get 4.25" and 6" barrels. The Regulation Police was the square-butt version of the .32 Hand Ejector. The square butt was longer and was a better fit for larger hands. Your gun may have a patent date of June 5, 1917 on the bottom of one grip piece. That's the patent for the frame and stock configuration that let the larger RP stocks be mounted to the small round butt grip frame. It involves milling a shallow step in the frame backstrap. You'll see this if you remove those stocks -- which you should so that you can clean up any rust that may have started to take hold where the wood contacts the metal.
Your gun dates to about 1919-1920. There was a brief period toward the end of WWI where S&W revolvers were produced without trademarks on them because the company was being operated by the government, and some models were not being produced at all. After the plant returned to private control and resumed full production, it took them a year or so to get back to marking the guns with trademarks. That's why your gun has fewer markings on it that other guns from earlier and later years.
It looks like the gun might benefit from a good cleaning, and maybe a surface rubdown with some fine bronze wool and some penetrating oil like CorrosionX or Kroil.
In case you didn't know, CTG is just an abbreviation for cartridge. It's not a model designation.
If you can get the gun cleaned up, it might be a $300-350 item in the marketplace (less if there is some corrosion that actually got seriously down into the steel). With its family connection, it is probably worth far more than that to you.
That's a .32 Regulation Police with the 3.25" barrel -- the shortest option for this model. You could also get 4.25" and 6" barrels. The Regulation Police was the square-butt version of the .32 Hand Ejector. The square butt was longer and was a better fit for larger hands. Your gun may have a patent date of June 5, 1917 on the bottom of one grip piece. That's the patent for the frame and stock configuration that let the larger RP stocks be mounted to the small round butt grip frame. It involves milling a shallow step in the frame backstrap. You'll see this if you remove those stocks -- which you should so that you can clean up any rust that may have started to take hold where the wood contacts the metal.
Your gun dates to about 1919-1920. There was a brief period toward the end of WWI where S&W revolvers were produced without trademarks on them because the company was being operated by the government, and some models were not being produced at all. After the plant returned to private control and resumed full production, it took them a year or so to get back to marking the guns with trademarks. That's why your gun has fewer markings on it that other guns from earlier and later years.
It looks like the gun might benefit from a good cleaning, and maybe a surface rubdown with some fine bronze wool and some penetrating oil like CorrosionX or Kroil.
In case you didn't know, CTG is just an abbreviation for cartridge. It's not a model designation.
If you can get the gun cleaned up, it might be a $300-350 item in the marketplace (less if there is some corrosion that actually got seriously down into the steel). With its family connection, it is probably worth far more than that to you.
DWalt
Member
Regarding the use of smokeless factory loads in older calibers and revolvers, the prevailing opinion seems to be that it is perfectly OK to do so. Smokeless loads have been around since the very late 19th century, and of course when they were first produced, there was (for the most part) nothing to shoot them in other than revolvers made during the black powder era. Therefore, for the old BP calibers such as the .32 S&W and .38 S&W (and others such as the .45 Colt, .44-40, etc.), they were factory-loaded with smokeless propellants to modest chamber pressure levels in deference to the many old revolvers existing that were chambered for them. And they still are. I have yet to see a box of modern factory ammunition in such calibers displaying a warning about not using in a black powder revolver.
Some people apparently have a belief that the pressure rise characteristics (pressure vs. time) of ammunition loaded with smokeless powder is much greater than with black powder loadings, which they somehow consider to be a bad thing. However, I have never been able to find any actual laboratory pressure data to refute or confirm such a belief.
As an interesting example, the .38 S&W Special cartridge was originally developed as a black powder load, but it was changed to smokeless powder very quickly, within a year or so. Regardless, for reasons unclear, .38 Special black powder loads continued to be produced (but in small quantities) well into the 20th century. Maybe it was simply because some users just liked lots of smoke and dirty revolvers. The early BP .38 Special loads were the ballistic equivalent (or even more so) to modern standard smokeless loadings.
Some people apparently have a belief that the pressure rise characteristics (pressure vs. time) of ammunition loaded with smokeless powder is much greater than with black powder loadings, which they somehow consider to be a bad thing. However, I have never been able to find any actual laboratory pressure data to refute or confirm such a belief.
As an interesting example, the .38 S&W Special cartridge was originally developed as a black powder load, but it was changed to smokeless powder very quickly, within a year or so. Regardless, for reasons unclear, .38 Special black powder loads continued to be produced (but in small quantities) well into the 20th century. Maybe it was simply because some users just liked lots of smoke and dirty revolvers. The early BP .38 Special loads were the ballistic equivalent (or even more so) to modern standard smokeless loadings.
Hey guys.
I just inherited my great-grandfathers on .32 long. My mother found it wrapped in an oily rag, stuffed in a sock, tucked in a box. Couldn't be more excited about it.
After browsing the internet for several hours, I'm a bit confused as to dating old S&W's via s/n.
The gun looks identical to the pics of wraco's revolver above, except the logo is stamped on the opposite side. The s/n is 226xxx and the ejector knob is the mushroom type.
Any information on dating my new found family heirloom would be appreciated.
Also, its tight as a drum, but its got some light worn spots, a tiny bit of pitting, and a little bit of rust here and there. I'm not concerned about the value, as I would never sell it, but would should I have it restored and refinished or just clean it really well and leave it alone?
Thanks for the help.
I just inherited my great-grandfathers on .32 long. My mother found it wrapped in an oily rag, stuffed in a sock, tucked in a box. Couldn't be more excited about it.
After browsing the internet for several hours, I'm a bit confused as to dating old S&W's via s/n.
The gun looks identical to the pics of wraco's revolver above, except the logo is stamped on the opposite side. The s/n is 226xxx and the ejector knob is the mushroom type.
Any information on dating my new found family heirloom would be appreciated.
Also, its tight as a drum, but its got some light worn spots, a tiny bit of pitting, and a little bit of rust here and there. I'm not concerned about the value, as I would never sell it, but would should I have it restored and refinished or just clean it really well and leave it alone?
Thanks for the help.
Joetad, welcome to the forum.
Can you check that serial number for us? Look also on the flat underside of the barrel and the rear face of the cylinder. The same number should be found there. Also, is the main serial number stamped on the forestrap of the grip frame, or on the bottom?
Pics would really help. Maybe I'm misremembering age-related characteristics, but I would not expect to see a large trademark on the sideplate of a gun from the mid-'teens (which is where the serial number 226xxx seems to point). Does your gun have the same type of two-screw square-butt stocks as Wraco's gun? If so, does your gun have an adjustable rear sight or just a groove in the frame? How long is the barrel, measured from the muzzle to the front of the cylinder?
Can you check that serial number for us? Look also on the flat underside of the barrel and the rear face of the cylinder. The same number should be found there. Also, is the main serial number stamped on the forestrap of the grip frame, or on the bottom?
Pics would really help. Maybe I'm misremembering age-related characteristics, but I would not expect to see a large trademark on the sideplate of a gun from the mid-'teens (which is where the serial number 226xxx seems to point). Does your gun have the same type of two-screw square-butt stocks as Wraco's gun? If so, does your gun have an adjustable rear sight or just a groove in the frame? How long is the barrel, measured from the muzzle to the front of the cylinder?
The sight is just a groove on the frame. The butt stock only has one screw. The barrel measured at 4 inches. All s/n's on the gun are 226xxx taken from the inside of cylinder, flat on the barrel, and bottom of the butt stock.
I was mistaken in that it does not look exactly like the gun in wraco's post as mine does only have 1 screw on the butt stock. Other than that they do look identical.
I will try to post some pics later.
Thanks!
I was mistaken in that it does not look exactly like the gun in wraco's post as mine does only have 1 screw on the butt stock. Other than that they do look identical.
I will try to post some pics later.
Thanks!
