.38 S&W M&P help, please (Updated with letter)

[sigp220.45]

While I was at a cop shop today picking up an AR I saw what I took to be a Model 10 in the case.

On closer examination, it was not only not a Model 10, it wasn't even a .38 Special.

It was a four inch, commercial blue, fish-hook hammer, no lanyard ring, .38 S&W. The barrel was marked ".38 S&W Ctg", and the cylinder was not bored out. There were no military markings at all. It was wearing obviously incorrect K frame targets (no diamond).

The bluing looked worn, but original. The trigger and hammer were color casehardened. I didn't take a picture or write down the serial number, but I'm pretty sure it was 22XXX.

As soon as I pointed out is wasn't a .38 Special, but a .38 S&W, the price dropped to $275.

I know I should have gotten it, but I was already committed to the AR and I wasn't sure about the configuration.

So what was this? I'm pretty sure it was a commercial original finish. I am absolutely sure it was a 4" barrel, and that there were no military markings at all. Maybe it is as common as a fence post, but I haven't run across one like it before.

 

[Absalom]

It could have been a pre-Model 11 or Model 11, but in that case a five-digit serial with no prefix would make no sense (I know you know enough not to have overlooked a prefix). Any 4" early-war M&P in .38 S&W, like the South African contract guns, would have a six- digit serial. And S&W did not make any K-frame hand ejectors in that caliber in the early 1900s where a five-digit no-prefix 22-serial would place. I'm stumped, unless I'm overlooking something obvious.

 

[sigp220.45]

It could have been a pre-Model 11 or Model 11, but in that case a five-digit serial with no prefix would make no sense (I know you know enough not to have overlooked a prefix). Any 4" early-war M&P in .38 S&W, like the South African contract guns, would have a six- digit serial. And S&W did not make any K-frame hand ejectors in that caliber in the early 1900s where a five-digit no-prefix 22-serial would place. I'm stumped, unless I'm overlooking something obvious.

I'm not sure at all on the SN. I know there was no prefix, and it started with 22. It could have been 22xxxx. It was definitely a pre-war long action.

 

[opoefc]

Go back and take some photos, & post them with full serial number. I can't think of a K frame, with a ser. # beginning with "22" with no prefix, that would be in .38S&W cal., perhaps it was a J frame , with incorrect square butt stocks, like a Regulation Police ?
Ed.

 

[two-bit cowboy]

Picking nits here, but it could have been an I-frame (no prewar J's), but we'd need Hondo44 to weigh in -- I don't know about those small-frame actions.

 

[Absalom]

I was briefly thinking I-frame, too, but they are so tiny compared to the K-frame, the Regulation Police is the only 4" .38 and is a 5-shot, and I think the OP would have noticed since he looked close enough to determine that the chambers were not reamed. Also, on the RP, where the M&P says 38 S&W CTG it reads REGULATION POLICE, which I'd also think would have been noticed. So I'm not sure whether that is a viable suspect.

 

[sigp220.45]

Definitely a 6 shot K frame.

Was there a "pre-Model 11"? If so, that is what this is.

 

[Absalom]

Definitely a 6 shot K frame.

Was there a "pre-Model 11"? If so, that is what this is.

They weren't officially catalogued as far as I know, so I am not sure we even have actual numbers produced. However, one thing is certain: if it is, it either had a six-digit serial not starting with a 2, or you overlooked a prefix, as all were serialed within the regular M&P sequence.

 

[DCWilson]

Definitely a 6 shot K frame.

Was there a "pre-Model 11"? If so, that is what this is.

There were some postwar non-model-marked .38 S&W M&Ps manufactured under contract for Commonwealth countries, or at least one of them. South Africa ordered a few batches of these up through the early '60s. Despite the ambiguities about the serial number, I agree that this has to be a pre-Model 11. Based on the hammer you describe, it should have a C prefix, in which case a five-numeral serial number might be correct and the gun would date to 1948 or 1949 (or later, of course, if it was sold from retained stock produced in a contract overrun). I found a reference to C271xxx in .38 S&W, shipped in 1954. This would necessarily be a five-screw Pre-11 if the chambering has not been misreported.

If it's not too much trouble, I would really like to see photos of this one and get full details on it. These postwar BSRs (if that's even a proper term since the British seem not to have ordered any of them) are interesting varieties for period collectors. No worries if time is limited or the shop is out of your way.

 

[Absalom]

.... It was definitely a pre-war long action.

There is also this problem, which should preclude a C-prefix serial.

 

[Texas Star]

I think it's either for India or South Africa.

 

[DCWilson]

I sure missed the part about the long action, but I don't know how a long-action gun could incorporate the short-action sculpted/fishhook hammer without some kind of tuning or smithing. Maybe I am just under-informed about the possibility of that kind of modification.

I'm now considering that this could be some kind of put-together gun with BSR parts hung on an old M&P frame. Did you happen to notice if it had the four-line or one-line address block, or even no address block at all?

Did you read the serial number from the butt of the gun or was it written by the dealer on a hang tag?

I feel myself going all OCD about this gun. Maybe I need to take a walk and swear off coffee for the day.

 

[sigp220.45]

Looking at it now. Serial is actually 685xxx. The other was from the crane and put on the tag. Took off the grips and found a plugged lanyard hole in the butt. Numbers on the barrel and cylinder match. No military markings at all. Not a fish hook hammer as I misremembered. Commercial blue.

 

[DWalt]

Just a pre-Victory BSR. SN indicates mid-1940 shipment. Grips are far newer (post-1969) targets. I'd buy it for $275, even lower if I could get them to back off a little more. .

 

[sigp220.45]

A deal was struck, and I think I did ok even if it is just an early BSR.

I'll clean it up tomorrow and start the search for some correct stocks.

It has the usual dents and dings from a long life that somehow led it to a Cripple Creek, Colorado police evidence locker. The action is smooth and it locks up tight. I already reload for .38 S&W so it will see plenty of range time.

My other BSR (below) is the usual 5" variety, replete with British proof marks and stampings. This 4" one avoided all of that.

What would the correct grips be? Checkered service, with medallions? Or would it have already had the smooth ones?

 

[DWalt]

At that time, correct grips would have been the wooden round-top style, checkered, with the small silver medallions, as used throughout the 1930s. Smooth grips were not used until early 1942.

 

[Absalom]

I'd still be curious whether it is an original 4" barrel. Comparing the position of the barrel stampings with your 5" specimen should clear that up. If it is original, it's an uncommon variant. The South Africans all got the U marks on the upper backstrap, really struck too deep to remove without a trace. I'll have to check Pate to see whether he shows other 4" BSR orders in that time frame.

 

[DCWilson]

Nice gun, fine deal. Thanks for clearing up the uncertainties, and I wish you many years of safe and satisfactory shooting with it.

 

[sigp220.45]

I'd still be curious whether it is an original 4" barrel. Comparing the position of the barrel stampings with your 5" specimen should clear that up. If it is original, it's an uncommon variant. The South Africans all got the U marks on the upper backstrap, really struck too deep to remove without a trace. I'll have to check Pate to see whether he shows other 4" BSR orders in that time frame.

Its the original barrel length, I'm sure. I'll post up some decent pics tomorrow.

I'd have never thought it was a BSR if it wasn't for the plugged lanyard ring hole.

 

[Texas Star]

If the lanyard hole was plugged, is this gun possibly reblued?
I don't understand this hangup some here (and nowhere else I've been) have about all four-inch BSR's being sent to South Africa.

I think the Commonwealth got a mix of four, five, and six-inch barrels until about April, 1942, after which the dull finish, smooth grips and five-inch barrels became standard.

I read somewhere that British troops assigned Field Security duty preferred the four-inch barrels, as they often carried their guns in a coat pocket.

Not all six-inch barrels went to Canada, either. Nor were all Canadian BSR's six-inch. My brother once had a six-inch with only UK proof and property markings, no Canadian. And I've seen pics of Canadian troops with the usual five-inch barrels. And seen a photo of an Aussie cleaning his six-inch .38-200! A pic of a New Zealand machine gunner at Monte Casino had the five-inch. His holster flap was folded back, and the gun was an S&W, not a Webley or Enfield.

Peter showed us his five-inch carried by a South African warrant officer in a armored car regiment, a man named Bucke. He kept the gun and his daughter sold it in South Africa after her dad died. Kept it very well, too, judging from the photos.

If you've paid attention here, we've also seen the six-incher issued BY THE RAF to a South African pilot named Harry Hoffe. He kept that gun issued in North Africa while serving there attached to the RAF, and then in Burma, and kept it after the war. Said it was only fired in anger at a rat...

Harry's daughter or grand- daughter told us he died at about age 96, a few years ago. He flew both Hurricanes and Spitfires,and was shot down by a B-29 over Burma. He flew his Spitfire close to a B-29, wanting a better look at the new American bomber. The gunner evidently mistook his Spitfire MK VIII for a Tony (Ki-61 Hien) and opened fire! Harry had to bail out and was rescued from the jungle.

I thought his name might be Afrikaans/Dutch, but the grand-daughter (?) said he was of Irish descent.
He was in the SAAF, which had Army-like ranks, so he was a Major, not a Squadron Leader. He was just serving in the RAF as a "seconded" officer. But his revolver came from British stores. (Supplies.)