.44 HE 3rd Model in .44-40 and a surprise 2nd Model

[ToddG]

Scored a couple of HEs in a live auction a few months back. Both were somewhat mis-labeled but hey, them's the breaks. Finally got around to taking pics.

First up, a 5" .44 HE 3rd Model. A Wolf & Klar special from '37. Sporting a very pretty set of stags, I assume re-blued both from the almost spotless (except for a turn ring) condition and a small "B" stamp on the frame under the right stock. Anyone tell me if these are S&W stags or would W&K have put them on? Each panel is labeled "57" in black marker.

Was labeled "Modern Firearm" in the auction. Didn't seem right so I took a chance and won it for what I think is a pretty reasonable price; under $1k after premium. At least they got the caliber correct.

On the other hand...

The second one was described as a 6 1/2" .45 DA 1917. Didn't look too close since I have been wanting to upgrade my beater Brazilian 1917. Hammered at what I thought was a low but reasonable price for a 1917, but when it showed up the barrel read, uh, 44 S&W Special Ctg. My very shiny new 1917 was actually a .44 HE 2nd Model. Bit of a difference, that. Serial dates it to early '26. As with the 3rd model, it looks to have had a factory reblue--very shiny.

This one is wearing a nice set of bone stocks. They look period but I suppose are not factory since the backs are stamped "Tru Fit". Tho the actual fit is a bit less than "Tru" at the corners, I'm not complaining.

I plan to get both lettered. I'm interested in how many 3rd models were .44-40. Mine won't seat a .44 Spl, so likely not a barrel swap. Hoping that the stories about not-well-documented W&K shipments don't bite me.

When bidding live auctions remotely, sometimes I'm the pigeon and sometimes the statue. I think I did OK at this one.

 

[Breakaway500]

They both have tons of character. I'd say you did very well. The grips look great!

 

[Wyatt Burp]

THose are both great guns. I like the 2nd Model most. The words "Tyler Tru-fit" grips seem to ring a bell from Melvin Tyler. Some kind of laminated composit material?

 

[Kinman]

The 44-40 is way cool, since my book doesn't show any 3rd models made in 44-40 I wonder if it doesn't have a 1st model barrel and cylinder...great piece. I just started messing around with a reproduction Colt Bisley in 44-40, its a neat cartridge although it has its share of foibles concerning loading about anything other than 200gr. bullets sized to .427, at least in my limited experience.

 

[ToddG]

1st model barrel and cylinder

Maybe, but if so the factory did it. The barrel serial matches the frame.

Hopefully a letter will clarify.

 

[Peak53]

You may need more than a factory letter on the 3rd model. Try the SW Historical Foundation after you get the letter. Documenting the 44-40 would be special! The stocks are the least of your concerns.

 

[Texas Star]

Why does the finish look so dull on the Third Model?

Impressive guns. Thanks for those fine photos!

 

[ToddG]

Try the SW Historical Foundation after you get the letter.

I thought the S&WHF did the letters for S&W. What is the difference?

I sent in a membership to the Foundation a couple of weeks ago and haven't received anything back yet (expected it would take a while, so no surprise).

Is a Foundation request different from the regular LoA request? I've only lettered a .38/44 HD a few years ago.

 

[Muley Gil]

The 44-40 is way cool, since my book doesn't show any 3rd models made in 44-40 I wonder if it doesn't have a 1st model barrel and cylinder...great piece. I just started messing around with a reproduction Colt Bisley in 44-40, its a neat cartridge although it has its share of foibles concerning loading about anything other than 200gr. bullets sized to .427, at least in my limited experience.

A 1st Model barrel would have a cut out for the 3rd lock and the 1st Model has a slightly smaller cylinder as well.

 

[SDH]

The caliber markings on the 3rd Model don't look factory to me. I'd almost bet it was a recent custom conversion. Especially with the slightly "plum" blue cylinder. The pinned perfectly round front sight and "bead blast" finish support this notion.
The 2nd Model looks high polished "buffed" contemporary with the bone "Micarta" grips. JMHO

Both would be welcome in my collection~~~

 

[tennexplorer]

I may get yelled at for this, but I think the Third Model .44 -40 is a conversion. Several items. 1. The pinned front sight. 2. The cylinder that is turning purple brown. 3. The bright case colors of the hammer and trigger, and they appear to have been lacquered. 4. The lettering style of the caliber designation. 5. The soft, almost bead blasted polish.

At the risk of my reputation, I would bet it letters as a heavy Duty. Except for the cylinder color change, I would guess early Hamilton Bowen.

Darn! Beaten by SDH by 10 minutes

 

[ToddG]

Why does the finish look so dull on the Third Model?

The 2nd is a high polish finish. The 3rd is a more matte finish.

Dunno why, but it could be a full special-order configuration given the caliber. Hopefully a letter will shed some light. There are some marks under the stocks, but not many (first 2 pics below).

The 2nd has a big R-S, 674, and 44 marked under the left stock. I assume R-S notes is reblue, 674 is a date code (6/74? 4/67?) and 44 the caliber (second 2 pics).

 

[ToddG]

I think the Third Model .44 -40 is a conversion.

Hmmm. Might explain the caliber. Does look a lot like my .38/44 HD. Serial on the barrel inside the shroud matches the frame, but there are differences, like the text on the top of the barrel, only one line of text on the frame, and no small logo on the left frame.

Would someone doing a barrel change go to the trouble of adding the frame serial to the barrel?

Learning something new all the time. Great forum for that.

Quick shots below.

 

[jsfricks]

The 2nd was sent back to the factory June 1974 for something and received a factory refinish, according to the R-S, possibly at that time. The 3rd/38-44 Model is definitely an aftermarket finish. I don't believe S&W ever did a finish like that back in the day. The sideplate gap is kinda a giveaway on a refinish. And definitely an aftermarket case hardening on hammer and trigger. I believe that tennexplorer is probably correct in that it is a conversion. Both are nice looking guns.

 

[ToddG]

Thanks all. Shoulda phrased this post in the form of a question! Good news is that I can shoot both with a clear conscious. Part of the fun I have in this hobby is learning.

The SCS&W notes in the .38/44 HD (prewar) section that frame serials 35037 to 62335 were used for .44 HEs and this one is in that range. So maybe a conversion from a .44 3rd. Plus the cylinder on my .38/44 HD is numbered to the frame, this one is not numbered at all.

 

[SDH]

Barrel rebored on the 3rd Model from .38 to .44~~

 

[ToddG]

Barrel rebored on the 3rd Model from .38 to .44~~

Can the markings on the side be sanded down or filled enough to re-mark the caliber? If so it makes more sense.

Heck, now that I know it's a shooter I may get a .44-40 lever gun, chaps, a fancy nickname, and join SASS! In my "spare" time.

 

[wheelgun610]

Can the markings on the side be sanded down or filled enough to re-mark the caliber?

The original roll mark would've been polished off. As for the cylinder not being numbered, it could've possibly started out as a .357 from the time frame when those parts (cylinders, barrels & extractors) were no longer numbered. That practice ended in the late 50's. Did you look at the inside of the extractor to see if it had a number stamped on it? It would be on the side facing the cylinder....

Mark

 

[wordsmith]

The 3rd Model is an older Hamilton Bowen conversion, guaranteed. The dead give-away's are the stamping of the 44-40 caliber barrel marking and the pinned serrated front sight blade. Definitely his work....

DC

 

[Eddie Southgate]

I would love to own either or both. I am curious why a second model .44 would have a lanyard ring ? I expect to see them on 1917's but I don't remember ever seeing one on a .44 special .

Eddie