Anybody have a 52A with correct shipping box and parts sheet?
If so pls. post.
If so pls. post.
52A factory box
- Thread starter gmborkovic
- Start date
Register to hide this ad
OP
I did check it out. The box had no end labels, or imprinted on box. Or
grease pencil on the bottom. Plus it was a nice box but Bangor Punta marked. Post mid 1965.
grease pencil on the bottom. Plus it was a nice box but Bangor Punta marked. Post mid 1965.
OP
Quite apparent no one on the Forum has a 52A in its factory shipping box.
n c rod
Member
52A
Bought a 52-1 NIB in March, box with no tools or papers. Can I help? Rod in NC. Best out of the box trigger I ever owned. Needs no adjustment.
Bought a 52-1 NIB in March, box with no tools or papers. Can I help? Rod in NC. Best out of the box trigger I ever owned. Needs no adjustment.
OP
Hello Rod, thanks for your kind offer. The 52A and your 52-1 are two different guns. They have nothing in common with each other.
Last edited:
Mike,
I have 2, 52-A boxes (just the boxes) that belong to 2 of Mike Tait's 52-A that I reported stolen back in 2015. About 20 of Mike's most expensive collectible guns were stolen by either his nurses or care givers shortly before his death in the 2014-2015 time frame. I was Mike's power of attorney and executor.
Then I also have another that my 52-A is in. I bought that one from Dr. John Parker of Perry, Florida back about 1992.
FYI, it came new with 2 magazines which are unique to the 52-A and NO Parts sheet nor brochures, just the cleaning tools and the older 2-part warranty card was enclosed.
There were so few 52-As that no parts sheets were printed, nor enclosed, for them. Best Regards, Sal
I have 2, 52-A boxes (just the boxes) that belong to 2 of Mike Tait's 52-A that I reported stolen back in 2015. About 20 of Mike's most expensive collectible guns were stolen by either his nurses or care givers shortly before his death in the 2014-2015 time frame. I was Mike's power of attorney and executor.
Then I also have another that my 52-A is in. I bought that one from Dr. John Parker of Perry, Florida back about 1992.
FYI, it came new with 2 magazines which are unique to the 52-A and NO Parts sheet nor brochures, just the cleaning tools and the older 2-part warranty card was enclosed.
There were so few 52-As that no parts sheets were printed, nor enclosed, for them. Best Regards, Sal
Last edited:
OP
Sal, just attempting to gain some education on this semi-mysterious auto. Printed material, especially serial numbers do not quite work out.
Were there 87 or 78 made or shipped to the public. What were the
number of 52-A sent to the Army? It has to be buried somewhere.
Now to the box. Were they pre-Bangor with the solid silver boarder?
Was the left end on the lid printed as a 39 and the right end had a white stick on label? The ever present quest to solve the mysteries of S&W. Mike
Were there 87 or 78 made or shipped to the public. What were the
number of 52-A sent to the Army? It has to be buried somewhere.
Now to the box. Were they pre-Bangor with the solid silver boarder?
Was the left end on the lid printed as a 39 and the right end had a white stick on label? The ever present quest to solve the mysteries of S&W. Mike
I missed that discussion but it's horrible and sickening. I would think with guns THAT rare, there would be some hope for recovery? Awful.
OP
Hello Sevens, agree wholeheartedly. Kind of wonder where they ended up for some fast cash. In the bottom of the lake or stripped for parts.
My take is that the frame, barrel and mag follower are distinctive to the 52A. What a shame for the original owner and the collecting fraternity.
Only have to ponder.
My take is that the frame, barrel and mag follower are distinctive to the 52A. What a shame for the original owner and the collecting fraternity.
Only have to ponder.
Boxes are solid semi-gloss blue pre-Bangor Punta, solid silver frame border on front. No printing on either end, just a label.
All 52As I've ever encountered (about 12 in my lifetime) were all in the 358xx serial number range.
OP
Well, thanks members. Apparently there is only one member/reader
that has any limited knowledge of this mysterious 52A pistol.
that has any limited knowledge of this mysterious 52A pistol.
OP
Mr. Jinks History book has a good intro to the 52A.
OP
"History of S&W" by Roy G. Jinks.
ISBN 0-917714-14-8.
ISBN 0-917714-14-8.
I think you have this almost correct. And I am not 100% sure of these details but they are pretty reliable. There were about 87 made for the US Army. 10 shipped to the US Army and the other 77 were sold commercially in 1964. They were never even cataloged as far as I know. The 77 AFAIK were sold commercially only because the Army didn't want them. The pistol was DOA. Why I am not completely sure. Its's only intended purpose was to be used the at the National Pistol Matches by the US Army as a replacement for revolvers using the Army's newly developed 38 AMU cartridge. I think it is because the Standard .38 S&W Special wadcutter used in the Model 52 and 52-1 were much more versatile and easy to obtain than the .38 AMU. Anyway that's my story. Boxes and literature I have no clue. These guns are pretty much ghosts. I have never seen one.
Last edited:
I'm trying to admit my confusion -- while at the same time trying to be cautious and NOT offend fans of the Model 52A.
But seriously, I cannot understand this pistol.
The model "52-A" gives the idea that this pistol is based on a 52, but chambered in the .38 AMU round. But this is NOT the case. Instead, this pistol seems to basically be a Model 39 which is chambered for the .38 AMU.
If this gun was built for the Army Marksmanship Unit to compete... why would they have any desire for a 39 when the Model 52 itself exists? Longer barrel, longer sight radius, target sights, a phenomenal trigger, a hand-fit slide/frame, a bank-vault lockup with an ingenious barrel bushing...?
The 39 was a fine service pistol and historically significant. The Model 52 is so far beyond a 39 in ability for competitive target and Bullseye style shooting.
So -why- is the .38 AMU chambered pistol that was offered to the AMU based on a Model 39 when the obvious choice was a 52?
What have I missed?
But seriously, I cannot understand this pistol.
The model "52-A" gives the idea that this pistol is based on a 52, but chambered in the .38 AMU round. But this is NOT the case. Instead, this pistol seems to basically be a Model 39 which is chambered for the .38 AMU.
If this gun was built for the Army Marksmanship Unit to compete... why would they have any desire for a 39 when the Model 52 itself exists? Longer barrel, longer sight radius, target sights, a phenomenal trigger, a hand-fit slide/frame, a bank-vault lockup with an ingenious barrel bushing...?
The 39 was a fine service pistol and historically significant. The Model 52 is so far beyond a 39 in ability for competitive target and Bullseye style shooting.
So -why- is the .38 AMU chambered pistol that was offered to the AMU based on a Model 39 when the obvious choice was a 52?
What have I missed?
Timing: The 39-1 aka 52A came out 1st. Then they built the 52 and 52-1. The 2 model #s are confusing. The 52A is really the 39-1 but was never cataloged. The 52 and 52-1 are not at all the same pistol as the 52A. They were designed and released after the 52A. Don't let the 1964 release date of 52As confuse you on timing. They sat in inventory for a few years before being sold to civilian market. My understanding on the 39-1 was the Army did not want the gun to be confused with a 9mm caliber 39 so they dubbed it the 52A.
Last edited:
OP
Sevens, Im with you on confusion. Did the Army request the gun or did S&W just make it and approached the Army? Now ponder this. Its 1964, and you walk into your favorite shop and there is one in the case.
How much was it and why would you buy it? Was ammo that abundant?
But S&W did not waste anything. Ship it out and invoice it.
How much was it and why would you buy it? Was ammo that abundant?
But S&W did not waste anything. Ship it out and invoice it.
Similar threads
Sold/Withdrawn
Factory S&W boxes for model 41(SOLD) & 638 - REDUCED
