A 1902, I think

[dspringthorpe]

I am looking for confirmation and any additional information on a pistol that came into the shop. I think it is a 1902. I have all of the original parts. I took it apart to clean and prep for a rebluing job. I found that the slide spring (normally a coil spring) was a flat spring with a different style trigger slide. Also, that the studs for the hammer, trigger and appear to have been screwed in. Both of these seem different from the normal. What this the normal for that time?
Any thoughts are appreciated.

• Type: Hand Ejector
• Serial: 30983
• Caliber: 38 S&W Special
• Barrel Length: 6.5" measured from the front of the cylinder
• Sights: Fixed
• Yoke stamping: assembly number only
• Screws: 4

• 

 

[Muley Gil]

Yes, it is a 1902 and those screw-in studs were in use pre WW II.

 

[spin132]

Sure looks like a 1902 to me. Here's a little trick I learned here to compress that spring if you want to disassemble the rest of it. Make sure you get a piece of hardwood dowel to fashion.

Mike

 

[Alk8944]

This is a 1902 1st change. probably made 1903-1904. Jack, JP@AK, should be along soon with more.

 

[Muley Gil]

Padded visegrip pliers work also.

 

[JP@AK]

It appears to have the smaller barrel extension, which would make it a Model of 1902 from before the "first change." The serial number also fits that variant. Probably assembled in 1903.

The threaded hammer pivot stud lasted all the way up to 1946; change order issued on January 18, 1946.

 

[cgt4570]

I concur with Jack. It's a Model 1902 (no change) circa 1902-1903. It has the smaller dia barrel shank that shares the threads with the i and j frames. .500-36 vs the K frame .540-36 stanardized circa 1903 in the Model of 1902, First Change.

 

[spin132]

1902 SN 43981 shipped in May 1904 if that helps.

Mike

 

[Truckman]

1902 SN 43981 shipped in May 1904 if that helps.

Lawdhavmercy!...What a nice pair of stocks!......Ben

 

[spin132]

Lawdhavmercy!...What a nice pair of stocks!......Ben

Thanks Ben!

 

[daveboy]

Padded visegrip pliers work also.

That is what I did. I like the dowel idea, though.

 

[daveboy]

I just wrapped up my first-ever restoration of a 1902. I'd never been inside one, being familiar with later actions. Imagine my surprise when I popped off that sideplate and saw no rebound slide along with an extra leaf-spring! I was very nervous disassembling and reassembling because some of these parts are simply unavailable. Here is the "works" along with a before and after.

 

[dspringthorpe]

I am looking for confirmation and any additional information on a pistol that came into the shop. I think it is a 1902. I have all of the original parts. I took it apart to clean and prep for a rebluing job. I found that the slide spring (normally a coil spring) was a flat spring with a different style trigger slide. Also, that the studs for the hammer, trigger and appear to have been screwed in. Both of these seem different from the normal. What this the normal for that time?
Any thoughts are appreciated.

• Type: Hand Ejector
• Serial: 30983
• Caliber: 38 S&W Special
• Barrel Length: 6.5" measured from the front of the cylinder
• Sights: Fixed
• Yoke stamping: assembly number only
• Screws: 4

• View attachment 816303View attachment 816304

Thank you all for the feedback. I will post pics for the restored version when I have them.

 

[JP@AK]

1902 SN 43981 shipped in May 1904 if that helps.

Nice one, Mike

Notice the swell where the barrel enters the frame. This is the so-called "first change." The diameter of the barrel extension was increased. The approximate serial number where this change occurred is 33800.

 

[spin132]

Nice one, Mike

Notice the swell where the barrel enters the frame. This is the so-called "first change." The diameter of the barrel extension was increased. The approximate serial number where this change occurred is 33800.

Thanks Jack, I see what you're referring to. Appreciate the information. You are a walking encyclopedia on most things Smith & Wesson. Many of us appreciate your sage input!

Mike

 

[Alk8944]

Jack, I knew you would fix it for me. I didn't look closely enough at all the photos I guess.