A Couple of No. 2 Army Revolvers

[DCWilson]

I went to my local FFL today to start the ship-in process for an out-of-state gun I am buying, and happened to look at the consignment shelf. Surprise! The No. 2 Army that had been there for a year with a ridiculous $1200 price on it was now marked "SALE" with a sticker price of $300. That was enough to catch my attention, but right beside it was another one, slightly more beat up, at an even lower price. I didn't even handle them. It took me about four seconds to tell the counter guy, "I'll take both of them."

These are NOT collector grade guns, but they are honorable No.2 Army models that will serve as my introduction to the world of tip-ups.

No. 46442

The one I had seen before is number 46442, which Ron Curtis would characterize as a fifth type; it has the long recoill shield. The action on this gun is fine, but the hinge and latch are sloppy. Any gunsmithing tips on how to fix that? The springs are all fine, trigger and hammer work properly. The tip of the hammer has lost a piece that sheared off along one of the knurling lines. The hinge screw is rusted solidly in place, but I am soaking it in Kroil and hope to get it out eventually. The interior was filthy, but cleaned up nicely.

The bore and chambers are not bad on this one, but even if I had some .32 RF ammo, I would never shoot it without addressing the latch and hinge problems.

No. 29827

Based on the serial number, this is an example of the fourth type that Ron Curtis described.

This gun is in tougher mechanical shape than the other one, with a lot of pitting on different surfaces. The cylinder stop is so worn that it cannot prevent the cylinder from spinning freely whether the hammer is cocked or not. The striker on the front of the hammer is broken off; there cannot be enough metal there to fire this gun. The top of the knurled hammer thumbpiece is also broken, but has been filed to a serviceable shape with no sharp edges. The bore and chambers need more cleaning before I can see exactly what is going on there, but they appear to be somewhat pitted and corroded. The rifling is still strong.

The good news is that this hinge and latch are not as loose as on the other gun, and the hinge screw is functional. The mainspring is strong and unrusted. The front sight is in better shape on this gun than on the other one.

This gun has a strange recoil shield modification. Someone bored a .32 diameter hole at the 3:00 o'clock position. Was this supposed to be a quick loading or unloading hole? If so, it must have been a failure because the rim of the .32 cartridge would not pass through the opening. The work is competent, but incomprehensible to me. Has anyone seen anything like this on other tip-ups?

And the familiar barrel top stamp, which is seen on the other gun as well:

Stocks on both guns are numbered to their respective frames.

I don't know much about these guns except what I read on Ron Curtis' web site, but I am looking forward to learning more. Looks like I will need a hammer and a cylinder latch to repair the one gun unless welded repairs have a chance of surviving further impacts. I believe the Type 4 will be an 1864 revolver, and the Type 5 gun from the following year.

Cool guns, and I think the price was right.

 

[gunlovingirl]

Two pieces of history! And at a really decent price! A No. 2 Army has been on my watch list for awhile. I've seen a few, but most aren't worth the asking price. At least not to me. Except one. I found one a few months back priced at $800. Fairly low serial number, nice even finish, tight mechanics. By the time I rounded up the money, it had been sold. I can't offer any advice on where or who to get the first one tightened up, but at $300, you can afford to get it fixed and have a nice gun. Congrats! And let us know how you make out with the repairs!

 

[jimmyj]

Hi:
Great score!
The second #2 Revolver with the "Hole" on the right side of the recoil shield could be a "Window" for viewing if the revolver is loaded or unloaded without taking the cylinder out. I have seen later solid frame revolver from the early 20th. century with this factory "Window" design.
Jimmy

 

[wedgeguns]

David
Great pictures The second one Cut in the recoil shield for loading, I have seen a good dozen that were so modified. The hammer this and the loose bbl hinge is very common, I would just leave it alone. The latch I also would leave alone as it is a night mare to change out. The gun as is shows character

Ron Curtis

 

[H Richard]

Lucky you. I've had one of these on my list for sometime, but never see one below the $700 - $1000 price range. A source for parts is possibly Popperts Gun parts. Poppert's Gun Parts Main Menu. He bought out Jerry Rodgers recently.

 

[Memphis]

David what a nice catch you've made. But I must comment on the excellent photography. Man, you sure know how to take a picture. Super nice closeups with stunning detail.

I've noticed you have excellent taste in guns (or at least you like the ones I like). Keep up the nice finds (and pics).

Roger

 

[hobby-gunsmith]

Great find for the price. I am looking for a #2 and the prices are high. They are increasing in value and the semi-functional guns are still holding their price. I keep surfing the gun sites and hope for the best. Again, Congrats on your find.
Nick

 

[DCWilson]

Jimmy, not to be argumentative but wouldn't it be simpler to make an inspection port by just filing off about a quarter of an inch from the outer edge of the recoil shield? That way you could also tell by touch whether your gun was loaded.

Ron, the diameter of the drilled-out portion on the shield is .327 inch. The chamber diameter is about .323. I don't know the rim diameter of the case, but I don't see how one could load the chambers through the back without a larger cut-out.

 

[Tom K]

Jimmy, not to be argumentative but wouldn't it be simpler to make an inspection port by just filing off about a quarter of an inch from the outer edge of the recoil shield? That way you could also tell by touch whether your gun was loaded.

Ron, the diameter of the drilled-out portion on the shield is .327 inch. The chamber diameter is about .323. I don't know the rim diameter of the case, but I don't see how one could load the chambers through the back without a larger cut-out.

Looking at the picture, it appears that the bottom of the cutout is flush with the frame. It may be that whoever did the modification didn't realize that it wouldn't be possible to file deeply enough to allow clearance for the cartridge rim, until it was too late. Wouldn't be the first time that someone jumped in with a good idea, that turned out to be not so good.

 

[opoefc]

David, Your modified Model 2 looks somewhat like a similar gun, in the collection of a friend of mine, that has been modified to fire the .32 Teat Fire cartridge. Are there any modifications to the firing pin nose of the hammer or the chambers of the cylinders? Ed #15

 

[DCWilson]

David, Your modified Model 2 looks somewhat like a similar gun, in the collection of a friend of mine, that has been modified to fire the .32 Teat Fire cartridge. Are there any modifications to the firing pin nose of the hammer or the chambers of the cylinders? Ed #15

Ed, thank you! That is a fascinating suggestion. I looked up some illustrations of teat fire revolvers (of which I was previously unaware) and can't honestly say that anything on my Old Army looks like it could have been part of a firing system like the ones I found pictured. There are no obvious modifications to the back of the cylinder, and the hammer face does not look as though it has been modified in a way that would allow it to hit a teat fire cartridge properly.

But -- and this is a big but -- I realized while looking more closely at the gun that what I thought was the striking area of the hammer is actually connected to manipulating the cylinder stop. Now that I know the hammer protrudes properly for rimfire operation, one of my generalizations above becomes invalid; this gun WOULD fire rimfire rounds if I had any.

Also, I found that the cylinder stop is not worn too low to function; the bar is simply bent up too far. I will remove it and gently put it back in shape this evening. And suddenly, the Type 4 will be as good a gun as the Type 5. That's a fast restoration.

Back to the teat fire rounds -- if I understand correctly, they were meant to be loaded through the front of the cylinder, so I'm still not sure what the benefit of the semi-circular cutout in the recoil shield would be. Were there yet other alternative cartridge ignition systems that were developed about this time?
(Rhetorical question, so no need to answer; I'll be trying to hunt up some information on that myself.)

Again thanks for asking a question that made me take a closer look at my gun and realize that what is wrong with it is a matter of adjustment rather than replacement.

 

[pace40]

These are NOT collector grade guns, but they are honorable No.2 Army models that will serve as my introduction to the world of tip-ups.

Ha, thats what I said when I bought my first ones. Careful, they have a tendency to suck you (and your checkbook) right in.

Seriously, nice find on a couple of honest model 2's. Man, the stories they could tell.

 

[DCWilson]

Just what I need. An opportunity for more S&W debt.

To go serious for a moment, I think there is something about the cylinder stop that I am not understanding. I get the three pins and the screw out, and there is a long split spring under there that traps the top of the hammer when it is at rest. But what creates the tension that forces the bar down so the stop engages the cylinder? Is there supposed to be another spring under the bar that holds it in the down position? Or is the long split spring supposed to be curved in a way to create that tension?

I am thinking there must be a second spring, because I don't know why else the center pin would be there. The one farthest forward is for the cylinder stop to pivot on, and the one farthest back is to restrain the cylinder stop and keep it from lifting up far enough to bend or break. Unless there is a missing spring, I don't see the point of the one in the middle.

I'm having a problem visualizing this, and I can't find an exploded drawing of a No. 2 on the web. Can somebody talk me through this? I know I could take the other gun apart and see what it looks like in there, but I'd rather not until I get a sense of what I am likely to find.

 

[DCWilson]

OK, answered my own question. I found an exploded drawing through Google Books, and yes, there is supposed to be another spring in there called, not surprisingly, the cylinder stop spring.

Anybody have an extra they would be willing to sell me?