A Crash Course in Prewar Kit Guns (Two more variants added: see post no. 29)

[Green Frog]

Froggie, my friend, I'm only too happy to help. I'll notify you immediately of any and all good buys I come across from now on.

Gee thanks, Hondo (I think) Are you helping or enabling? I have to confess that I have been party to one of these HFT rebuilds, and Jim provided critical assistance. I bought a '20s vintage HFT with badly bulged barrel then found a NOS 6" barrel for it form Poppert's guns. What I didn't realize was that the new barrel was apparently part of a post-War run and had no notch milled for the LERK. Fortunately friend Jim got me hooked up with a donor e-rod that could be altered by turning off the knob so I wouldn't have to alter the barrel. When some other challenges came to light, it was good to have that one already dealt with, so a public shout out of thanks goes to Hondo44.

Since the aforementioned HFT is already altered, I may now decide it needs to become a Kit Gun by changing the barrel yet again to a 4" one. Since it already has RP-type grips, it should make up into a nice little carry package for the honorable pastime of woods loafing.

Froggie

PS to Sixgun Strumpet: Now that is an old school Red Dot sight!!

 

[Hondo44]

Sixgun,

It will be very interesting to see if the left side grip frame has a date stamp and a star for re-work. Although the star is more typically stamped after the s/n on the butt, I have seen a few where the star was stamped by the date under the left grip too. Or maybe the gun was employee owned and the work was done by him.

 

[Modified]

Sixgun,

It will be very interesting to see if the left side grip frame has a date stamp and a star for re-work. Although the star is more typically stamped after the s/n on the butt, I have seen a few where the star was stamped by the date under the left grip too. Or maybe the gun was employee owned and the work was done by him.

I agree. Should be able to have a look at it next Friday or Saturday, I'll be sure to post detailed pictures.

It seems to me that so much of the fun of old smiths is trying to figure out what went on with them. I think that's why I like the non-stock guns so much, at least when the factory or someone skilled did work on them that is.

 

[Modified]

Ok, here we go:

First impression: Love it.

Only disappointment: absolutely NO markings under the stocks at all, none. Not even a trace of anything. Was really hoping for a date or something but it's 100% clear of any markings. Every marking on the gun is in those pictures (I cannot find the S/N on the back of the extractor either).

 

[DCWilson]

Ok, here we go:

First impression: Love it.

I love it too. That's a very nice virtual prewar Kit Gun.

It's sad there are no frame markings, but the well-executed modifications tell the tale. At some point the factory simply stopped marking the frames of guns that came in for repair or refinish. The latest date stamp that comes to mind is 1978, but I suppose there could have been later marked repairs on returned guns that I don't know about. Hard to believe that a prewar barrel would still be available in the 1980s (if that's when the work was done), but stranger things have happened.

 

[Modified]

That's so odd. I would never have imagined that a gun like this could have been constructed in the 1980s.

They would have had to break out old stamps for the S/Ns wouldn't they? Plus, the King sights would have had to have been old by that point, and laying around with the barrel?

Not that I mind much, would have been nice to have a date there, but the gun really does speak for itself when it is in my hand. I'm in no way unhappy about it.

Except maybe that it didn't come with a nice set of I frame Ropers

 

[DCWilson]

Sorry, that was a potentially misleading response. I didn't mean to imply I thought this was necessarily a 1980s rebuild. If I had to guess I'd say it was earlier. Possibly this gun simply didn't get the grip frame date stamp, but the four-line address rollmark clearly indicates this was a postwar service department modification.

 

[Hondo44]

I believe IIRC, the practice of updated stamping of pre war guns returned to the factory was done immediately post war and Roy Jinks put a stop to it early on like in the early 1950s. Thank goodness!

Your gun also seems to have the post war to mid 1950s satin blue finish like my HFT that was factory re-finished and dated 1953. And also mine did not get the 4 line address re-stamp.

To me those two facts would give the time frame of when your gun was modified.

 

[PALADIN85020]

This is a great thread. I thought I'd throw in some pics of an unusual transition kit gun I recently acquired. I've posted the details before, but I thought they would also be well placed in this particular thread. The serial on this piece places it in 1940, but according to Roy Jinks, it was one of about 25 that were not actually shipped until after the war; this one in June of 1951. The lockwork on this one is the postwar type with the sliding hammer block bar.

The frame was serialed in 1940, and the postwar niceties such as the new lockwork, cylinder release and stocks were applied after the war. The barrel and cylinder are serialed to the frame and may have been installed pre-war. The rear sight has an extra locking screw; the only one I've seen on guns of this type - some were applied to earlier .38 special target-sighted guns. The final high polish bluing had to have been applied postwar, the clue being that the stocks are a perfect fit to the contour of the frame. Stocks were fitted to the frame just before bluing. These are stamped internally with the serial number.

John

This stamp underneath the barrel, which matches another under the ejector star, verifies that this gun with a 1940 serial number frame was re-worked at the factory before shipment after the war to give it some more modern freatures. A number of modifications and part replacements were implemented before its eventual shipment.

 

[Lt Dave]

I have an I-frame kit gun in .22 cal with a four digit serial number. How old do you think it may be? Ser/1161

 

[JSR III]

Welcome to the forum.

Love to see 10 year old threads get resurrected. A kit gun with a serial number between 101 and 135465 (ie 1161) would be the Model of 1953 or a pre model 34 produced from 1953 to 1969. Serial numbers hit 5,000 in 1954 so one would believe that your gun was made during the first year of 1953.

Prior to this model the .22/32 was a 6" barreled target gun built at the behest of San Francisco gun dealer and west coast S&W representative Phillip Bekeart, and is referred to by collectors as the Bekeart model. In the 1930's S&W came out with the K-22 built on a larger and heavier K frame and in my opinion it was the death knell of the lighter I frame .22/32 revolver. My belief is that S&W had frames in inventory and never wanting to waste anything, came out with a 4" version labeled the "kit" gun so no longer in competition with the 6"K 22.

Those 6" .22/32's started production in 1911 @ serial number 138226 and ran up to around 525900 or so and the kit guns started around 527700 in the late 1930's going up to around 600000 in 1952.

Your gun was the next version in the line built on the improved I frame.

I hope that helps.

 

[JP@AK]

I have an I-frame kit gun in .22 cal with a four digit serial number. How old do you think it may be? Ser/1161

With that serial number, it would have to be a .22/32 Kit Gun Model of 1953. In other words, it is postwar Kit Gun. The Model of 1953 began with serial number 101. Yours would be from sometime in the mid-1950s. Hondo44 may have a list that would help determine the date more precisely.

 

[JP@AK]

I see that James posted while I was writing my reply. Most of what he told you is accurate, except for this:

Your gun was the next version in the line built on the improved I frame.

The Model of 1953 was not built on the "improved I frame." No Kit Gun was ever built on that frame. The Model of 1953 Kit Gun was built on the 1953 new I frame, with slightly larger dimensions than the "improved" version.

 

[JSR III]

The Model of 1953 was not built on the "improved I frame." No Kit Gun was ever built on that frame. The Model of 1953 Kit Gun was built on the 1953 new I frame, with slightly larger dimensions than the "improved" version.

Sorry if this is incorrect however I was merely quoting what I had learned in the Roy Jinks book, "125 Years with Smith and Wesson" on page 152 paragraph 3 where Roy states, "Both 1953 models differed from the original in that they incorporated an improved I frame with a coil type mainspring and micro-click sights."

and

on page 134 of the Standard Catalog of Smith and Wesson 4th edition wherein it too states that this model was built on an improved I frame.

Perhaps this is merely semantics where there is "the improved I frame" and "an improved I frame"
referring to different models.

I'll defer to the experts on this.....

 

[Flygas]

David, the middle gun in the initial photo (third gun in row 2) appears to have an inscription on the right sideplate. What is it?

 

[JP@AK]

Sorry if this is incorrect however I was merely quoting what I had learned in the Roy Jinks book, "125 Years with Smith and Wesson" on page 152 paragraph 3 where Roy states, "Both 1953 models differed from the original in that they incorporated an improved I frame with a coil type mainspring and micro-click sights."

and

on page 134 of the Standard Catalog of Smith and Wesson 4th edition wherein it too states that this model was built on an improved I frame.

I'll defer to the experts on this

Like you, I defer to the experts. But knowledge has a way of growing over time. In this case, we have increased knowledge thanks to a growing number of experts who examine details and contribute new understanding of the facts.

If you go back to your SCSW 4th Edition and study the brown pages (144-146) you will see Jim Carter's (Hondo44) explanation of the developments in the I frame. On page 146 he identifies the Model of 1953 as the "new" I frame, an improved version of the "improved I frame." Yes, it has the coil spring of its predecessor, but it has new dimensions. This does contradict what appears on page 134. I believe this contradiction will be corrected in the 5th Edition, which will be out next month (at least I hope so).

Most of us are following Jim's lead on this. He is widely respected as the expert on the I frame.

 

[wbraswell]

What a great thread, and it only took me 11 yrs. and 8 months to discover it! I have been hunting one of these rascals and so far have been outbid on the 2 or 3 I have tried for. (my fault!) Bravo David, I appreciate the knowledge I have gained from this thread.

 

[DCWilson]

David, the middle gun in the initial photo (third gun in row 2) appears to have an inscription on the right sideplate. What is it?

It's the full name, I presume, of a previous and possibly original owner. I recall that I bought the revolver out of Oregon, but when I looked into the inscribed name, it turned out to identify a former attorney who practiced law in Orange County just a few miles north of where I have lived since 1970. The attorney was not old enough to have bought the gun for himself, as he was in single or low double digits when it was shipped. But this would have made an excellent boy's first gun, and I suspect parents may have bought it and had it engraved with his name as a coming-of-age gift.

There is obviously room here for tighter evidence. Thanks for asking the question, because I will now go looking for the man or close relatives in both Oregon and Southern California census records to see if can nail down a connection. I probably should have done that when I bought the gun a dozen years ago.