Buy The Gun, Not The Story

[boykinlp]

I was reviewing some guns that I had bookmarked on past auction sites today when I came across this one. When I reread the description, part of it seemed curious to me. How would you folks rate the accuracy of the description?
Larry

https://www.invaluable.com/auction-lot/smith-wesson-44-magnum-revolver-a154e98b7c

 

[stansdds]

A factory letter does provide the pedigree, but too rich for my blood.

 

[DARE]

Did not spot anything curious. What did you see? SCSW, 5th Edition says $4750 for Excellent. Think that would not include box and tools or letter. $7000 seems like a lot, but could see $5500 or $6000.

 

[oliver897]

If I had a dollar for every “this gun was carried by an undercover agent/ninja/CIA ghost” story, I’d have way more guns

 

[glowe]

My question is why did they state it was part of the first 300 made? Serial numbers start around S121,000, so how many were made between S121,000 and 160, 704? The old SWCA database shows the gun's serial number referenced by Roy Jinks in the notes as being one of 125 44 Mag revolvers manufactured, but no basis for the number? This is a gun for Bill Cross to comment on. It looks like a 5 screw, so maybe that is a reason for these numbers?

 

[Tijeras_Slim]

I’d think a picture of the case would have been a plus to their claims.

 

[Charlie Foxtrott]

Letters are always suspect IMO. With that said, buy the gun not the story.

 

[boykinlp]

My question is why did they state it was part of the first 300 made? Serial numbers start around S121,000, so how many were made between S121,000 and 160, 704? The old SWCA database shows the gun's serial number referenced by Roy Jinks in the notes as being one of 125 44 Mag revolvers manufactured, but no basis for the number? This is a gun for Bill Cross to comment on. It looks like a 5 screw, so maybe that is a reason for these numbers?

Gary, that’s exactly what I was wondering. Don’t know for certain, but I imagine the buyer, if he took that information for granted, might have bid more for it. Who knows?
Larry

 

[22hipower]

It sold for $8225 plus tax, shipping, transfer fees so someone thought it was worth the money. Two sold at RIA's auction last weekend for realized prices of $5288 and $4994 (plus the tax etc.). I didn't handle the one the OP mentions but I did the two this weekend and both were nice. Both of these were 6.5 inch first year guns with S&W letters.

We never know about auction prices, sometimes a couple guys want them and they go for more than we would expect, other times there is less interest and they go for less. Seems there are folks in those auctions for whom price isn't all that big an issue if they want the item. Last weekend I watched someone buy a pair of engraved Purdy shotguns for $350k (add another 28% or so for fees/taxes/shipping). The next day the same guy bought a Colt Walker revolver for $240k plus the fees followed up shortly thereafter by a Colt Patterson at $28k. Price didn't seem to be that big an issue for him, he just kept bidding until he won.

Was the pre-29 worth it for $8225? To whoever bought it, it was. I don't know how anyone would know that the one in question was one of the first 300 or why we would care other than first year guns do seem to carry a premium. Percentage wise it didn't go all that far above the RIA estimated price range.

Jeff
SWCA #1457

 

[DARE]

Maybe the letter says first 300? April 16, 1956 is an early ship date. SCSW 5th says 2X for the first 100 guns. Does not mention an add for the first 300.

 

[22hipower]

Maybe the letter says first 300? April 16, 1956 is an early ship date. SCSW 5th says 2X for the first 100 guns. Does not mention an add for the first 300.

The letter doesn't say anything about being one of the first 300, only gives the April ship date. It could well have been in the first 300, but why we would care isn't clear to me. S&W made a lot more than 300 that first year and I don't think the 301st is worth less than the 300th.

RIA is usually pretty good about not getting carried away with superfluous information and their price estimate ranges are quite accurate much of the time. I don't think they would intentionally include information that couldn't be verified. Perhaps the consignor wanted the 300 number included, I don't think RIA would have conjured it up on their own.

Jeff

 

[flundertaker]

Big egos coupled with big wallets.

 

[Model29-26.5]

I was reviewing some guns that I had bookmarked on past auction sites today when I came across this one. When I reread the description, part of it seemed curious to me. How would you folks rate the accuracy of the description?
Larry

https://www.invaluable.com/auction-lot/smith-wesson-44-magnum-revolver-a154e98b7c

I watched that one hammer live. Went for $3750.
My bad different lot

 

[Gun Relics]

My question is why did they state it was part of the first 300 made? Serial numbers start around S121,000, so how many were made between S121,000 and 160, 704? The old SWCA database shows the gun's serial number referenced by Roy Jinks in the notes as being one of 125 44 Mag revolvers manufactured, but no basis for the number? This is a gun for Bill Cross to comment on. It looks like a 5 screw, so maybe that is a reason for these numbers?

Well if it shipped in April it is indeed an early gun, regardless of the serial number.

 

[boykinlp]

I wanted to get on here and tell y’all how good crow tastes. I spent tonight looking through old posts on the forum. I looked at a bunch, but if I was smarter, I could have gotten the answer much quicker since our .44 magnum expert Bill Cross posted this only a few days ago.

“S160304, shipped in early May 1956. One of the first 300 44 Magnums shipped by S&W.” Per Bill Cross 5/2/2025

In my reading, there was some conflicting numbers, so these are not gospel by any means. But, this is what I could put together. The total number for the first year was approximately 3100.

12/1955 - 1
01/1956 - 26
02/1956 - 40
03/1956 - 132
04/1956 - 134
Total…….333

Larry

Also, just as a FYI, the gun I brought up in the first post was once owned by one of the forum’s members.

 

[Retired W4]

I’d think a picture of the case would have been a plus to their claims.

Good luck getting any more photos out of them. Good looking gun based on the few photos provided.

 

[Model19man]

Serial numbers were for all N frame Smith & Wesson products. The 44 Magnum revolvers were only one part of that. That one is really nice, apparently two guys thought it was worth the money.

 

[DARE]

Larry, we serve crow about once a week at my house. Thanks for finding the post about the first 300. After reading what you wrote, I got the idea to search "first 300" on this forum. Bill's post popped right up. Thanks for teaching me something. Have been told that is not an easy thing to do.

 

[H Richard]

What always irks me about this Co. is you get two pictures, and that's it. I won't get into how they bundle from 3 to 10 guns in a bundle to just get rid of them.

 

[Gun Relics]

I wanted to get on here and tell y’all how good crow tastes. I spent tonight looking through old posts on the forum. I looked at a bunch, but if I was smarter, I could have gotten the answer much quicker since our .44 magnum expert Bill Cross posted this only a few days ago.

“S160304, shipped in early May 1956. One of the first 300 44 Magnums shipped by S&W.” Per Bill Cross 5/2/2025

In my reading, there was some conflicting numbers, so these are not gospel by any means. But, this is what I could put together. The total number for the first year was approximately 3100.

12/1955 - 1
01/1956 - 26
02/1956 - 40
03/1956 - 132
04/1956 - 134
Total…….333

Larry

Also, just as a FYI, the gun I brought up in the first post was once owned by one of the forum’s members.

I admire that you were willing to research this. I really doubt that the buyer cared much about the "first 300" statement anyway. The condition and early ship date, being at the start of S & W's most iconic models (to the public) and the complete original package. I have been looking for a 5 screw first year myself - no doubt they are in high demand because my bids have fallen way short.

I'm showing it went for $7,000 final plus fees - is that not correct?