OP
Very good. Well past the start of heat treating cylinders.
Can this be original finish?
- Thread starter BC38
- Start date
The extractor rod's front bevel that should be bare metal does not show in bruce5781's picture. The unblued metal part that does show was only used in the 1st Model N frame or Triple Lock. It has case hardening colors. It cammed the third lock in out of the way while the yoke was being closed. The third lock was discontinued early in WW I. I think bruce5781 intended to write that the line he looks at is between the yoke and frame.
k22fan,
You are correct, Sir.
Regards,
Bruce
You are correct, Sir.
Regards,
Bruce
bmcgilvray
Member
Original in my opinion.
Here's serial No. 506000-and-something-or-other. It's one of the better pre-war "treasures" in the trash & treasures here.
Here's serial No. 506000-and-something-or-other. It's one of the better pre-war "treasures" in the trash & treasures here.
Last edited:
OP
I got the point you were making about the yoke to frame fit. I suppose you look for the same kind of thing you would with the sideplate seam?
Would you have a picture of what a correct ejector rod would look like? I think I get what you're saying, but a picture would confirm it...
Of course someone who didn't know better might mistake an unblued ejector rod knob as a sign of wear and try to do a "touch up" with cold blue.
Now that you've taught yourself to look for it the picture that shows the extractor rod nob in your original post should show you the bare metal front bevel obvious as the nose on an elephant's face. Presumably the bevel was finish cut to fit the rod so the cylinder closed with the desired amount of side pressure.
OP
Are you talking about the photo below and almost the entire area outlined in red? Or just the center part where the front locking pin makes contact with the end of the rod. I can't tell from this photo whether either of those areas are in the white - or not.
Attachments
Last edited:
The entire area outlined in red should be in the white. I guess you could call it a rounded bevel.
OP
Very good, thanks for the confirmation. At least I know exactly what I am looking for. Though with the reflection in the photo, I can't say one way or another about this one, whether it is or isn't.
Guess I'd find out this weekend.
I'd still like to see a photo of one that is correct, but if I don't I can at least know what to check.
Thanks,
Last edited:
Something about the pitch black ejector rod strikes me as odd looking ... but if that gun ie refinished someone worked a miracle.
Can't quite see the front of the rod cap , but I have to say original.
I do think that the references made to the likelihood of the market for old iron bring affected by recent events are probably going to prove out. If you are near retirement or close to it , and seeing the net worth slashed by 30% in a week , one more revolver may slip on the priority list. The guys lined up out on the sidewalk at gun shops these days are not there for 90 year old revolvers.
Can't quite see the front of the rod cap , but I have to say original.
I do think that the references made to the likelihood of the market for old iron bring affected by recent events are probably going to prove out. If you are near retirement or close to it , and seeing the net worth slashed by 30% in a week , one more revolver may slip on the priority list. The guys lined up out on the sidewalk at gun shops these days are not there for 90 year old revolvers.
OP
LOL, true, true.
On the other hand, now is the time to buy stocks, because the stock market will come back once this madness passes.
Same with old revolver prices I'm thinking.
Unless the virus kills off all us older guys who like 'em
Bad joke, I know. But I'm including myself in that group too.
skeezix
SWCA Member, Absent Comrade
Ejector rod tip
Here's a picture of the ejector rod tips from much newer revolvers, but maybe you can get the idea.
Here's a picture of the ejector rod tips from much newer revolvers, but maybe you can get the idea.
I have always believed that there are lots of guns out with reblues that we cannot even tell if original or not. As a matter of fact, often only those guns with scratches or rust even need any surface preparation. Holster wear will leave no damage to the metal and honest use for a well cared for revolver is the same. Those can be stripped and simply reblued without any prep-work, or at least only need the lightest and finest buffing.
The key is to know the very fine points of factory finishes in order to find reblued guns and if the gunsmith knows those procedures, the finished product can often be undetectable. Also, older refinishes can often show enough soft wear to look very convincingly original. The only thing that has changed in more recent times is that Carbona blue has disappeared, so color are often slightly different with processes like caustic blues. What bothers me about the OPs gun is that the color looks off. No blue color and mostly black brings up some questions, but metal is perfect and stampings are clear.
Bottom line is that the gun is worth $400 either way, if it had original stocks. Don't think I would buy it with those post-WWII stocks since original stocks are getting hard to find and more expensive as time goes by.
The key is to know the very fine points of factory finishes in order to find reblued guns and if the gunsmith knows those procedures, the finished product can often be undetectable. Also, older refinishes can often show enough soft wear to look very convincingly original. The only thing that has changed in more recent times is that Carbona blue has disappeared, so color are often slightly different with processes like caustic blues. What bothers me about the OPs gun is that the color looks off. No blue color and mostly black brings up some questions, but metal is perfect and stampings are clear.
Bottom line is that the gun is worth $400 either way, if it had original stocks. Don't think I would buy it with those post-WWII stocks since original stocks are getting hard to find and more expensive as time goes by.
Last edited:
OP
I appreciate the effort, but I know what the ejector rods look like on newer guns. I've got lots of them.
I just don't have any that are this old to look at and see what the front of a mushroom ejector rod is supposed to look like.
Thanks for taking the time to post the picture though.
Here is a mint 1924 Target M&P. Knob is in the white on the bevel and the front face.
Attachments
OP
PERFECT! Thanks Gary!
handejector
Staff member
- Joined
- Mar 17, 2005
- Messages
- 26,134
- Reaction score
- 47,029
Knob Class-
(meaning a class about knobs, not a class for knobs
)
Here are other views of what Gary beat me to. These blue knobs are part of the ejector rod, meaning they are one piece, made with the rod:
Originally, the knob was a separate piece which was case hardened.
You can see the joint between the two pieces on the end-
That was dropped with the 1905-3rd Change which appeared in 1909.
And HERE we have a point that can be made for the Neal & Jinks classification system- ALL Mod 1902 and Mod 1902-1st change guns would have a separate knob. So, if you replace the ejector rod in one, I would be sending you a two piece rod. If you insist your 38 M&P made with a round butt made in 1938 is a Mod 1902, you need a totally different shaped rod with the barrel shaped knob, not the mushroom knob. If you order a Mod 1902 rod from a knowledgeable supplier, you'll get the WRONG rod.
You 1902ers are welcome to show me how I'm wrong.
.
.
.
(meaning a class about knobs, not a class for knobs
)Here are other views of what Gary beat me to. These blue knobs are part of the ejector rod, meaning they are one piece, made with the rod:
Originally, the knob was a separate piece which was case hardened.
You can see the joint between the two pieces on the end-
That was dropped with the 1905-3rd Change which appeared in 1909.
And HERE we have a point that can be made for the Neal & Jinks classification system- ALL Mod 1902 and Mod 1902-1st change guns would have a separate knob. So, if you replace the ejector rod in one, I would be sending you a two piece rod. If you insist your 38 M&P made with a round butt made in 1938 is a Mod 1902, you need a totally different shaped rod with the barrel shaped knob, not the mushroom knob. If you order a Mod 1902 rod from a knowledgeable supplier, you'll get the WRONG rod.
You 1902ers are welcome to show me how I'm wrong.
.
.
.
Attachments
Last edited:
OP
Interesting info! I always assumed all the mushroom knobs were a separate piece screwed onto the ejector rod. So starting in 1909 the knob and rod were one machined piece, and the bluing stripped off the front of the knob.
Los of nuances to learn. I appreciate the education guys.
Los of nuances to learn. I appreciate the education guys.
45ACP Model of 1917 Extractor Rod Variants
The first of this model had a two piece extractor rod. S&W changed it fairly-on to a one piece part. They also moved the front latch point about 3/16 inches forward so that a two piece rod doesn't fit. I know this because I just tried to replace a bent rod in a serial # 35xxx gun recently. Numerich did not have a one piece rod available, so I figured a two piece one would work just as well. It didn't work because the front latch milled area on the barrel had been moved forward.
I doubt S&W reverted to the two piece rod after WWI.
The first of this model had a two piece extractor rod. S&W changed it fairly-on to a one piece part. They also moved the front latch point about 3/16 inches forward so that a two piece rod doesn't fit. I know this because I just tried to replace a bent rod in a serial # 35xxx gun recently. Numerich did not have a one piece rod available, so I figured a two piece one would work just as well. It didn't work because the front latch milled area on the barrel had been moved forward.
I doubt S&W reverted to the two piece rod after WWI.
