First Model Hand Ejector .32 S&W Long - Antique?

[Dubbed743]

I'm looking for supplemental information on the Antique status of the First Model Hand Ejector .32 S&W - Model 1896 (First Model).

The "Standard Catalog of Smith & Wesson" (Supica & Nahas) lists sequential serial numbers from #1 - #19712 as manufactured c. 1896 - 1903. In theory this would mean that roughly half of the guns are antiques and half are not, however there are several online sources that state that the ATF has classified ALL First Model Hand Ejectors as Antique due to a letter from S&W stating that all frames were produced and numbered PRIOR to 1899. Sources:

The Smith & Wesson .32 Hand Ejector.

Hand Ejector 1st Model

I cannot find any reference to this in any printed medium nor on the ATF's website, so my question is very simple: Where can I find evidence that the ATF considers all First Model Hand Ejectors antiques?

TIA!

Pics of my antiques (or are they?) for views:

 

[merl67]

They are all classified as antique because the frames were all made prior to 1898. I used to have the list of all guns considered by the BATFE as antique they actually sent me the list as part of my Curio and Relic license package...The problem is a lot of dealers won't ship them as antiques...

 

[Wingmaster]

They are all classified as antique because the frames were all made prior to 1898. I used to have the list of all guns considered by the BATFE as antique they actually sent me the list as part of my Curio and Relic license package...The problem is a lot of dealers won't ship them as antiques...

I found the same thing to be true. I let my Curio and Relic ffl go back because it wasn't doing me any good.

 

[Absalom]

There are pictures of a letter exchange between Roy Jinks and ATF floating around on this forum, in some old thread on the Model 1896, that contain the evidence you need. You can probably hunt for them with a forum search. But they do still require an FFL who can read if you can‘t ship yourself.

 

[Dubbed743]

They are all classified as antique because the frames were all made prior to 1898. I used to have the list of all guns considered by the BATFE as antique they actually sent me the list as part of my Curio and Relic license package...The problem is a lot of dealers won't ship them as antiques...

I found the same thing to be true. I let my Curio and Relic ffl go back because it wasn't doing me any good.

There are pictures of a letter exchange between Roy Jinks and ATF floating around on this forum, in some old thread on the Model 1896, that contain the evidence you need. You can probably hunt for them with a forum search. But they do still require an FFL who can read if you can‘t ship yourself.

Thanks for responding.

I have tried every conceivable search I could think of and haven't found anything besides people saying "there's a letter somewhere...", which is why I made this thread.

Example: Pre-1899 Hand Ejector Classification

I was hoping someone saved a copy of the letter, because I cannot find it anywhere on the internet.

 

[glowe]

They are all classified as antique because the frames were all made prior to 1898. I used to have the list of all guns considered by the BATFE as antique they actually sent me the list as part of my Curio and Relic license package...The problem is a lot of dealers won't ship them as antiques...

Just a quick note for clarification since I am guilty of saying the same thing before, but a year can make a big difference. An antique gun is classified as being manufactured prior to 1899 not 1898.

I have posted the 1972 letters between the BATF and Roy Jinks when he was working at the company, but I can never remember where they are. Letters are below.

 

[Dubbed743]

Just a quick note for clarification since I am guilty of saying the same thing before, but a year can make a big difference. An antique gun is classified as being manufactured prior to 1899 not 1898.

I have posted the 1972 letters between the BATF and Roy Jinks when he was working at the company, but I can never remember where they are. Letters are below.

You sir are a gentleman and a scholar!

 

[Hondo44]

I'm looking for supplemental information on the Antique status of the First Model Hand Ejector .32 S&W - Model 1896 (First Model).

I cannot find any reference to this in any printed medium nor on the ATF's website, so my question is very simple: Where can I find evidence that the ATF considers all First Model Hand Ejectors antiques?

You obviously want the evidence straight from the horses mouth. There's only one way to get that:

So what did the BATFE tell you when your called and requested them to send you a copy of the list that includes the Model 1896 as an antique (because it is)?

 

[LostintheOzone]

There are pictures of a letter exchange between Roy Jinks and ATF floating around on this forum, in some old thread on the Model 1896, that contain the evidence you need. You can probably hunt for them with a forum search. But they do still require an FFL who can read if you can‘t ship yourself.

People who can read are in short supply at USPS also. I have to take a copy of their regs and ask if they can produce a supervisor that understands the volumes of regs they deal with daily. For some reason firearms is an especially high hurdle.

Don't get me wrong. I don't want that job. Most FFL's aren't attorneys and therefor tend take the I'd rather not deal with that approach. Probably why so many won't ship to CA.

 

[Peak53]

OK, so this time around, I copied glowe's letters between Jinks and BTF and saved them in a folder labeled same, just in case this comes around agin'.

 

[LostintheOzone]

Just a quick note for clarification since I am guilty of saying the same thing before, but a year can make a big difference. An antique gun is classified as being manufactured prior to 1899 not 1898.

I have posted the 1972 letters between the BATF and Roy Jinks when he was working at the company, but I can never remember where they are. Letters are below.

They put it in writing and you documented it. Great day in the morning. That's always a but we have this in our correspondence with ATF in our records.

Great save.

ATF: Can't find that but we will defer to your records.

 

[glowe]

The Model 1903 was just that, a new model for S&W beginning again with serial number 1. Many model changes at S&W restarted the clock so one has to know two things, first the model name and second the serial number.

 

[Muley Gil]

This comes from the Ublinkingeye.com article, "The innovations found in the above patents all appear, in one form or another, in the Second Model .32 Hand Ejector which is the first production gun that is nearly identical, externally, to the modern Smith & Wesson revolver. The major difference remains the lockwork. The Second Model .32 Hand Ejector (No Change) was made from 1903 to 1904 and the serial number range extends from 1 to 19,425."
So the numbers do restart for the Model of 1903s? And those have the latch or do any of the Model of 1896s have the latch?

Welcome to the Forum.

None of the 1896 .32s have the side cylinder release. The 1903 .32s are NOT antiques, but they are C&R firearms. The 1903s do start with serial number 1.

 

[Truckman]

The 1903 .32s are NOT antiques, but they are C&R firearms. The 1903s do start with serial number 1.

S/N 2158 shipped 8/4/1903...This one was built when S&W was still doing parts cleanup and uses the odd looking 1896 trigger return spring......Ben

 

[glowe]

S/N 2158 shipped 8/4/1903...This one was built when S&W was still doing parts cleanup and uses the odd looking 1896 trigger return spring......Ben

No parts cleanup, just the Model 1903, No Change and 1st Change had a different trigger spring than the 1896. It was not until the introduction of the rebound slide in 1906 that the second spring went away at about serial number 51,000.

Pictures are from an 1896, an early 1903 and a later 1903.

 

[Göring's S&W]

Exactamundo friend. Still a really cool platform to work with nonetheless. The side cylinder release might be a cool project to see how it works and if it must be added with the 2 inch Model 30 .32 long barrel I'm going to adapt. I know some people are like dude why? But why not when you are trying to enjoy your toys in YOUR lifetime right? The only issue now has been locating a "real" gunsmith in my area. California sucks for gun enthusiasts in alot of ways.

So you want to adapt a top break to having a side cylinder release but then you intend to do it to a Hopkins & Allen? (what you have pictured) or do you want to adapt the later side release to the earlier ejector rod style cylinder release of the 1896 to a S&W hand ejector?

I'm a little confused but maybe it is just me.

 

[rct269]

OK, so this time around, I copied glowe's letters between Jinks and BTF and saved them in a folder labeled same, just in case this comes around agin'.

The letter Gary has provided is a great resource----------IF!!

When one has been fortunate enough to have been sent off to Problem Solving School, one of the very first things they learn is to make sure they are focused on the real problem---rather than apparent problems---or symptoms----that because the folks who sent them to school don't want them to be spending valuable resources traveling down dead end roads.

The real problem is not so much one of ignorance on the part of the dealers, or pretty much any of the others we deal with where the letter should help; but with what one might think of as the fear put into any and all within the sphere of influence/control of what one might think of as "badge heavy" ATF personnel.

There was a time when most ATF folks were regular people----more inclined to help than to hurt. Maybe we'll see those times again one day.

Ralph Tremaine