Found a Grail gun...

T

TIMETRIPPER

Bronze Supporter
Joined
May 10, 2010
Messages
1,978
Reaction score
2,216
Location
Pennsylvania
Found a grail gun...

... and I need a little help! Last month I spotted a special item in an online auction listing: a very well worn example of my fondest grail gun hope, a Triple Lock. The auction house described it as being in poor but sound condition and the posted pics confirmed their evaluation. Since this was only the second TL I have seen in all my travels I had to go and see if it would at least make a good shooter, if I could get it for the right price. Well, the price was right and I brought an old warrior home today: S&W .455 Mark II, 1st Model Hand Ejector, serial #1510.

As you can see, there's not much finish left on him. But he has some good points. There is some pitting, it's not deep. The metal surface is mostly smooth with all markings being readable. The bore isn't perfect but it is in far better shape than my 1917, good enough for a shooter. Even better still, from my point of view, it has been modified to use 45 Colt, another plus for a shooter. All serial numbers match except for the stocks, which are in beautiful shape. The number is visible on the rear of the cylinder so I believe the recoil shield was shaved down to accommodate the slightly thicker rim of the Colt cartridge. But please correct me if I'm wrong. It also came with aN S&W letter, which cites a ship date of Dec 1st, 1914 to the Union Metallic Cartridge Co. in NY, NY. They were acting as purchasing agents for the British government. The low 4 digit serial number tickles my fancy too.
It's the stocks that I need a little help with. I checked the SCSW and they look to be the type used from 1904-10. The penciled on serial number is in the mid 2000 range, which seems to confirm the time span. Since the S&W letter states that the gun shipped with checkered, gold medallion grips I believe that these may be replacement grips, albeit very nice ones. Any thoughts on this would be appreciated. Also, is there any value in the grips/stocks themselves?


If the rest of the gun was is as nice condition, I certainly would have not been able to afford a winning bid.

I am still somewhat surprised that I came home with it. TBH, before the sale, I was resigned to expect to see it go for twice what I actually paid. It's happened before. Needless to say, I am a very happy camper.

John
 
Register to hide this ad
Congrats!
This pic shows a Triple-Lock cylinder that was counterbored for the thicker rim of the .45 Colt, leaving the serial number visible.
 
Congratulations. Don't you love the feeling of finally owning something that you have long sought after? That's a piece of history that you have there and something to be proud of.
 
Of the three .455 to .45 Colt conversion means, it could be two of them. If chambers are slightly counterbored for the .45 Colt rim (the best way in my opinion) that should be obvious. If not, then the rear of the window has been shaved.

I prefer the earlier grip style, even though not period correct. I'd consider rebluing if I weren't such a tightwad.
 
If you leave the gun as is, keep those same grips. There is no need for a correct-year
pair of gold medallions - these concave non-medallions are more than good enough.
A very light thin coat of linseed oil, rubbed dry, will do wonders for them


Mike Priwer
 
John,

Congratulations on finding your holy grail gun and at a reasonable price as well. It's a fine old war horse.

You might want to provide the number on the grips because you may find an eager buyer for them who is the happy owner of the TL with matching number. And he may even have a correct set of gold medallion grips to trade you.

Have you determined the method of conversion to 45 Colt; if in fact the recoil shield was shaved or the chambers recessed as per Geezers photo above?
 
Here's a couple more pics of the cylinder and recoil shield.




Sorry for the poor quality of the pics but these are the best I could do with my Kodak digital. I'd say the shield is shaved.
I rechecked the number on the stocks in better light and it is looks to be either 4288 or 4200. In my first post I incorrectly reported them as being in the mid 2000 range.
Unless someone pops up with the missing gun for them and really twists my arm, I will probably keep those stocks and mull over getting a reblue for awhile. But for now, I'm just planning to get some brass and dies, and take the old feller down to the club for some fun.
John
 
I would keep it as is myself. It has "history" written all over it. Of course, I am not everybody and there are those who love to have one restored to its former grandeur.

I would shoot it too, but with very tame loads... Definitely do not stray into the "Ruger Only" section of your reloading manual!

Even fairly light loads of the .45 Colt should easily surpass the ballistics of the .455 Mk II cartridge.
 
If you like projects, it would be a good candidate for a dity rust blue. It shouldn't take more than a few months to do it right.
 
Should to decide to upgrade and another New Century falls into your lap (it does happen) you'll be thankful you didn't alter this gun further.

In my opinion, nothing looks worse than a poor (or even mediocre) refinishing job on a fine old firearm. I'd much rather see a well worn, but honest New Century, then a over polished example spoiled by a quick-buck artist. If you do decide to refinish this old warhorse, please have a master craftsman do the work. Then, due to the cost, you will probably have to resign yourself to keeping the gun or if you turn it out to trade, you will likely stand a loss in dollars.

Just my opinion. Take it for what it is...

Drew
 
Sebago Son said:
Should to decide to upgrade and another New Century falls into your lap (it does happen) you'll be thankful you didn't alter this gun further.

In my opinion, nothing looks worse than a poor (or even mediocre) refinishing job on a fine old firearm. I'd much rather see a well worn, but honest New Century, then a over polished example spoiled by a quick-buck artist. If you do decide to refinish this old warhorse, please have a master craftsman do the work. Then, due to the cost, you will probably have to resign yourself to keeping the gun or if you turn it out to trade, you will likely stand a loss in dollars.

Just my opinion. Take it for what it is...

Drew
Click to expand...

What he said.
 
+10 on what Drew said. If the look of it bothers you, look for another one and then let it go once you "upgrade." The more money you save by making good gun related choices means the more guns you will have, in the long gun.
 
TIMETRIPPER said:
I've always valued your opinion Drew. I will still mull about a refinish, as it is my nature to do so. But ultimately, what I'd spend for a proper job could be spent on another old Smith instead. They don't always have to be pretty to be enjoyed.
John
Click to expand...

That's sound thinking John... :)
 
Yes. What everybody said. The problem with re-bluing, if I'm 'reading' the photos accurately, is that all the pits won't come out and nothing looks worse than bluing over pits except poor polishing too.

The blotchy-ness is what makes it look so bad. A light coat of Naval Jelly could improve that a whole bunch and get the black out of the pitted areas and wouldn't leave it shiny. I wouldn't do the entire gun. Leave the large areas of blue alone. Just another opinion and worth what you paid for it. I too would save the cost for a good re-blue to upgrade to a nicer one later.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

cmansguns
Evidently I'm on a K38 Masterpiece Model 14 ND roll -- more questions
Replies
7
Views
393
Hodado
H
B
Model 34 Kit Gun 1953
Replies
8
Views
274
BenelliSlim70
B
Crimson Caravan
Another K-22 dating thread
Replies
3
Views
165
JP@AK
JP@AK
R
DSS Model 19 with verification letter AYZ serial number range
Replies
4
Views
266
RWJ
R
waelkhntr
May have found my Holy Grail
Replies
13
Views
2K
Masterpiece
M

Latest posts

Back
Top