I guess so. In 2012, a Mongrel just like mine, not engraved and no finish left, was auctioned for $3,012. So I can imagine how high I engraved one could fetch, especially knowing, as Crossv wrote, that only 4 of the 650 Mongrels were engraved !
Found a model 1 today
- Thread starter Bobbysixkiller
- Start date
I guess so. In 2012, a Mongrel just like mine, not engraved and no finish left, was auctioned for $3,012. So I can imagine how high I engraved one could fetch, especially knowing, as Crossv wrote, that only 4 of the 650 Mongrels were engraved !
"Yeah, I think that engraved Mongrel sold at auction at Rock Island a few years back. I'll try to look it up but that is the best place to list the really rare stuff."
Please do post if you find one in an auction because the one I posted above has been in my family for at least 40 years and that was my question - whether there is another known example.
Please do post if you find one in an auction because the one I posted above has been in my family for at least 40 years and that was my question - whether there is another known example.
Hey Crossy,
My apologies shipmate. I just finished a search of Rock Island past auctions and could not find that beautifully engraved Mongrel. I thought I had seen it on that sight but I was mistaken. Came back to this site and saw your post.
My apologies shipmate. I just finished a search of Rock Island past auctions and could not find that beautifully engraved Mongrel. I thought I had seen it on that sight but I was mistaken. Came back to this site and saw your post.
I just finished a pretty good web search using multiple engines and located 3 others. They all fell in the 28,000 serial number range and all sold for some impressive $$. First one sold for $1800. None engraved. One sold in France just last month! Patbar you missed it!!!! Maybe you can translate what the inscription on the barrel says for us??
Attachments
mmaher94087
Member
That is the name of the destination (seller or importer) or owner of this revolver. In some cases that name is associated with the shooting parlor that rented the revolver for shooting sports. More beer here!
The translation of this inscription is "?. Marquis patented in Paris", Marquis being the name of the dealer.
I have a model 1 1/2 second issue which bears the name of Claudin, another famous S&W dealer in Paris.
Marquis and Claudin were not only dealers but also gunsmithes who had obtained patents for their inventions. That is why the word "breveté" (or its abreviation "Bté") which means "patented" was marked after their name.
Attachments
Last edited:
Wow,
Very interesting and helpful translation Patbar. I wonder if that firm was one of the major recipients of the 400 Mongrels shipped to France? I've seen many bulldogs from the 1870's and 1880's that were dealer stamped in London. Seems to have been quite common in Europe. However, dealer stamped revolvers in the USA are quite rare.
We should reach out to Roy Jinks on this Mongrel issue and see if the historical department has found any new information?
Say, Patbar can you please take a close look at your Mongrel and see if it has matching assembly numbers?
I'm trying to see if they were assembled by Smith & Wesson or perhaps contracted to other firms.
I honestly still have a problem with that theory because of the serial number range? They are serial numbered at the end of the early 1 1/2.
Would Smith & Wesson have numbered the frames then sold the unassembeled parts to other firms for assembly? Otherwise why would that firm in France apply their Patent to the barrel?
Very interesting and helpful translation Patbar. I wonder if that firm was one of the major recipients of the 400 Mongrels shipped to France? I've seen many bulldogs from the 1870's and 1880's that were dealer stamped in London. Seems to have been quite common in Europe. However, dealer stamped revolvers in the USA are quite rare.
We should reach out to Roy Jinks on this Mongrel issue and see if the historical department has found any new information?
Say, Patbar can you please take a close look at your Mongrel and see if it has matching assembly numbers?
I'm trying to see if they were assembled by Smith & Wesson or perhaps contracted to other firms.
I honestly still have a problem with that theory because of the serial number range? They are serial numbered at the end of the early 1 1/2.
Would Smith & Wesson have numbered the frames then sold the unassembeled parts to other firms for assembly? Otherwise why would that firm in France apply their Patent to the barrel?
BMur, I took a close look at my Mongrel and except the serial number on the butt and on the right grip, there is only a "U" and "O" at the rear end of the barrel.
Concerning the patent on the barrel, all I can say is that I don't know anything about Marquis, but I know that Claudin had a gun factory and obtained several patents for his hunting rifles. I searched on the web about him but didn't find anything else.
I have too considered the possibility that S&W parts could have been sent to them for assembly, but who could give us any facts about that ?
Concerning the patent on the barrel, all I can say is that I don't know anything about Marquis, but I know that Claudin had a gun factory and obtained several patents for his hunting rifles. I searched on the web about him but didn't find anything else.
I have too considered the possibility that S&W parts could have been sent to them for assembly, but who could give us any facts about that ?
Last edited:
Hi Patbar,
That's exactly what I was hoping that you would say. This supports the position that the frames were numbered consecutively by the Smith & Wesson factory at the very end of production of the earlier model and beginning with the new model frames, however they were not assembled? ( possibly?) . The new type frames were sold combined with leftover parts of the earlier model with older ( barrels and cylinders) to be assembled by the buyer?
Roy Jinks mentions that in his book. That The company did not want to waste parts after being advised by a vendor that was making the barrels and cylinders for them that they had some leftover. Smith & Wesson at that time was already transitioning to the new model. That's why they were called Mongrels. Because they were a mixed breed from leftover parts that the company didn't know existed until they had already started making the new model. That makes perfect sense to me.
I am pursuing a factory letter for my 22 cal Mongrel. The serial number puts it just beyond the end of the 1st Model 2nd issue 22cal so this should be a .22 Mongrel as well. It also has very unusual features that make no sense except that it was part of the last batch of barrels/ cylinders of the 1st Model 2nd issue that was put on a very early 3rd issue frame. That would make it a .22 Mongrel. You can cross reference the time frame is exactly the same time in history that the 32 cal 1 1/2 Mongrel showed up. Approximately 1868. The vendor that made barrels and cylinders for Smith and Wesson must have had leftover 22 parts as well.
Hopefully Roy Jinks will clear this up with factory historical documentation! I think he is going to have some very interesting information in this subject!
I strongly recommend that you get a factory letter for your Mongrel as well. It would only document its legitimacy from a historical standpoint and bolster its value!
That's exactly what I was hoping that you would say. This supports the position that the frames were numbered consecutively by the Smith & Wesson factory at the very end of production of the earlier model and beginning with the new model frames, however they were not assembled? ( possibly?) . The new type frames were sold combined with leftover parts of the earlier model with older ( barrels and cylinders) to be assembled by the buyer?
Roy Jinks mentions that in his book. That The company did not want to waste parts after being advised by a vendor that was making the barrels and cylinders for them that they had some leftover. Smith & Wesson at that time was already transitioning to the new model. That's why they were called Mongrels. Because they were a mixed breed from leftover parts that the company didn't know existed until they had already started making the new model. That makes perfect sense to me.
I am pursuing a factory letter for my 22 cal Mongrel. The serial number puts it just beyond the end of the 1st Model 2nd issue 22cal so this should be a .22 Mongrel as well. It also has very unusual features that make no sense except that it was part of the last batch of barrels/ cylinders of the 1st Model 2nd issue that was put on a very early 3rd issue frame. That would make it a .22 Mongrel. You can cross reference the time frame is exactly the same time in history that the 32 cal 1 1/2 Mongrel showed up. Approximately 1868. The vendor that made barrels and cylinders for Smith and Wesson must have had leftover 22 parts as well.
Hopefully Roy Jinks will clear this up with factory historical documentation! I think he is going to have some very interesting information in this subject!
I strongly recommend that you get a factory letter for your Mongrel as well. It would only document its legitimacy from a historical standpoint and bolster its value!
Attachments
Hi BMur,
The problem with these factory letters is that they are not cheap and that I have several Colts and S&Ws which would deserve such a letter.
I must add that I don't care much about the value of my Mongrel since I will never sell it.
P.S. I thought back that the guns sold by Marquis or Claudin must necessarily have been assembled in France since they could be blued only after the engraving of the dealer's name.
The problem with these factory letters is that they are not cheap and that I have several Colts and S&Ws which would deserve such a letter.
I must add that I don't care much about the value of my Mongrel since I will never sell it.
P.S. I thought back that the guns sold by Marquis or Claudin must necessarily have been assembled in France since they could be blued only after the engraving of the dealer's name.
Hi Patbar,
I certainly understand where you are coming from. I think most of us have been disappointed by an inquiry for a gun that basically didn't deserve a letter to begin with. Someone on this forum just inquired about ivory grips and was advised that they should get a factory letter? I did not agree but just let it go. I'm tired of upsetting people with a sound opinion. Sure enough the letter came back with the typical "Nickel Finish, Hard rubber grips". Waste of money!
I bought an engraved 38 topbreak years ago in Baltimore. Beautiful gun with gorgeous pearl grips. The seller said it was "Factory Engraved". I asked a S&W collector at another table and he said; "OH yeah its factory alright". Came home, got a factory letter and sure enough...."Hard Rubber grips, Nickel finish" is how it left the factory.
Some guns do not deserve a letter. >HOWEVER< Some guns absolutely need a letter. I had one that had grind marks on the backstrap and a fellow collector told me that it was a Baltimore Police issue revolver? I said; NO WAY! He said that's the correct serial number range. So I put in for a letter and sure enough it's a Baltimore Police issue 38. Without that letter the gun is a pure story/opinion. With the letter it's worth a ton more!
That said, we now look at the MONGREL. I absolutely have to attempt a letter for my 22cal because it's pure guess on my part. Your MONGREL is documented "ONLY" to that serial number range but not to that exact serial number. You have to have a letter for that PATBAR or fellow collectors will talk badly of it. Claiming it's a "LUNCHBOX SPECIAL". I've gotten that line about 30 times on this website. The letter Confirms its rarity and in our case shoots the value up huge! So the $75 in our case is worth every penny.
I certainly understand where you are coming from. I think most of us have been disappointed by an inquiry for a gun that basically didn't deserve a letter to begin with. Someone on this forum just inquired about ivory grips and was advised that they should get a factory letter? I did not agree but just let it go. I'm tired of upsetting people with a sound opinion. Sure enough the letter came back with the typical "Nickel Finish, Hard rubber grips". Waste of money!
I bought an engraved 38 topbreak years ago in Baltimore. Beautiful gun with gorgeous pearl grips. The seller said it was "Factory Engraved". I asked a S&W collector at another table and he said; "OH yeah its factory alright". Came home, got a factory letter and sure enough...."Hard Rubber grips, Nickel finish" is how it left the factory.
Some guns do not deserve a letter. >HOWEVER< Some guns absolutely need a letter. I had one that had grind marks on the backstrap and a fellow collector told me that it was a Baltimore Police issue revolver? I said; NO WAY! He said that's the correct serial number range. So I put in for a letter and sure enough it's a Baltimore Police issue 38. Without that letter the gun is a pure story/opinion. With the letter it's worth a ton more!
That said, we now look at the MONGREL. I absolutely have to attempt a letter for my 22cal because it's pure guess on my part. Your MONGREL is documented "ONLY" to that serial number range but not to that exact serial number. You have to have a letter for that PATBAR or fellow collectors will talk badly of it. Claiming it's a "LUNCHBOX SPECIAL". I've gotten that line about 30 times on this website. The letter Confirms its rarity and in our case shoots the value up huge! So the $75 in our case is worth every penny.
Hi BMur,
I too have a Baltimore Police Baby Russian with the ground backstrap on which only the top of some letters still appear. However, the serial number of this gun is 4478 when the "Standard Catalog of Smith & Wesson" says that the serial range of theses Baltimore Police guns was 4600-6949.
And I too have a marvelous engraved .38 SA second model which was the object of one of my posts on this forum.
As I wrote yesterday, I also have 2 Colts which would deserve a letter. But a Colt letter costs $200 !
And finally, concerning the mongrels, I understand very well that you have to letter your .22 because these mongrels have never been documented. But my 1 1/2 is pretty well documented and I am sure that it's not a "lunchbox special" because it's almost impossible to make a fake by trying to assemble a second issue frame with a first issue's cylinder and barrel - the differences are too important !
I too have a Baltimore Police Baby Russian with the ground backstrap on which only the top of some letters still appear. However, the serial number of this gun is 4478 when the "Standard Catalog of Smith & Wesson" says that the serial range of theses Baltimore Police guns was 4600-6949.
And I too have a marvelous engraved .38 SA second model which was the object of one of my posts on this forum.
As I wrote yesterday, I also have 2 Colts which would deserve a letter. But a Colt letter costs $200 !
And finally, concerning the mongrels, I understand very well that you have to letter your .22 because these mongrels have never been documented. But my 1 1/2 is pretty well documented and I am sure that it's not a "lunchbox special" because it's almost impossible to make a fake by trying to assemble a second issue frame with a first issue's cylinder and barrel - the differences are too important !
Last edited:
Would someone explain what they think a "lunchbox special" means?
- Joined
- Oct 9, 2010
- Messages
- 1,083
- Reaction score
- 1,609
For me, a "lunchbox special" is a gun made from parts that were pilfered from the factory and assembled at home. At least, that's what I mean when I say that.
Mike
Thanks Don for bringing that subject to light.
I agree with Mike and it's why I took offense to my "Possible 22cal Mongrel" being labeled a "Lunchbox special". Basically you are calling it a "stolen piece". Which there is no denying it, its a form of "TRASH talking a collector's piece"!!!
What it could be called is a "miss-matched" gun assembled with miss-matched parts? I can live with that but calling my Possible Mongrel a "STOLEN gun" is a kick below the belt!! That's why I posted what I did to Patbar and recommended a factory letter. To avoid this "unfair trash labeling" ( read the posts ) of a possibly very rare piece of Smith and Wesson manufacturing history.
I agree with Mike and it's why I took offense to my "Possible 22cal Mongrel" being labeled a "Lunchbox special". Basically you are calling it a "stolen piece". Which there is no denying it, its a form of "TRASH talking a collector's piece"!!!
What it could be called is a "miss-matched" gun assembled with miss-matched parts? I can live with that but calling my Possible Mongrel a "STOLEN gun" is a kick below the belt!! That's why I posted what I did to Patbar and recommended a factory letter. To avoid this "unfair trash labeling" ( read the posts ) of a possibly very rare piece of Smith and Wesson manufacturing history.
Just a quick follow up. I personally think that before you can suspect a "lunchbox special" it should have features that support that it's been "possibly" stolen. Like no markings whatsoever on the gun. No barrel address, no serial number, no assembly numbers, possibly no finish, and what looks like poor assembly and fitting. Some will claim it's a "Proto-type" gun but it would require some form of documentation or very unusual features before it can be called a Proto-type.
Hey Patbar,
You have a Baby Russian Baltimore Police gun too? Aren't they cool? I noticed that some have the grind marks and some don't? What's up with that? I'm thinking that some were sold as used guns to the open market after the Police Department was done with them? Cuz mine is in very used shape. They removed the markings to sell them? That's the only thing that makes sense to me. Mine is not in too bad a shape and functions well but you can see it definitely was carried by a Police officer on duty. Back in 1876 no less!
You have a Baby Russian Baltimore Police gun too? Aren't they cool? I noticed that some have the grind marks and some don't? What's up with that? I'm thinking that some were sold as used guns to the open market after the Police Department was done with them? Cuz mine is in very used shape. They removed the markings to sell them? That's the only thing that makes sense to me. Mine is not in too bad a shape and functions well but you can see it definitely was carried by a Police officer on duty. Back in 1876 no less!
- Joined
- Oct 9, 2010
- Messages
- 1,083
- Reaction score
- 1,609
I'll speak only for myself ... but I would never intend for "lunchbox special" to be a slight. To the contrary - it *is* an interesting piece of history.
As I mentioned somewhere else, it has also been speculated that Rollin White's patent model was made from parts he pilfered during his time at Colt.
Mike
Wow Patbar,
Your's is very nice. Mine is in much more worn condition but the backstrap looks exactly the same as yours does with the deep and coarse grind marks. Must have gone through the same grinder! Very historical piece. I don't know why you don't want to get a letter for this one? Roy Jinks is very specific and detailed with the Police issue guns and my letter states that it went to a distributor that "supplied" the Baltimore Police Department. So the Baltimore Police Department didn't actually buy at least some of their guns directly from the factory. Therefore the original markings on the backstrap were "NOT" applied at least on some of them by the Smith & Wesson factory. A factory letter would look very nice next to your example. Mine is One of if memory serves correctly 500 guns that was shipped to this distributor. I will look through my letters and post it later today so you can take a look? Thanks for posting it. Very exciting piece of history.
Your's is very nice. Mine is in much more worn condition but the backstrap looks exactly the same as yours does with the deep and coarse grind marks. Must have gone through the same grinder! Very historical piece. I don't know why you don't want to get a letter for this one? Roy Jinks is very specific and detailed with the Police issue guns and my letter states that it went to a distributor that "supplied" the Baltimore Police Department. So the Baltimore Police Department didn't actually buy at least some of their guns directly from the factory. Therefore the original markings on the backstrap were "NOT" applied at least on some of them by the Smith & Wesson factory. A factory letter would look very nice next to your example. Mine is One of if memory serves correctly 500 guns that was shipped to this distributor. I will look through my letters and post it later today so you can take a look? Thanks for posting it. Very exciting piece of history.
- Joined
- Oct 9, 2010
- Messages
- 1,083
- Reaction score
- 1,609
Why couldn't a lunchbox special be marked? There was nothing out of the ordinary about roll marks and such. That was just one more step in the manufacturing process. And given that many of the employees were actually contractors who owned their own tools, a "lunchbox special" could be just as well fitted and finish as a gun off the factory floor. Again, I don't use the term derisively; it's just another interesting facet of American industrialism.
I agree about prototypes -- documentation and/or provenance are absolutely necessary. There is evidence that a prototype Model 1, 3rd Issue may exist (with an extractor more along the lines of a top break style extractor), but I've only ever seen one grainy photo of the barrel and cylinder from the 1960's.
Mike
I believe this "lunch box special" fits what Mike is talking about. And certainly one of my really special guns! It has the roll marking on the cylinder and top rib of the barrel. The barrel stamp is consistent with the final roll stamp made for the Model 2 Army. The previous ones broke segments of characters and can be used to date production. The only other mark is the initials H.M.C. which is believed to be Hiram M. Chamberlin who was an inside contractor at Smith & Wesson during the time of Model 2 Army production. He was later issued a patent for breech loading firearms and shown in the census as a gunsmith. The gun is otherwise "in the white" and unfinished. I am having trouble uploading attachments which I will do when I can.
Lunchbox special
Well at least we all agree that a lunchbox special is a " Stolen gun"! And before we suggest that "ANY"collector on this site is in possession of a "Stolen Gun" we should have at least " SOME" evidence! Or that term is grossly inaccurate and insulting!!
When we think of the obvious mentality of " The Thief" the last thing they want to do is get caught with the goods? Or leave a trail of their criminal activity!! A serial numbered gun generally speaking is an accountable gun! That's why thieves tend to file off numbers when actually stolen from the public. When a Theif steals in "the factory" they are opportunists but still do not want to get caught. Unfinished and unnumbered parts are a safer bet for the thief I would imagine. Especially since Roy Jinks and the historical department "CLEARLY" prove that Smith & Wesson kept excellent records!
Unnumbered parts have very likely not been documented by the factory. A serial numbered gun is way further down the line I would think and "has been"documented! When we perform an inventory in house and find serial numbers missing we would suspect theives wouldnt we? Contractors or not, we are now on the lookout for them! Maybe have a meeting with the troops and investigate? I don't know of any company at least back then that would tolerate theives!!
Well at least we all agree that a lunchbox special is a " Stolen gun"! And before we suggest that "ANY"collector on this site is in possession of a "Stolen Gun" we should have at least " SOME" evidence! Or that term is grossly inaccurate and insulting!!
When we think of the obvious mentality of " The Thief" the last thing they want to do is get caught with the goods? Or leave a trail of their criminal activity!! A serial numbered gun generally speaking is an accountable gun! That's why thieves tend to file off numbers when actually stolen from the public. When a Theif steals in "the factory" they are opportunists but still do not want to get caught. Unfinished and unnumbered parts are a safer bet for the thief I would imagine. Especially since Roy Jinks and the historical department "CLEARLY" prove that Smith & Wesson kept excellent records!
Unnumbered parts have very likely not been documented by the factory. A serial numbered gun is way further down the line I would think and "has been"documented! When we perform an inventory in house and find serial numbers missing we would suspect theives wouldnt we? Contractors or not, we are now on the lookout for them! Maybe have a meeting with the troops and investigate? I don't know of any company at least back then that would tolerate theives!!
- Joined
- Oct 9, 2010
- Messages
- 1,083
- Reaction score
- 1,609
It may be grossly insulting to you, but for me it's just a part of the gun's history. And in context, it's a fascinating history that we'd do well not to judge so quickly.
Smith & Wesson kept records like most other companies, but these records were in service of managing the corporation's day-to-day needs and not proving historical debates a century and a half later. And historical records are never "proof" of anything; people lie all the time and historical records bear witness to that. Just because something is in the books doesn't mean that it's "legit," and just because something isn't in the books doesn't mean that it was the spoils of crime. Roy would be the first person to say that the records are sometimes confusing and cryptic and sometimes flat out missing, and that's just the way it is. It made sense to someone back in the day, but since we weren't there we're not in a position to judge.
(For a good example of this, spend some time comparing peoples' entries in the census records. People lie about their age, birthplace, marital status, etc. It's a fascinating side-study of human behavior, and a reminder to be careful about taking written records as the gospel.)
A lot of this record keeping was also in its infancy. Heck, mass-production was still in its infancy when Smith & Wesson started their operation, as was the concept of modern management practices (with professionally managed departments). Accounting was haphazard and the idea of knowing the exact cost of a particular part would have been more of a guessing game than the scientific process that it is now. Just as they did then, we work now with the scraps of information that we can gather, but we don't have a God's eye view of the factory floor back then to know exactly what was going on. And let's not delude ourselves into projecting some sort of puritanical fantasy on this: petty theft was as prevalent then as it is now, and in some ways was probably a lot easier to get away with.
(If you don't believe me, look at how many companies willingly violated the Rollin White patent, and the thousands of other patents in force at this time.)
The "putting out" system of yore was very different than we understand contract work to be today. Contractors then were sometimes charged for "waste" (parts that didn't pass inspection), and some of these folks may have felt that they were well within their moral compass to take those parts. Others, of course, may have had no scruples about just helping themselves. And I'm sure that there were more than a few people who were eager to gather up the factory's waste and try to make something out of it. In any case, these people had their own stories, and we're doing a fool's errand if we pass judgement on them now.
My point is that there's a lot of shades of grey in this. "Lunchbox special" is a bit of a catch-all term for something that was assembled outside of the factory's regular production run, and outside of the usual R&D prototyping, and outside of any "special order" process that the factory had in place. There may be an exotic story behind it (a great conspiracy to ship parts overseas), or it may just be the case that someone collected rejected parts and would occasionally put a gun together at home. I don't see the term as derisive and I'm sorry if you took umbrage to that; in my opinion it's as educated a guess as we can make right now, until we get more information that suggests otherwise.
Mike
Hi Patbar,
I'm going to start a new Thread later this evening. I think we need to dedicate a thread to The Baltimore Police Bsby Russian and see what turns up. I seem to have a lot more questions than answers. Maybe others will chime in? I'll post my letter on that thread OK?
I'm going to start a new Thread later this evening. I think we need to dedicate a thread to The Baltimore Police Bsby Russian and see what turns up. I seem to have a lot more questions than answers. Maybe others will chime in? I'll post my letter on that thread OK?
