Funny Looking Model 10...

[Talan2000]

Hi all,
I suppose I have been bitten by a S&W bug as a week ago I only had a hand me down 19-3, but now I have a 19-3, 17-4, and ... this funny looking Model 10 I just bought on gunbroker.



A week ago I would not likely have known the difference, but after reading your posts and studying some amazing K38 threads, I deduced that our friends at the selling pawnshop were a bit confused...I was thinking of trying to buy a Model 10 inexpensively as a shooter when I came across this listing...Then, the sellers edited the listing calling it a Model 30 because there was a 30 stamped where the model number "should" be. Um, no.

The serial is K80217 dating to ~1949 and smith "expert" that I am , I'm pretty sure its a Pre Model 15, 5 screw, aka K 38 Heavy Masterpiece.

Of course, I'm fully pleased with myself for figuring this out - now I'm hoping it's a) actually in good shape and b) I didn't overpay! (pretty sure I didn't but we'll have to see it to be sure.

I do have question a about the hammer - it appears to be a target hammer - not the "upswept" hammer I read about here. I also read that this model could come with a target hammer from the factory. Is this correct and does it "hurt" the value any if it is a replacement target trigger - doesn't seem like there's any way to tell even with a "letter" from smith.

And re: that trigger shoe - I assume that someone added that well after it was made - are these pretty common? I'm not really a collector and my goal is to shoot it so, I'll just see how it feels before deciding whether to remove it, but was curious what the consensus was?

Anything I should look (out) for when inspecting next week when I pick her up?





Thanks!
Todd

 

[Xfuzz]

Pre model 14...
Decent condition.

 

[JP@AK]

A "Model 10." That is pretty funny!

What you have is a K-38 Heavy Masterpiece (wider barrel rib), and it is among the first bunch of them made in 1949 when they were introduced.

I'm afraid you missed the model number by a bit, though. This one would eventually become the Model 14, not the Model 15. The latter was standard with the 4" barrel and a Baughman front sight (instead of the Patridge that is on yours).

I actually don't remember when that hammer type was introduced, but like you I would have expected the high speed hammer like the one shown on the 1952 Combat Masterpiece shown below. The trigger shoe is definitely an aftermarket addition. I would probably remove it, if it were mine.

Congratulations on a great find!

 

[JP@AK]

Here is a K-38 Masterpiece from 1956. It has the same hammer as yours. I don't currently own an early K-38 with the wide rib, so I can't make a comparison for you, but I'm sure there are those here on the Forum who do. We'll just have to wait for one of them to post.

 

[DCWilson]

Nice specimen of its type; I bet you'll have some good shooting with that one.

I have Heavy Masterpiece K78197, which shipped in February 1950. It has unrelieved target stocks and a target hammer now, but it may not have shipped with them; the letter is silent on those questions. It's possible that the first heavy Masterpieces shipped in late 1949, but the earliest confirmed ship date I can recall was in January of 1950. You'd have to letter the gun to nail down a precise date, but if I had stumbled across that one I'd probably be content just to think of it as "early 1950" and spend the letter money on ammunition.

 

[BC38]

Nice one! FWIW, I got a pre-24 with a trigger shoe like that, and I really LIKE it. Once you start shooting it you may not want to take it off.

 

[Hondo44]

Todd,

This may help:
A Revolver-Buyer?s Checklist | The Sixgun Journal

 

[DWalt]

Trigger shoes (aftermarket items) were very popular among competitive Bullseye target shooters before the appearance of factory-installed wide target triggers. They were also widely used on target rifles. Even though some always recommend removing them, I'd leave it in place. Try it both ways to see which you like best.

The SN on yours suggests an early 1950 shipping date.

 

[Art Doc]

The trigger shoe can be unsafe if it protrudes beyond the width of the trigger guard which they often do. Many guys find them ugly and cheap looking (that's up to you to decide) and the screws will mar the trigger.

Other than that they're great...

 

[g8rb8]

Congratulations. That's a beauty. It will be interesting to see if the inside of one of the grips is stamped with the serial number of the gun. It looks to be in very nice condition and I'll bet the timing, lock-up, end shake, forcing cone to face of cylinder gap, etc. all check out well. It looks original to me but other things to look for are refinish marks or date stamps indicating it went back to S&W for refinishing or service work.

 

[H Richard]

The biggest problem with trigger shoes is "IF" the gun will be used in a holster, as the "shoe" may stick out far enough to catch on the edge of the holster and cause a N.D.

 

[Fredo Batali]

Here's a shot of my 1949 "Heavy Masterpiece" with the "stock" hammer for comparison. As you can see they are quite different. Your's may have been a special order feature.

De Oppresso Liber

 

[shawn mccarver]

I agree with earlier comments concerning the trigger shoe as regards removing it. It adds little, and is dangerous if its sides catch on the holster during insertion, causing a negligent discharge. I tried them back when they were fashionable, and found them of little use to make the trigger "feel" lighter. Others like them, and that is fine, but remember that they have resulted in a gun going "bang" during holstering, which is at once embarrassing and dangerous to you and those around you.

 

[Talan2000]

Thanks all!

Thanks for all the feedback - guess I wasn't as smart as I thought I was - appreciate the "pre Model 14" correction -- at least I had the official name right -- K38 Heavy Masterpiece. I'm sure it is a 1950 model based on your additional info, not 1949.

I appreciate the safety notes on the shoe. I'll not likely ever put it in a holster, but if I do I will be vigilant. I'll check out how the trigger feels with the shoe when the revolver arrives and go from there - can't wait.

Hondo44 thanks especially for the detailed instructions on checking out a revolver. I've never really known what to look for specifically. Ignorance is(nt) bliss! I hesitate to check the revolvers I already own with all this

When the revolver arrives I'll let you know what I find re stamps, refinishes etc.

Todd

 

[JP@AK]

I'm sure it is a 1950 model based on your additional info, not 1949.

Todd
That is actually unknown. It might have actually been assembled in 1949, but not shipped until after the first of the year. S&W did not ship guns in serial order and there could have been lots of them that were made in, say, December of 1949 and not have gone out the door until 1950.
The best serial number information we have says that 1949 production ended at K84149. So I'll stick with 1949 as the year of manufacture.
The ship date is the "official" date of birth, but it isn't always reflective of the point at which a gun is made or assembled.