Identification Question

[WartyPig]

Hello All,

I inherited a S&W .38 from my father's estate, and was hoping someone could identify the model and rough year of production. The serial number on the bottom of the grip (and on the cylinder) is 403324. On the frame (internal) below the barrel is engraved 28294. Hopefully the attached photo will be helpful. Any help would be greatly appreciated.

Best,
Wendell

 

[Goony]

First off, welcome to the forum, and thank you for the photo, that is always helpful.

Your heirloom is a Military & Police (Model of 1905, 4th Change) which by the serial number dates to around 1922-23. That serial number should also appear on the underside of the barrel (on the flat area that is obscured by the ejector rod when the cyloinder is closed).

That number inside the frame recess that's exposed when you swing out the cylinder served merely as a reference in matching up components during manufacture and is irrelevant to dating or identifying your gun.

 

[Texas Star]

Does the barrel measure 6.0 or 6.5 inches from the front of the cylinder to muzzle?

Anyone recall when S&W dropped the 6.5 inch barrels in the M&P?

Also, the front sight is very unusual. Probably isn't original.
This gun MAY have been re-barrelled.

 

[WartyPig]

All,

Thanks for your help. The barrel is 6 inches.

 

[red9]

If the underside of the barrel has the same serial number as the bottom of the butt, there is a very slight chance that you might have a rare variation. A very few M&P's left the factory with target front sights and service rear sights (subject of previous thread). The only way to verify that would be a factory letter, which costs $50, but may also give you other information of interest. Enjoy the family history and, if you fire it, use only low pressure, lead bullet loads.

Bob

 

[lowhog]

Welcome,It has a target front sight,and a service rear sight.I have seen this before somewhere.Very nice gun!Mike

 

[Goony]

In my first post in this thread, I was attempting to prompt WartyPig into looking to see if the barrel was numbered to the gun, because besides the sight its profile looks slightly off to me. Unfortunmately, this is information we still don't have.

If the number is there, either the front sight has been modified (which negatively affects its monetary worth a bit) or it is an unusual variation as has been suggested by red9 above. If there is no number there, it has almost certainly been rebarreled, but if it's one of the period aftermarket target barrels (somewhere else on this forum I have seen a thread on this topic), I don't think it really hurts the gun at all, and, depending on to whom the barrel can be attributed, might actually enhance its value to the right collector.

 

[WartyPig]

Alright, instead of prepping for my physics lab, I took a look, and, sure enough, the same serial number does appear under the barrel. I'm tempted to go through S&W to find out what they can tell me. Thanks again, everyone, for your insights.

 

[DCWilson]

Does the barrel measure 6.0 or 6.5 inches from the front of the cylinder to muzzle?

Anyone recall when S&W dropped the 6.5 inch barrels in the M&P?

Also, the front sight is very unusual. Probably isn't original.
This gun MAY have been re-barrelled.

I think that is a six inch barrel. I have a 1905/first with a 6.5 inch barrel, but the fourth change barrels are no longer than six inches. I think I recall seeing second-change barrels with the extra half inch, but maybe not the third-change guns.

The barrel profile looks OK to me. I think that front sight represents a custom replacement after the half-round original was milled off and the sight base slotted so a different blade could be pinned to the barrel.

 

[Goony]

The barrel profile looks OK to me. I think that front sight represents a custom replacement after the half-round original was milled off and the sight base slotted so a different blade could be pinned to the barrel.

Well, as it is now confirmed that the barrel is numbered to the gun, I think that your conjecture is most likely the case, and obviously my impression that the shape of the barrel was otherwise a little off was just...well, off too. I wouldn't mind seeing a close-up shot of that sight, anyway. I'll add to my earlier comment regarding the negative impact on value that this gun in less than pristine condition would not be a high dollar item in any event, so any hit it may take on account of a modification to the sight is not going to be all that great, at least in absolute terms.

Edit: of course, if it were to letter as coming from the factory with that target style sight, it's a new ballgame as to desirability and worth.

 

[WartyPig]

Alright, here are some shots of the front sight... As always, thanks for your help.

 

[DCWilson]

Well, as it is now confirmed that the barrel is numbered to the gun, I think that your conjecture is most likely the case, and obviously my impression that the shape of the barrel was otherwise a little off was just...well, off too. I wouldn't mind seeing a close-up shot of that sight, anyway. I'll add to my earlier comment regarding the negative impact on value that this gun in less than pristine condition would not be a high dollar item in any event, so any hit it may take on account of a modification to the sight is not going to be all that great, at least in absolute terms.

Edit: of course, if it were to letter as coming from the factory with that target style sight, it's a new ballgame as to desirability and worth.

In fairness, and not trying to undercut my own observation. S&W was known to stamp old serial numbers on new barrels when the gun went back to the factory for repairs. That way all the parts would still number together. I have such a .22/32 that got a new cylinder and barrel that were numbered to the original (and much older) frame.

 

[Goony]

WartyPig - I took the liberty of enhancing your photos a bit so everyone could get a better look. My judgment is if it's an older non-factory modification, which seems most likely, it was at least well executed and as fortunately it wasn't done to a rarer model, to my way of thinking all things considered this isn't too objectionable.