K-22 Masterpiece 1949

[DARE]

I'm not RKmesa by a long shot, but might have an answer. SCSW 4th says 1940-1958 for the Blued steel knurled-handled screwdriver.
Bill Cross told me the first Aluminum knurled-handled screwdrivers were shipped in 1956 with the .357 Combat Magnum and the .44 Magnum.

 

[USBP SW]

Dave, first of all your k-22 looks great, it shows honest use, provided everything is tight and works properly. It just means that you won't hesitate to enjoy it. I apologize about the vertigris, I would have cleaned it but took advantage of no line at the post office. I have cleaned vertigris with success using Ballistol, it is safe on basically all surfaces, including wood and leather.

 

[DARE]

Just noticed the rear sight is a U shape rather than a square notch. Was that standard? I'm guessing that with a gold bead you got a U shape and with the patridge you got a square notch.

 

[Truckman]

I'm guessing that with a gold bead you got a U shape and with the patridge you got a square notch.

That's what I've found on mine......Ben

 

[DARE]

I think this will be my K-22 shooter.
I have a K-22 Outdoorsman that shipped in April 1937. Has service stocks, the SS bead and the 2 screw rear sight.
The K-22 Masterpiece has magna stocks, a gold bead front and the micrometer rear sight (U shaped notch). Also short action and a rib.
Someone suggested target grips. I have 2 K frames with target grips, but they do not fit the gun. One is an early .357 Combat Magnum and the other is a 1st year Model 53.
I got a Tyler T-grip with this gun. Think I will try that.
Will post a range report soon.

 

[.38SuperMan]

No connection with Warren Spahn. The gun shipped in November 1948. The photos are of the front and the back of Warren's 1948 Bowman baseball card. That is his rookie card and is probably worth more than the gun.
Since the gun and the card were both 1948 I put the card in the photos.

That a gun I could love because I was shipped (born) November 1948. I guess we're both a little rough around the edges.

 

[rct269]

In the for what it's worth department, the front sight shown in Post #1 is not treated in Neal's 1977 article (The Evolution of Smith & Wesson Target Sights). Now all that means for a fact is it was not observed by Neal and his legion of helpers during the research for the article---does NOT mean it wasn't a factory sight---but if it was, its use was rare.

My knee-jerk reaction is it started life as a plain Patridge, and was very skillfully whittled down to its current configuration. As it stands right now, I'm betting we'll never know for sure and certain.

Serious shooters (and not so serious shooters) are well known for messing with their guns. The more serious mess with them in search of their version of perfection. The rest of us mess with them because we like to mess with them.

Ralph Tremaine

 

[DARE]

Ralph, thadheth said he believes gold and ivory beads were an option. Says he has an ivory one a bit younger than mine.
When I said I had a gold bead and a U shaped rear sight, Truckman indicated he had that combination on some of his guns. Don't know if he was referring to K-22s or sight packages in general. It looks factory to me. I mentioned the bead sight to Don in my letter request. Hopefully he will address that when I get my letter.

 

[Truckman]

Truckman indicated he had that combination on some of his guns. Don't know if he was referring to K-22s or sight packages in general.

David, the ones I'm sure about are all .22/32's...I'll have them all out again at the show here on Thanksgiving weekend...If I remember I'll look at the K-22's......Ben

 

[rct269]

Ralph, thadheth said he believes gold and ivory beads were an option. Says he has an ivory one a bit younger than mine.
When I said I had a gold bead and a U shaped rear sight, Truckman indicated he had that combination on some of his guns. Don't know if he was referring to K-22s or sight packages in general. It looks factory to me. I mentioned the bead sight to Don in my letter request. Hopefully he will address that when I get my letter.

He is correct, and the beads were placed on the face of a Patridge.

He is also correct, in that Marble sights were available as an option, although I don't know the time frame for that. (No matter, because this sight isn't a Marble.)

I hope you sent along a photo of this sight to Don---and if not, do both him and yourself a favor, and shoot one to him now so he's not working with a blindfold on.

Finally, it looks factory to me too (That's why I said "very skillfully whittled down".)---and if it is, I'll have learned something new---and that's what this hive is all about!

Ralph Tremaine

I'm thinking sight options were available across the board for target versions-----not necessarily applicable to any one model---as was the case early on with the Registered Magnums.

 

[dobegrant]

Very neat old gun

 

[DARE]

A better picture of the front sight and the rear notch.
Heard from Don. He says nothing on the invoice about a bead sight. Will post the letter when it arrives.
With the poor condition of the gun and incorrect stocks, guess it really does not matter if the sights are factory. Gun not worth very much.

 

[Green Frog]

A better picture of the front sight and the rear notch.
Heard from Don. He says nothing on the invoice about a bead sight. Will post the letter when it arrives.
With the poor condition of the gun and incorrect stocks, guess it really does not matter if the sights are factory. Gun not worth very much.

"Gun not worth very much"? Bite your tongue, Dave! Its worth is now in its utility and for a good solid K22, that's virtually incalculable. Anybody with enough money in their pocket can have a shiny new gun, but when you acquire a friend that can be beside you on the range and in the field, that's just priceless! If you still feel like it's not worth very much, drop me a PM. My 1948 K22 would love to have a brother!
Froggie

 

[peterdeb]

Sure sounds like a case of buyers remorse. Don't know what you paid for it but if it isn't worth very much, put it up for sale here and I'll bet someone would love to have a 1948 K-22 shooter. Just saying...........

 

[DARE]

Not unhappy with the gun although I was disappointed in the condition. Sellers pictures were not very good. Looked like 85-90% in the pics. With the gun in hand I would say around 60%. Pictures were dark and could not see much of the wear.
SCSW 4th says Exc (98%) $1100, VG (85%) $800 and Fair (60%) $500. A Fair gun can have replacement parts without affecting the value. Not so on an Exc gun. I bought what I thought was an $800 gun, but got one worth $500.

 

[peterdeb]

Don't feel bad DARE. I got burned by a fellow member here on a 1947 K-22. His pictures were good enough for me to buy it. Close up and in hand I had my doubts and put it up here for opinions. It turned out to be reblued.
Talk about a drop in value. I chalked it up to the guy being a creep and he has never returned to burn anyone else I got burned for a few hundred bucks but it still shoots great. We all live and learn, most of us here have. Heck, I'm still considering having it chromed...why not..

 

[larryofcc]

Here's a nice 1947. Actually shipped on my 5th birthday. 9-23-1947. 4 digit, # 4339. All matching with large ejector rod knob.
(LERK) if you will. Real close to mint. Big Larry

 

[thadheth]

I'm thinking sight options were available across the board for target versions-----not necessarily applicable to any one model---as was the case early on with the Registered Magnums.

Hope not to add confusion, but here is a section of the 1940 Stoeger catalog showing various front sight options for target models.

 

[DARE]

Here is the sight info from my 1941 S&W catalog. Very similar to the 1940 Stoeger catalog. To me my sight looks most like the Marble or Sheard bead. Ralph says it not, so don't know what I have.

 

[DARE]

Got the letter and the invoice. Seller said November 1948, but turns out to be September 1949.