K22 Outdoorsman

[CZU]

I have bought with the right to decline this K22 Outdoorsman pictured below. These are the only 2 pics that I have. It's been lettered and shows it was shipped in 1937. I really want to like this and to my eye it looks original. The problem is when I look it over with a bright light I don't see any brown under the blue, all I see is blue coming back to my eye. Also, the polishing where the Smith & Wesson is roll stamped on the barrel isn't as fine as the rest of the barrel and the barrel shank isn't as finely polished either. There is no star on the butt indicationg a factory re-work. Tomorrow I'll get to look at it again and hopefully be able to take the grips off to see what is on the frame if anything (and if the grips match).

This was bought online from Cabelas. Used to be you would pay the 20-25 bucks to have it shipped to a store near you and if you decided you didn't want it you were out the shipping fee. Now you have to pay for it fully but you get the opportunity for a full refund if you decline. The regular guys that were there didn't want to take the chance I guess of damaging the grips so they asked if I could come back when the manager was there. It's not to far from work so I was agreeable to that.

If it makes a difference, refinish or not, it was shipped to the U.S. Coast Guard. (No s#, I forgot to write it down)

 

[Retired W4]

Looking at C. W. Pate's book, page 96, he mentioned 12 S&W K-22s requested by the Coast Guard and shipped in May, 1936, but none in 1937.

 

[22hipower]

So your question? Brown under the blue? I don't know why you would expect to see that. I can't see anything not to like. Close up sharp pictures with good light might tell us more. You didn't mention the price but if around $1k I'd be pretty happy. With no rework stamps, matching number on the stocks (and elsewhere) and no indications of a refinish (and with the S&W letter which I presume is there confirming shipment to the Coast Guard) I'd probably be ok with it if a few more Benjamins were needed. More pictures if you get it please.

Jeff
SWCA #1457

 

[Retired W4]

Also, Dept. of Interior purchased 4 in 1837. SNs: 665165, 665241, 665280, 665315. I.A.W. Pate

 

[rct269]

My knee-jerk reaction is it was put in the commander's sock drawer upon arrival---and then transferred to someone else's sock drawer---and so on after that.

This appraisal is made on the basis of the fact I had two of them in my collection---both drop dead gorgeous----and yours is BETTER!!

Ralph Tremaine

 

[CZU]

So your question? Brown under the blue? I don't know why you would expect to see that. I can't see anything not to like. Jeff
SWCA #1457

I was thinking rust blue but of course this is Carbona blue. This changes things up a bit.

 

[PeteC]

The finish looks very similar to one I acquired recently, except mine was not kept in a sock drawer, and shows normal wear. It is a very deep and glossy blue. No refinish stamps. I look forward to your pics when it is in your hands

 

[Peak53]

I'm no expert on these things, but the ejector rod shows some wear. Seems to me that if the gun were refinished, the rod would show little wear. So, it appears to be shot some and well taken care of. Edges look sharp and there is no dishing of the screws. Tight side plate seam. Roll marks look crisp except for the kind of shallow trademark which is not that unusual. I bought one in perhaps slightly lesser apparent condition a few years back off this forum for $1100 and never looked back. Yes, get the grips off. If all looks good, and for an agreeable price, then ...

 

[DARE]

Here is mine that shipped April 6, 1937. SN 661640. Should be similar to yours. I wish mine shipped to the Coast Guard but no such luck. Went to a distributor in Dallas.
Congratulations on a cool gun.

 

[rct269]

"You didn't mention the price but if around $1K I'd be pretty happy."

If anybody's interested in the real world, here's what my two Outdoorsman sold for within the last three years and change during the liquidation of my collection.

#659434, shipped January 28, 1937----$1750

#646192, shipped March 20, 1934----$2500

Both were in comparable condition to this one----almost. #646192 fetched the most seemingly because it carried a King Cockeyed Hammer----the only significant difference in the two----and the only reason I bought it in the first place--------'cause I already had the other one.

Ralph Tremaine

 

[RKmesa]

Looks like a great K-22 Outdoorsman to me. I look forward to some more photos when you get it home...

 

[22hipower]

"You didn't mention the price but if around $1K I'd be pretty happy."

If anybody's interested in the real world, here's what my two Outdoorsman sold for within the last three years and change during the liquidation of my collection.

#657805, shipped January 28, 1937----$1750

#646192, shipped March 20, 1934----$2500

Both were in comparable condition to this one----almost. #646192 fetched the most seemingly because it carried a King Cockeyed Hammer----the only significant difference in the two----and the only reason I bought it in the first place--------'cause I already had the other one.

Ralph Tremaine

Here's more "real world" pricing.

639167 from 1937; $750 in 2019.

639167 from 1935; $300 in 2014

Although I suspect Ralph's examples might have been just a tad higher condition.

And you can buy one, also from 1937, also with S&W letter, here on the classifieds today for $975 shipped.

Jeff
SWCA #1457

 

[schutz5]

Here is mine that shipped April 6, 1937. SN 661640. Should be similar to yours. I wish mine shipped to the Coast Guard but no such luck. Went to a distributor in Dallas.
Congratulations on a cool gun.

Why does this one have the logo on the left side while the OP has the logo on right side. ?? Both are 1937

Thanks nice blue work!

 

[Retired W4]

Interesting question. From what I'm reading the logo didn't move to the side plate until~1940.

 

[glowe]

There was an order issued on December 2, 1936, to mark all H.E. revolvers with large logo on the side plate.

 

[DARE]

Good eye schultz5, I did not pick up on that. What I have always heard is that S&W took a while from when an order was issued until it was in practice. Use up old parts, etc. Plus they did not ship in SN order, so a manufactured gun might go right out or might sit for a while.

 

[rct269]

Good eye schultz5, I did not pick up on that. What I have always heard is that S&W took a while from when an order was issued until it was in practice. Use up old parts, etc. Plus they did not ship in SN order, so a manufactured gun might go right out or might sit for a while.

Here's a really good example of going right out, or sitting for a while-----quite a while in this case: Both of these are 3rd Model Single Shots---and both are examples of odd-ball barrel lengths---10" being being the regular, everyday fare.

#4807---a 6". It was one of a production run of 31 units completed on May 9, 1911, "and entered into the shipping vault on that date.". It was shipped on November 11, 1915. (!!!!)

#4826---an 8". "------this pistol was in the production run of this model completed on June 21, 1911 and entered in to the S&W shipping vault on that same day." It was shipped on June 24, 1911. This one was "a single unit special order"---proving once again you get snappy service when you call attention to yourself!

Ralph Tremaine

 

[handejector]

The pics are not good enough to make the call. The logo looks a little faint. IF it is a refinish, I would bet it is Factory and will probably be marked under the grips.

 

[CZU]

I really wanted to bring this home with me. After looking at it under different lighting it was obviously a re-do. Buffed is buffed and a refinish is a refinish, some are done well and some are not. It just goes to show you that a first hand examination is always the best no matter what the pics might tell you. Ever so slight dishing was evident on the sideplate screw holes and the person that did this was very careful but the buffing was evident. The grips DID match and there were no stamps on the frame other than a b that was about the same size as the b preceding the S# on the barrel flat. Also, it was not a CG gun, that was only mentioned in the letter as part of the history of this model.

I guess I will continue looking.

 

[DARE]

Right, not a Coast Guard gun. My letter mentions them also.

One of the rarest of the K-22 Outdoorsman are a group of 25 made in 1935 for the United States Coast Guard.