Letter Arrived .44 Hand Ejector 2nd Model with Pearl Handles

[mikepriwer]

In addition to what Lee noted, that front sight is definitely not factory. In addition to the two cross pins anchoring the sight blade, one of the later photos shows the slot in the front sight base being milled clear through the sight base.

The rear sight assembly is, among other things, not the right length for the frame. It doesn't fit correctly at it's front end.

Regards, Mike Priwer

 

[shown50]

In addition to what Lee noted, that front sight is definitely not factory. In addition to the two cross pins anchoring the sight blade, one of the later photos shows the slot in the front sight base being milled clear through the sight base.

The rear sight assembly is, among other things, not the right length for the frame. It doesn't fit correctly at it's front end.

Regards, Mike Priwer

Thanks for the info the front sight base has been milled all the way through front to back. Is the rear sight supposed to be filed to length? I thought the N frame was the largest frame size they made.

 

[shown50]

Here’s pictures of the side plate off to show the action. Side plate and yoke have the same assembly number. Ejector star has the serial number stamped inside.

 

[mikepriwer]

Here is a picture, perhaps not good enough, showing the side view of the front sight and its base. The blade is held in with one pin, not two, and fits into a slot milled inside of the sight base. I can show more complete pictures if necessary.

Regards, Mike Priwer

 

[shown50]

Here is a picture, perhaps not good enough, showing the side view of the front sight and its base. The blade is held in with one pin, not two, and fits into a slot milled inside of the sight base. I can show more complete pictures if necessary.

Regards, Mike Priwer

Thanks I’ve looked at a couple stock guns and saw they were all 1 pin front sights along with some King catalogues(all 1 pin that I saw) I’m not sure who made the front sight or who installed it with the rear. I’d assume they were some aftermarket do it yourself type of deal. After seeing the responses I believe King did the short action job and “Cockeyed” hammer. The trigger seems to be a stock trigger although I’ve not found anything stating if these came with a smooth or vertical grooved trigger(mine is grooved with patent stamp on the back).

 

[Muley Gil]

Grooved triggers became standard in the late '1920s-early '1930s.

 

[shown50]

Grooved triggers became standard in the late '1920s-early '1930s.

Awesome thanks for the info I had read I think from Handejector in another thread they started marking them with the Patent mark in 1926 and discontinued it during ww2 production.

*edited to correct dates

 

[mikepriwer]

Here is a better picture, directly overhead, showing the milled-out slot for the front sight base. The slot is entirely contained within the body of the forged front sight base, and is not sliced through the ends of the base.

I had to set the camera to let in a lot of light, so the top of the sight base is too shiny on one edge of it.

Regards, Mike Priwer

 

[shown50]

Received my letter today. This answers some of the questions on the gun. I’m going to try and send off for service records now that I have the factory letter.

 

[Modified]

Interesting letter. There must be some service department records?

My take on this gun is that at one time it went to King for the hammer / action work.

At another time it was at the service department.

And after all of that some gun plumber did...things... to the sights, and then applied the finish it is currently sporting.

That sight work is absolutely not up to King standards, much less Service Dept. standards. I'd guess it's not actually a king rear sight, it looks like it doesn't have windage adjustment. As far as I have seen even the King sights that are very close to the S&W sights have that.

 

[shown50]

Interesting letter. There must be some service department records?

My take on this gun is that at one time it went to King for the hammer / action work.

At another time it was at the service department.

And after all of that some gun plumber did...things... to the sights, and then applied the finish it is currently sporting.

That sight work is absolutely not up to King standards, much less Service Dept. standards. I'd guess it's not actually a king rear sight, it looks like it doesn't have windage adjustment. As far as I have seen even the King sights that are very close to the S&W sights have that.

Thanks for the reply, the letter surprised me that it was a target model originally. It doesn’t make a lot of sense why the sights were modified. I could see changing the front sight to a gold bead but why modify the rear?

I agree after reviewing your other King threads that the work is far from King quality. I haven’t been able to find any front or rear sights similar in the King catalogs. I also agree King did the short action job and Cockeyed hammer unless the service records show differently.

To be honest I’m unsure how to view the letter. As far as I understand it they never made N frame Pearl handles but the letter says they were added when it came back for service. How often would they do a finish change? I’m hoping there are service department records or correspondence to show when the work was done.

 

[DARE]

Mr. Shown,
Interesting gun
Interesting letter
Interesting thread

Looking forward to what the repair records show.
Sounds like the consensus is that the gun went back to S&W for some mods and some other things were done not at S&W. The letter says the gun came with adj. rear sight. The rear sight is different than what the gun shipped with in 1932?

Here is my only gun that has marks from going back to S&W for service. As far as I know it was refinished and nothing else. Have a S and diamond under the barrel and on the cylinder. Date of service up from the toe (10-74) R-S on the grip frame. Am told that means refinish standard. Of course my date of service was I'm sure quite a bit later than yours.

Thanks for showing us the gun, I have learned quite a bit from this thread.

 

[shown50]

Mr. Shown,
Interesting gun
Interesting letter
Interesting thread

Looking forward to what the repair records show.
Sounds like the consensus is that the gun went back to S&W for some mods and some other things were done not at S&W. The letter says the gun came with adj. rear sight. The rear sight is different than what the gun shipped with in 1932?

Here is my only gun that has marks from going back to S&W for service. As far as I know it was refinished and nothing else. Have a S and diamond under the barrel and on the cylinder. Date of service on the toe (10-74) R-S on the grip frame. Am told that means refinish standard. Of course my date of service was I'm sure quite a bit later than your.

Thanks for showing us the gun, I have learned quite a bit from this thread.

Thanks for all your replies and the pictures of your gun. Those are similar to what I’ve seen on other guns with refinishes. I have a 1905 4th change sporting a 2” barrel that went back 4.60 for what I’m assuming was a barrel conversion since it’s too early of a serial number to be a 2”. What’s weird is the 44 doesn’t have any of those marks other than the S<> under the barrel.

 

[AJ]

Received my letter today. This answers some of the questions on the gun. I’m going to try and send off for service records now that I have the factory letter.

Cropped a bit for better reading for those of us who are challenged computer wise. If someone else can do better, please do.