Model 10?

[lonestarlizard]

I just received this yesterday. I believe it is some version of the old M&P. Can I get some information from the forum experts as to model and year of manufacture?

 

[OFT II]

Military & Police model. I'll make a WAG of about 1925. Nice looking old shooter.

 

[robertrwalsh]

Really neat old piece of iron. Congrats.

 

[lonestarlizard]

Thanks, I will pursue that time era. The frame is in very good condition but the barrel exterior is, as pictured, devoid of bluing. The action is very tight and smooth and the cylinder indexes securely. Bore appears excellent with no pitting whatsoever. Next step is a cleaning and then off to the range to see how it shoots.

 

[lonestarlizard]

Really neat old piece of iron. Congrats.

Thanks. This old piece might even still be legal over there in the Democratic Peoples Republic of California. I bailed out of San Diego (loved the area and weather) in 1990 before the state became the fustercluck it is now.

 

[DWalt]

It is a S&W .38 Hand Ejector, Model of 1905, Fourth Change, Military and Police, from about 1925. Grips are period-correct. The Model 10 did not appear until 1957, 32 years after yours was made. But they are very similar. I love the M&Ps made between the wars.

 

[Mike McLellan]

1925 sounds about right. I'm puzzled about the difference in condition between the barrel and the rest of the gun. Did someone swap out a damaged barrel for an old, used one, with the intent of refinishing it "one of these days"?

 

[bgrafsr]

1925 sounds about right. I'm puzzled about the difference in condition between the barrel and the rest of the gun. Did someone swap out a damaged barrel for an old, used one, with the intent of refinishing it "one of these days"?

I was wondering the same thing.

 

[lonestarlizard]

1925 sounds about right. I'm puzzled about the difference in condition between the barrel and the rest of the gun. Did someone swap out a damaged barrel for an old, used one, with the intent of refinishing it "one of these days"?

No, it is the original barrel with a serial number that matches the ones on the butt and cylinder. I do not know what happened to the finish. It could have become rusted and someone tried to "remove" the rust with an abrasive. The bore looks to be in very good shape to my eye. I will find out how good the rifling is when I shoot it.

 

[lonestarlizard]

It is a S&W .38 Hand Ejector, Model of 1905, Fourth Change, Military and Police, from about 1925. Grips are period-correct. The Model 10 did not appear until 1957, 32 years after yours was made. But they are very similar. I love the M&Ps made between the wars.

Thanks for the data. Are these older guns capable of handling the modern .38 Special ammo? I know the M&Ps are not rated for +P but I would surmise that they are capable of digesting any other .38 Special loads.

 

[KEN L]

1925 sounds about right. I'm puzzled about the difference in condition between the barrel and the rest of the gun. Did someone swap out a damaged barrel for an old, used one, with the intent of refinishing it "one of these days"?

Generally has to do with the hardness of the metal in the barrel as compared to the rest of the gun. Bluing doesn't take as well when the metal is harder. Often you'll see an original gun with beautiful bluing on the cylinder and the rest of the finish looks crappy.

 

[DWalt]

Thanks for the data. Are these older guns capable of handling the modern .38 Special ammo? I know the M&Ps are not rated for +P but I would surmise that they are capable of digesting any other .38 Special loads.

Using +P ammunition is perfectly OK. It's only marginally better performance than standard loadings. The main question is why would you want to do that?

 

[lonestarlizard]

Using +P ammunition is perfectly OK. It's only marginally better performance than standard loadings. The main question is why would you want to do that?

To have the option of using +P if I wanted to.

 

[oberon]

The 1905 is one of the revolvers on my wish list.