Model 2 tip up. Is it a fake???

[markieh]

I just bought my first Smith antique revolver but I'm having some doubts. The first thing that doesn't look right is that the rear of the frame is flanged where it meets the grips (Like a model 1). Most pictures of model 2s on the net the frame is flat and the grips taper to meet the frame.

The second thing is that the grips are very finely checkered, all over. They look to be original to the gun.

Finally (and this is the biggie). It's a 32 rimfire...... and has a 7 shot cylinder.

Other than proof marks (Birmingham, UK) there are no other identifying marks. It has a 4.5" barrel and is quite nicely scroll engraved. The frame is nickel plated although fairly worn.

I'm not sure how to post pics on the forum but if anyone could do it for me I could e-mail some to you.

 

[H Richard]

If you are referencing a Model #2 "Old Army" S&W, I don't think you have a correct one. It is 32 RF, but it is a 6 shot cylinder. The 4.5" barrel would not be correct either. We would need pictures to confirm what you have, but I seriously doubt it is a S&W Model 2. The Birmingham UK proof marks would also indicate it isn't a S&W. Clear pictures of both sides, and top and close up of any stamping would help identify.

 

[wedgeguns]

Model 2 army

You may wish to check out my web site. www.model2project It may be of some help.
Richard pointed out pictures would be helpful.

ron SWCA20

 

[markieh]

Here are some pics.

 

[mmaher94087]

Welcome to the forum. You have a nice copy of the S&W #2 Army. The barrel rib should have the Smith & Wesson name and Springfield, Mass. Mike #283

 

[opoefc]

As Mike said, It's a British copy of the S&W Model 2 Army. These are somewhat common, as it seems a lot of the British gun makers were quick to turn out their version of the S&W Model 2s. These guns are an interesting subfield to collectors of the Model 2 Army. Ed.

 

[pace40]

Yep...its a copy...but with some pretty nice engraving.

 

[markieh]

Thanks for the answers. Were these copies usually by English makers and if so does anyone know any names. Any chance it's Belgian? although I suspect a Belgian copy would be more poorly made.

 

[mmaher94087]

Probably not Belgium as there are no Belgium proof marks. I don't have any names of the English makers. Mike #283

 

[Thuer]

It is British. I do see the Birmingham proofmarks on the cilinder.
Even Webley made Smith and Wesson model 1 and model 2 copy's.

I have seen very well made examples of British copy's.

 

[mmcalc]

That's a good example of why the British gun maker always put some engraving on their guns; the piece is still aesthetically pleasing even when the finish is worn off. That is a wonderfully made copy with some really nice engraving.

MMC

 

[markieh]

SOLVED!!!!!

I know it's a VERY old thread but I have the answer. Apparently these were made by WEBLEY in 1865/66, but there seems to be dispute whether they were licensed by S&W or not.

According to William Dowell in "The Webley Story" they were licensed but others claim there is no evidence of any such agreement.

Webley used the design but obviously upscaled the dimensions, as this is a .32 rimfire with 7 shot capacity, and is obviously bigger than an S&W. The engraving was done on presentation pieces.

 

[BMur]

Tranter

Very nice antique.

There are several problems with your theory though.

The cylinder locks are post 1875 European type. See photo 1 of early cylinders.

Also the engraving screams Tranter manufactured Notice the flower around the side plate? That's a Tranter identification symbol.

Also Having early Tranter type proof marks on the cylinder post 1875.

Smith and Wesson was extremely strict with patent infringements. In 1867/68 Remington manufactured the first large caliber .46 Rimfire revolver "with Smith and Wesson approval" that required the cylinder to have the 1855 patent date stamped on it!

Your gun is not an infringement. It's a post patent copy from the mid to late 1870's. One more identifying feature for Tranter is the brass frame. When they made copies they would not apply their logo typically on the left side frame in front of the cylinder.

These procedures were identical to there Bulldog series revolvers.
If it was manufactured in the 1860's it would be a patent infringement not a copy. Big difference legally.

If Smith &Wesson was involved in any way this example would have an 1855 patent stamped on the cylinder.

Murph

 

[markieh]

Murph that actually makes a lot of sense. I always suspected Tranter because of the brass frame and fine checkering. I didn't know about the flower engraving so thanks for that info. I believe Tranter made a lot of "Trade guns" for retailers to put their own name on and always thought this was one that never got branded.

 

[BMur]

Tranter

Tranters are very well made.

Their bulldogs are highly sought after and the bank note engraving is near identical to Webleys but have distinctive features that separate the two. When found cased and engraved they sell for a lot!

Tranter also made several spur trigger brass frame revolvers that are copies of Smith & Wesson designs but manufactured much later after all patents had expired. I've never seen any marked with their logo but I have seen catalog advertisements that confirm their manufacture.

Most of their production was Bulldog type double actions of both brass and iron frame. Small and very large 50 cal! The 50's are worth a ton.

They also had many contracts to convert earlier cap and ball revolvers to cartridge. Those are also quite valuable today. Most being converted to centerfire.

Murph