My first triple lock... was Elmer Keith's

[beetledude]

I guess what I am saying is that there have been several nice firearms I have passed up, not because I cannot afford them, just because I think the price is too high for what it is. Just a matter of opinion...

Hi. I too have passed on firearms because I thought the price was too high for what it was. but in my opinion this was a special situation. If this was just a "regular" triple lock then I would have only paid what I thought the market value was.

But the question is, are these "regular" triple locks? I think it depends on what value you place on the Keith ownership. To some it won't matter and those people will only pay the market rate. To others (me included) the Keith ownership is huge and adds a significant premium.

Kind of like asking if a 1911 owned by John Moses Browning is worth more than a regular 1911. To some, no. To others (me included) Yes!

I have posted answers to questions like these in several threads and will reply here as well.

1. To someone making $10/hour at the local Dunkin Donuts, prices paid for a registered magnum or the OP's guns seem like lottery numbers. To the guy that just sold his dot.com company for 6.2 billion to that Japanese conglomerate, it's the pocket change in his left front pocket. It's all relative.

I can assure everyone that I definitely did not sell a company worth $6.2 billion! LOL. Yes I have a good job that affords me the ability to pursue my hobbies, and for that I'm grateful. But this purchase was significant for me. Even still, I don't regret that I did it.

Yes. of course! $39,100 for some folks is a fraction of a day's pay. For others, it is several year's pay. Do I think it is a good investment over the long haul? Probably. Unless, of course, there is little interest in Elmer Keith, or triple locks, in future years, as younger generations flock to plastic firearms...

I think that there will always be interest in fine pieces of art made from steel and wood. If anything, the younger generation is just now discovering the beauty of revolvers. Look at the prices of pythons lately -- they are through the roof!

It comes down to this -- is $39K a lot to pay? Yes, I'm not a billionaire. but for me it was worth it. Unlike other "regular" guns it's not like you can pass because another will come along. when do you think another triple lock with Kearsarge custom stocks that was once owned by Keith AND McGivern will come along?

Anyways no right or wrong answers on this one -- just something that collectors will need to reconcile in their own head.

 

[SuperMan]

Hi Bob.

I believe you are correct! After reading your post I know see how the holster is supposed to work. thanks for the insight!

Cheers!
-b

U R quite welcome...

I went over to the Cal guns site and saw your article on the .38 Super...what a great find and rescue...that gun would have been part of an engine block by now...

It is funny but I have a friend who owns serial number 1000. He bought it from the gun writer/lawman Sheriff Jim Wilson back in the 1980s at a gun show in the Ft. Worth area. The gun was written about by Jim in his article about guns he should have never sold...

Bob

 

[ddixie884]

My business has been slow, or I would have probably bid on a couple. The 4" 1950 target with carved ivory stocks, you knew was Elmer's holster gun at $10,000 was a really good buy IMHO. Also, his every day carry M-29. My opinion, only......

 

[sw282]

l think serious collectors call it '' provenance ''.. That old 45-70 Springfield may only be worth $1000. But if it survived the ''Little Big Horn'' it instantly becomes a MILLION DOLLAR GUN...

l think any gun owned by Elmer is worth at least a couple extra Zeroes of '' provenance''

 

[bcr22]

It makes me happy that this thread turned up here. I hope that his carry M29, his .333 OKH, the Corbett rifle, and the Number 5 do the same.

 

[rednichols]

Welcome and what a great story....

One thing I do ask...aren't the guns supposed to be down in the holsters a tad more...like the cylinders into the recesses where the springs are and the triggerguards lock in a recess to the rear...

The guns come out through the front, not the top...

Again congratulations...Bob

Yes indeed:



That said, Keith's article points out that Berns created his holster to allow the carry of long-barrelled revolvers in the snow (this is, very high on the belt but still drawable); so "up and out" would've been the method there.

Taffin's pics are amongst the few I've seen of the Berns-Martin being suited to the SAA, one in the Keith article being the other. None are pictured in their post-war brochures. Taffin's Keith holsters and their belt, are not the same as the OP's purchase; a keen set of eyes will show you the differences, which are many, between the belts and the paired holsters; the barrel lengths being not the least of them:

http://www.sixguns.com/BookOfThe44/bot44c09.htm

 

[CajunBass]

Welcome to the forum, and thanks for the article.

Come back often.

 

[OLDSTER]

I can't wait to see your future posts when you decide to get serious about S&W collecting

 

[beetledude]

Yes indeed:

View attachment 203064

That said, Keith's article points out that Berns created his holster to allow the carry of long-barrelled revolvers in the snow (this is, very high on the belt but still drawable); so "up and out" would've been the method there.

Taffin's pics are amongst the few I've seen of the Berns-Martin being suited to the SAA, one in the Keith article being the other. None are pictured in their post-war brochures. Taffin's Keith holsters and their belt, are not the same as the OP's purchase; a keen set of eyes will show you the differences, which are many, between the belts and the paired holsters; the barrel lengths being not the least of them:

9. THE ROAD TO THE 44 MAGNUM

agree that the Berns-Martin holster pictured on Taffin's site is not the same as the one I bought. For reference here is the picture from Taffin:

The most obvious difference is the lack of cartridge loops at the front of the belt. However on Page 88 of "Hell I Was There" you can clearly see the cartridge loops at the front of the belt

which matches the configuration of the belt/holster I bought.

 

[Bullet Bob]

Fame is a funny old thing. Mr. Keith was certainly an important part of our shooting heritage, but his public pulpit and unreserved certainty about his own opinions have made him more famous as time goes on.

I'm not saying it's undeserved, but you hardly ever hear of the other ".44 Associates" who had as much of a part in development of the .44 magnum as Mr. Keith did.

That's just the way history goes, in ebbs and flows. The general public rarely heard of Nikola Tesla 20 years ago, and now it seems it's his turn to get some time in the spotlight.

 

[rednichols]

Taffin's pics are amongst the few I've seen of the Berns-Martin being suited to the SAA, one in the Keith article being the other. None are pictured in their post-war brochures. Taffin's Keith holsters and their belt, are not the same as the OP's purchase; a keen set of eyes will show you the differences, which are many, between the belts and the paired holsters; the barrel lengths being not the least of them:

I'm 'quoting' myself so I can repost the Taffin pic:



Don't get me started on holster minutia (sp?) or you'll be here all day The Taffin holster is shaped very differently near the rear sight, and the basket weave near the trigger guard is set well away in the style of the postwar Berns-Martins vs yours which is quite close to the hand stitching there. The former will be because it's for the SA vs the DA.

And the belt has a very different billet.

I only wonder that the holsters that Elmer is wearing have no obvious safety straps. Of course he could have turned them back under the holsters for the pic.

His 1932 article states that he has handled the first two of the Speed Holsters ever made, and taken with his comment about a patent that issued in 1935, tells us that there are no pre-1932 holsters (a patent application has to be filed within 1 year of a public use, and it was filed in September 1932).

These early holsters have their straps stitched to the rear of the holster, so that they extend forward like wings when open. Post-war Berns-Martin Speed holsters have the straps attached to the rear with a strategically placed rivet-and-burr, plus a snap on the back near the muzzle, so that the strap can be not only swivelled away, but snapped into position there.

I recently saw a TINY pic -- so small it wasn't worth salvaging -- on an auction that nevertheless shows the strap stitched to the OUTSIDE of the holster and snapped to the rear.

Now THAT'S minutia (sp?).

OP, how about a first quality set of pics of your holsters, front and rear? I see that one snap stud has come off your left-hand holster, which wasn't apparent in the auction pics.

 

[jw mathews]

Thanx, Beetledude, for sharing. Fine photos & story. I'm a long way below yr income bracket, but I respect yr admiration for Elmer & fine handguns. I know you'll care for and treasure your purchase for years to come & I hope those years are many & healthful.

 

[rboineau]

Spectacular acquisition. I am wondering how the ex-McGivern gun remained in such pristine condition, since Keith often mentions in his writings about target and game shooting with it, not to mention load development. Even spreading the "load" over the two guns, I would have expected more wear on both. And the grips obviously have seen little use so must have been added in later years.

 

[moosedog]

This is a great post and I thought I would bring it back to life. I remember how much I enjoyed reading the writings of guys like Elmer and Skeeter.

 

[NavySCPO]

Absolutely wonderful article, I hated to see it end. Congratulations on owning these beautiful firearms! I know we’re never supposed to buy the story, but the story is what makes them so special.

Well done Sir!

 

[rednichols]

Keith's twin setup is, with the permission of the photographer and owner of the set, the dust jacket of my book with John Witty that is "Holstory -- Gunleather of the 20th Century" for the First Edition. For the Second Edition the image was replaced on the hardcover that has no dust jacket, with Tom Threepersons' Colt and his holster -- also with permission of that set's owner who was the photographer.

It was this thread that made it possible for us to reach out to the owner for permission and pics. Research for the book began late in 2016. The First Edition is out of print:

 

[MajorD]

Excellent write up and guns.
I will point out however, that while Elmer was instrumental in the development of the large bore magnums, the 357 while Elmer did have input, was primarily the result of work by one of his lesser known contemporaries Phil Sharpe- I read a thick telephone size book written by Sharpe called the complete guide to Handloading from 1935. What a comprehensive book! Hundreds of pages of reloading data, unlike modern manuals it gives loads mild to wild with every imaginable bullet weight and powder combination. I wish something modern could be produced like that. Need a 30/06 round for indoor practice loaded with a 32 wadcutter bullet? He has that. Hottest possible 220 grain bullet load for bear? Yep in there too. Some of the common caliber load tables for example 30/06 run 15 or 20 pages