n2 new model ?

[bibain]

Hello,
For my first post, I propose this photograph of a tip up of my collection, which intrigues me;
Description
It looks like a big n1 ½ 2 issue at 6 shots
Barrel length 4.30"
Compliant markings (SMITH&WESSON.SPRINGFIELD.MASS) and same location than for N°2
No patent (and no traces of patents on the barrel), many more assembly numbers (may be due to disassembly and modifications?)
The serial numbers are complete under the grip (76009) but only the last three digits (009) under the frame. If it is an N ° 2 frame modified the first two n ° were planed by the transformation.
All parts (even screws) are interchangeable with an N° 2 old model.

The Letter of Authenticity says:
"Your handgun was probably shipped from our factory between July and November 1870 and delivered Charles W May Paris, France.
Smith & Wesson's sales representative in France. This revolver was shipping with warrior barrel lengths, blue finish and smooth rosewood grips. C W May received 5000 model 2 in 1870 these shipments were July 18: 1000 units, October 12: 2000 units, October 30: 1000 units, November 1: 1000 units.
The serial numbers of these revolvers are not listed in the records, but the above serial number would be in the range of this 5000 revolvers.
It is very possible that the revolver was modified in France."

For more than 15 years I am interested in old sw, and I saw only three of this type. Mine, I saw one in an auction, and one of my friends has one.
We compared them they are both are exactly the same: its serial number is 65941, (under the frame 941). The two guns have suffered from a bad storage but have not been used or little used.

The precise and regular work found those two guns suggests to know-how and important material equipment. Without any element I can consider several possibilities:
-may be a modification made only for France because of the War of 1870 (state command or independent gunsmiths)
- modifications at the smith & wesson factory for a specific order or simply by N2 modernization will (like for 1st model and 1/2 model) : technical means, know-how but no mention and no known archives ?
- modifications in the United States by the distributor and exporter: but how about technical means and additional cost?
- modifications in Europe: Belgium, Germany , England or France by independent gunsmiths; but few technical means, additional cost and they would have signed their works
-modifications in France by the State Armourers MAS, MAC maybe for officers , but in this case incontestably presence of punches, markings and archives.

I explored all these tracks without having an answer
Have you ever seen such a modification of a smith & wesson n2 in the US or Europe?
If so, in what conditions? I appeal your expertise.

 

[bibain]

other pictures

 

[BMur]

France was a huge buyer of Smith & Wesson early revolvers begining with the French Exhibition of 1867. Models 1 1 1/2. , 2, etc were big sellers there. Possible assembly of spare parts sold to Distributors is not out of the question since 400 of the leftover Mongrels in 1 1/2 variation is proven through factory records to have been shipped to France in about 1869/70. Qualified and talented gunsmiths were in literally every Major Distributor facility. So anything is possible during that time. Proving it? That's a different concept.

 

[bibain]

Actually it will be very difficult to know the history of this SW and that is why I present it to you with the hope that other people have known about it, it will perhaps allow to direct the research


Regarding the export of 400 mongrel by C W May, it will be the opportunity to present my copy in a future post

 

[BMur]

Unfortunately, I think that since the modification or contract assembly likely took place in France or another neighboring country we will have little information in the USA. I find that barrel very interesting as well. It looks to be dementionally matching the gun in size and likely original assembly. I see no reason to go to such trouble unless it involved reasons involving the market at that time. Lots of folks would argue with me but the simple truth is we do not give Major Distributors enough credit during that time. There was an abundance of talented gunsmiths and machinists in that ERA both in the USA and in Europe that were more than capable of assembling this type of revolver using pre- made parts and machining them to fit. That includes changing and octagon barrel too say a round or even a ribbed barrel! Converting saw handle to birdshead frame. If I was in France and had the time I would look through newspaper archives during that time I'd say 1869- 1875 and see if you can find drawings of this model for sale like the article ( photo'd) that was from the Exposition in France circa 1867? Bet you've never seen this one before?

 

[glowe]

Let me be the first to welcome you to the Forum. I have to say that combining information and pictures of three guns at once is confusing. Let me try to decypher what you have.

Starting with the "009" gun, it looks like it could be a 41 Rimfire, which is very rare and only a handful have been discovered. Is this one a 6 shot? and does it have another serial number 76009?? Let's concentrate on this one first. Can you measure the bore? Of course there were European companies that copied S&W designs and could have made an enlarged counterfeit example in a larger caliber. More details would be welcome.

It is not made up of leftover parts, since there were no other models using that size or stylecylinder and frame. Could be a modification of a standard Model 2. We would like to have more information and pictures of the ends of the cylinder, etc. Also, add an image of both the 009 and a Model 2 for additional size comparisons.

 

[BMur]

41 Rimfire?

Gary,
He wishes it was a 41 Rimfire! So do I ! That would be the 2nd one known to exist. See photo. The frame for the 41 Rimfire is " Way bigger"! And only 4 shot. If only it was! I'd have soo many questions for him!

 

[shouldazagged]

Welcome, bibain. I hope you find the answers to your questions.

 

[bibain]

Actually I posted you the pictures without commentary


1 post
sw modified with next to a n2 old model
barrel markings
The modified SW alone
2 post
Serial numbers on the heel of the frame
The grip on the frame of the n2 old model
the 2 sw that have been modified
3 post
The modified sw and a n1 ½ 2 issue for comparison


To inspect it with a magnifying glass, dismantled, compared with my old model, I confirm that it was made from a n2
According to serial numbers one was manufactured in 1869 and the other in 1870
It is a 6 shots 32rf caliber (not a 41 rf) looking at the pictures the 41rf has the same proportions but respects more the general shape of the second generation tip up
serial number was 76009 but after modification there is only 009 left
I also think that to take the trouble to add a second set of assembly numbers, there should be several copies to work at the same time


I'll post more photos on the numbers and changes

 

[glowe]

So someone rounded the butt-frame, machined flutes in the cylinder, and cut the barrel to 4 1/4" barrel. Lots of work, but makes an interesting pocket revolver. Why, who, and how it was done will most likely remain a mystery. It is certainly not S&W factory work and am most likely went to Europe in original condition. Most likely modified by a private gunsmith with some skills, since the flutes look to be very well done.

Modified Model 2s are not often seen here in the US, but collectors would have little interest in that one, considering the gun's present state. Great conversation piece and most likely still functional if one could only find ammunition.

 

[bibain]

Thank you for the documentation on the 41 rf , I only knew the photo of the book «history of Smith &Wesson»
I send you the photos with the numbers (the 76009 seems to have numbers mismatched)

I have already searched (books, archives, web ), but I have found nothing that would advance my research.
the possibility of modification by French resellers (Ferdinand Claudin , Eugène Lefaucheux etc ..) leaves me skeptical by the absence of signature, the important work and its extra on resale.

The abnormally clean condition of the two barrels (no stain, rare thing on weapons that fired black powder) reminds me of an article saying that unused new guns of which S & W n2 had been stored during the Franco-Prussian War of 1870 and resold much later on the civilian market.

But these remain simple deductions

I will continue my research by browsing the newspapers of these years

A photo of an article presenting the smith & Wesson revolvers at the 1867 World Expo

 

[BMur]

I think the excellent additional photos leaves no doubt that this was converted from a Number 2. No way this is factory work. It could have been performed by most any competent machinist of that era. The work is overall excellent with the cylinder flutes addition but if you look at the barrel you can see the difficulty he had converting the octagon ribbed barrel to a round ribbed barrel? Looking from the breech you can clearly see that it is not evenly machined round. I was thinking about that barrel conversion prior to these photos and thought of how difficult that would be to accomplish perfectly. I'd be willing to bet if you provide a photo looking down the barrel from the muzzle that one could see the obvious conversion. It would be very difficult to get that even I think.

 

[BMur]

Quick follow up? I'm not a machinist. Not claiming to be but I have an industrial drill press in my shop and I have de-burred cylinder chambers and actually changed calibers to save pitted cylinders. 32's to 38's.
Take a close look at the cylinder photo? Notice that shine around each chamber throat at the face of the cylinder? Sorta Looks like a shiny ring? That happens when you run a honning or deburring drill bit through the chamber at low turn speed to polish the chambers. Those rings go away very fast from the face of the cylinder rubbing against the forcing cone when you work the action. Also shooting the gun blows them out pretty fast yet I can clearly see that " Like New" shine.
What I'm saying here is that I honestly think this conversion took place not too long ago!

 

[BMur]

See close up photo of face of cylinder and shiny ring around each chamber? I'll bet the chamber are minty too!

 

[BMur]

Here is more proof that the cylinder conversion work was done recently. Certainly not 149 years ago!
Look closely at the recently milled shiny cylinder flutes as compared to the surface condition? The outer surface is consistent with being 149 years old. Pinprick pitting etc. Now look at the flutes? See close up photo

 

[bibain]

Hello
If I understood your analysis correctly: the modification of the cylinder would it be recent because of the absence of rust in the cylinder flutes? but the modification was made also on the barrel and the frame, which they are oxidized, would it have been modified in two times?
There are some bright rings on the cylinder chamber, but they have not been modified (like all my 32 rf: 0.32inch, the length of the cylinder is also the same)
I think this S & W has suffered surface oxidation on almost all of it, but some more protected areas have been preserved , So, it was probably brushed (thank you, it was not sanded) and superficially reblued.
I would understand a modification of the time of modernization as n1 and n1 ½ but recent work, why? It would be an important job and a precision for not much.
I imagine this almost new S & W wrapped in a cloth and forgotten for years in a chest or drawer
Some details in photos

 

[glowe]

The gun has been fired lots after the flutes were installed since there is evidence pitting near the front of the cylinder. The fact that the rear section of the flutes are pit free indicates the gun was modified sometime later in life. The finish on these guns was near flawless and factory new guns would have a highly polished surface. Your gun shows evidence of overall pitting of the surface and most likely loss of the original finish overall.

I think you trying to find a link that would support the gun was modified when new. Looking at all the work done, I believe that someone wanted a pocket sized gun and had the butt rounded to allow for easier extraction from one's pocket. The factory, a distributor, or government armory would not have plugged the stud hole in the bottom of the stocks, they would have replaced them. The barrel was most likely cut so it would fit better in the pocket, and my guess on the flutes was that it made the gun look more "modern" in the eyes of the owner at the time.

All indications are that the gun was modified quite some time after it was made.

 

[BMur]

It's an interesting piece.

 

[bibain]

In fact, we say the same thing: a later change that no one knows who did it.

In my first post, I tried to present all the possibilities on its transformation, to analyze them to remove the least plausible, with the hope of finding new elements in the forum.
The important additional cost was already noted in my analyzes as well as the possibility of a work done in France mentioned in the letter of authentication

The only things we know for sure are
-It was a s & w n2
- The work is well done
-It had a bad storage but is mechanically perfect
-There are other copies (at least 3 to my knowledge)
-The two copies observed have two sets of assembly numbers.
By deduction, this work could only be done in the workshop (even small quantity) or several copies were dismantled and modified at the same time, these numbers allowing going back with their original elements.
These last two comments excluded any possibility of single modification or amateur work.
I also have trouble admitting that this work dates from the XX century, I do not see the interest because of its outdated design, and continue to think that it was done when the N2 was still successful either in the 1870s, perhaps he did not have the hoped success?

Unfortunately without concrete elements, we can only make assumptions, but I would always be interested in new information about this modified N2

Thank you for the time you have given to study my post

 

[BMur]

Hey Bibain,
I removed my last post because I just noticed something about your No.2 that intrigued me. Take a look at the photos of my various barrels( parts) from a No1 2nd and No 1 3rd and No. 1 1/2 early barrels and No.2 cylinder. Those that are still legible have a "common denominator". A "single set" of numbers and letters?
Ok now check out the photos and my next post and photos that you provided?
Also my newly found opinion of same.

 

[BMur]

Evidence of period alteration!

Ok now if we look closely at the rear of the altered barrel photo you can actually see the matching assembly number 65 both on the frame and on the back of the altered barrel partially concealed by the machining( left side near forcing cone? However! There is now an additional assembly letter and number located below it! Why? Why two sets of numbers? In my newly found opinion this additional set of assembly numbers is in lieu of the alteration and follows a pattern of production often used by manufacturing and shop milling of that era where they actually took the time to apply these numbers to altered and/ or refinished parts. The die stamps are also using Antique style numbers! So, " Shut my mouth"!

So with this information I would find the other two that you mentioned and see if they have the same assembly number on the barrel? Perhaps Z1 and Z2? That would also prove the same shop made them and if they are higher numbers like Z76 then maybe they made a lot more than just a few!

 

[bibain]

Hello
The study of assembly numbers is, in our case, very interesting

I do not know if at S & W, the affixing of assembly numbers respects a certain standard or if it is done at random with only obligation to be the same on the three main parts.

Out of curiosity, I checked the assembly numbers of all my tip up: all are a combination of number and letter, except my n2 : numbers 23 and my n1 1 issue : numbers 4)) .

In the case of my copy (76009)
it is interesting to note that in two places (frame and barrel) the numbers have been partially erased by the modification.
for the barrel , may be that the person responsible for putting them incorrectly estimated the location?

The original assembly numbers have no logic (Z3 , 066 (990) & o cut) We can think of a reassembly from different parts.

The second assembly number is 85 which can be found in several places
(for me the 85 is the second number, that of the modification, because it is affixed to places where s & w does not put them: at the top of the frame, the access hatch, the grips )

The case of my friend's copy (65941) makes more sense, only two sets of numbers, the original assembly numbers 52 and the modification number 63.
I hope I can send you specific photos of these numbers

In either case, the new set of numbers is always put in the same place.

These are all these details, as well as the perfect copy of the two copies, which make me think of a work in a workshop (even small) very professional and very structured.

Unfortunately, the archives concerning this work will be very difficult to find.

 

[bibain]

Here are the pictures of the numbers I forgot to show you
(sn 76009)

 

[BMur]

BIBAIN,
Yeah those numbers are something you need to always provide for evaluation of your example. They represent a very distinct "pattern of production" whether it be factory, Major Distributor or small machine shop of that era? " They all attended the same school"! That's why I was skeptical at first about the time frame of the alteration. I think that you are well aware from your presentation that a later alteration represents very little historical interest from collectors but a period alteration ( especially if a significant run was manufactured) is most definitely " Historically Significant " and translates to a heightened interest which is clearly seen by the number of hits on this thread. Also increased value.
In order to visualize the dynamic of production during that time you must study "Patterns of Production" from All manufacturers of that era including Major Distributors and small shops.
What we now " Must See" is a pattern with the other two known examples. Even if the additional assembly numbers are not the same? There should be a very distinct pattern to prove that they are done at the same shop. Please attempt to acquire numbers seen on the other examples for further evaluation and photos if possible.
The number 63 you mention on your friends example may be the pattern that we are looking for since yours has 65 on the frame? We need a photo " Close up" of the die stamps to compare the numbers. The 6 should be identical!
As far as records?
It's very important to closely photo assembly numbers found on examples having dealers marking on barrels. Die stamps are very often very unique and actually made by machinists at the shops. They can represent " A Signature of that Shop". So we often waste time searching for documents that no longer exist but the physical evidence is right in front of us!

 

[bibain]

here are the pictures of my friend's S & W 65941 numbers
there is no common figure between my assembly number 85 and that of my friend 63, but in view of the rarity of this modification, we may consider that they come from the same workshop.
If I understand your reasoning, we have 4 digits; 8, 5, 6, 3 to serve as a comparison, among them, two have an atypical shape: the 3 whose top is flattened and not bulging and the 5 or it seems to miss the top bar.
It is true that in the absence of archives and other copies to study, this analysis of assembly numbers will be one more element for our research.

Thank you for the time you have given to study my post

 

[bibain]

a montage showing the most readable assembly numbers

 

[BMur]

Dies matching

Bibain,
Could you look at your unaltered No. 2 on the frame under the grips? Where is the number and what is it?
The only possible connection between the two is the location and sequence of the numbers 65 and 63 on the frame under the grips but this might be a factory assembly number.
To be honest I was hoping there was a suffix Z on the back of your friends barrel followed by a number. That would be significant.
Could you also have your friend look closely on the barrel for a Z suffix followed by a number? It could be in a different location like underneath on the flat next to the latch?

 

[BMur]

Shops " Re- finish, machine work numbers"

Bibain,
I just checked out a couple friends unaltered No. 2 Army's and they have the assembly number on the right side lower grip frame. I also zoomed in on yours and can't see a number on the left side grip frame so I'm assuming that Smith & Wesson typically stamped them on the "Right side" grip frame with the matching assembly number.

So I think the 63 and 65 numbers found in the exact same place on the "Upper left grip frame" and having the same size die for each are actually the numbers that you're looking for. I strongly suspect that the shop that made these modified No. 2's stamped those numbers there. This would be their Signature Work! A procedure that they would have followed on all the guns that they actually "machined & refinished".

Now Using those numbers as a guide you now need to search for any and all guns in the No. 1 1/2, No.2, even Mongrels in the 1 1/2 etc that are clearly marked by a distributor in France usually on the barrel top. Ask the owner to please take off the left grip and see if there is a refinish & machined shop stamped number ( These are Not actually assembly numbers) in the exact same place with the exact same die font size and you have yourself solid ground to stand on. You know where to go from there. Find every example you can from that shop and look for those numbers and document each.

 

[bibain]

Hello
I inspected my two n2

The number 65954: w3 at the bottom, right side of the frame, w3 front side of the cylinder, 33 7 (can be exchanged ? )
The number 75803: 23 at the bottom, left side of the frame, 23 front side of the cylinder, 23 barrel
The size of all these marks is 0.06 inch, except the barrel of 65954 (33 7) which is 0.08 inch

Concerning the modified n2 of my friend (65941), there is no Z on the barrel and no marking on the right side of the frame.


I think so :
The numbers posed by S & W would therefore be
-at the bottom, left or right side of the frame
-front side of the cylinder
-barrel
the numbers posed for the transformation would therefore be
-at the top, left side of the frame,
- rear of the cylinder,
- barrel

my work will begin with the census of gunsmiths of the 1870s and study their work. They were numerous at that time.
Thank you