New Model No. 3 ? Need some help...

[thadheth]

Purchased this well worn ("abused" is probably more accurate) revolver - just cannot resist low serial numbers (3831 in this case) and somewhat unique (ivory) grips. The barrel is the common 6.5", and it has the 2-line patent markings with the last being the 1871 "Reissue" date. Serial numbers match on the butt, cylinder, and cylinder latch. There are no other markings that I can find. I believe it is .44 S&W Russian, although I do not have any cartridges on hand other than a .44 S&W American which fits well (and which, if I understand it correctly, should fit since it is very slightly smaller than the S&W Russian). Some sources of information indicate that there was quite a bit of overlap in serial numbers for variations of this gun. My questions:
1. Am I correct that this is a New Model No. 3?
2. With the low serial number, was it possibly one of those that may have been sent to Turkey or Japan?
3. Is it worthy of a factory letter?
4. Approximate date of manufacture/leaving factory?
5. Was $360 a fair price for this old beater?
Thanks - and any other insights about this gun would be appreciated.

 

[Wiregrassguy]

Looks like a new Model #3 to me...short ejector housing, round butt. Are the charge holes bored straight through or do they have a shoulder? If straight through, they likely are for the American cartridge.

 

[opoefc]

Yes, It's a New Model # 3, has "character" and worth the price for the parts alone. A factory letter would probably show a shipping to a dealer who probably added the ivories, but would verify the caliber for you. Your choice. Ed.

 

[thadheth]

Thank you, gentlemen. Yes, shouldered charge holes, so it certainly appears to be .44 Russian (.44 special cartridges also fit neatly, albeit not all the way). Thanks again.

 

[mmaher94087]

To my eyes, I believe the stocks are bone. It's still a nice NM#3 even with the 'challenged' finish. This is another case of "If this gun could only talk".

 

[iby]

If it works, $360 is a great price.
Doesn't look refinished to me and it is early (longer ejector housing)

 

[raljr1]

I paid nearly twice that for re-nickeled one with mechanical issues, so your price looks pretty good to me.

 

[thadheth]

To my eyes, I believe the stocks are bone. It's still a nice NM#3 even with the 'challenged' finish. This is another case of "If this gun could only talk".

You are most likely correct that these stocks are bone. I know next to nothing about antique ivory and bone grips -especially how they age and wear. Here are a couple of pictures. If anyone has additional insight to help me identify these in the future, I'd surely appreciate it.

 

[thadheth]

To my eyes, I believe the stocks are bone. It's still a nice NM#3 even with the 'challenged' finish. This is another case of "If this gun could only talk".

You are most likely correct that these stocks are bone. I know next to nothing about antique ivory and bone grips -especially how they age and wear. Here are a couple of pictures. If anyone has additional insight to help me identify these in the future, I'd surely appreciate it.

 

[gmborkovic]

What a righteous old girl. A really neat snag. It sure was not sitting on the couch playing video games.

 

[mm93]

With bone you usually see what looks like the rings on a tree stump on the bottom of the butt material. Ivory has a smooth look to the end grain with no figure or rings.
Those are in tough enough shape it's hard to say if they're ivory or bone for me.

 

[Jaxenro]

Ivory has a grain like fine grained wood you can typically see it on the butt especially where it shows as tight concentric circles

Bone doesn't have a grain but has Haversian canals - little pores that blood flows through they usually show as small pits and dips in older handles. They run parallel to the long surface and usually unlike grain have a beginning and ending

Ivories grain will usually run from one end to the other of the handle like cutting a slice off a tree but like a tree it also depends on how it is cut for how the grain pattern is. Typically handles are cut parallel to the long section of the tusk and not across it

Haversian canal - Wikipedia

 

[mmaher94087]

I'll again venture that the stocks are bone BUT picture #3 in post #8 makes me lean toward horn or antler. That photo shows the tapered interior of antler or possibly horn. Ivory won't have that void unless carved out. I see no indication of any carving. Both antler and horn have a hollow center like what photo #3 shows.

 

[thadheth]

I'll again venture that the stocks are bone BUT picture #3 in post #8 makes me lean toward horn or antler. That photo shows the tapered interior of antler or possibly horn. Ivory won't have that void unless carved out. I see no indication of any carving. Both antler and horn have a hollow center like what photo #3 shows.

Thank you for reviewing this again - it seems like the groove on the back might be the best indicator - so, if anyone asks, I'll just say "probably stag or horn."
And thank you to the others for the insights about ivory vs. bone. Very helpful.