Now that a 2nd one has turned up, anyone know of others?

[Art Doc]

A forum member mentioned that he has one of the Utah HP RMs and we communicated via email and he does indeed have one exactly the one I bought last year.

I just realized that I forgot to ask him if his has the correct hammer.

Anyway, he got it from a shop in Texas around 1979 so they must be out there. When I bought mine the seller suggested that only 2-3 were known to collectors. Anyone happen to know the whereabouts or history of any of the 50 RMs purchased by the Utah Highway Patrol? They are readily identified by the UHP #XX (1 to 50, I presume, mine is #27 and the other member has #19) on the side plate.

Anyone seen one or know about one?

 

[Art Doc]

A forum member mentioned that he has one of the Utah HP RMs and we communicated via email and he does indeed have one exactly the one I bought last year.

I just realized that I forgot to ask him if his has the correct hammer.

Anyway, he got it from a shop in Texas around 1979 so they must be out there. When I bought mine the seller suggested that only 2-3 were known to collectors. Anyone happen to know the whereabouts or history of any of the 50 RMs purchased by the Utah Highway Patrol? They are readily identified by the UHP #XX (1 to 50, I presume, mine is #27 and the other member has #19) on the side plate.

Anyone seen one or know about one?

 

[Art Doc]

Really? With all of the accumulated knowledge on RMs represented here nobody has even heard of other UHP guns?

Here's a photo from around 1939 of some Utah troopers at inspection presenting their RMs.

 

[Art Doc]

OK, now I'm starting to think that it's not that nobody has any info but that nobody wants to talk to me.

I won't bite.

 

[jphendren]

Saxon,

The one that you have is the only one that I have ever seen or heard of. I believe that they are fairly scarce.

Jared

 

[CelticSire]

Originally posted by SaxonPig:
OK, now I'm starting to think that it's not that nobody has any info but that nobody wants to talk to me.

I won't bite.

Now, Dr. Pig, I'm always more than happy to converse with you, but I don't know a thing about the UHP RMs. But a picture of your's sure would be nice.

 

[Art Doc]

SGT127 has an identical gun (well, his is a little nicer and it does have the correct hammer while mine does not) inscribed #12. He bought his in a Texas shop in 1979 and mine came from the late Garbrecht collection and I don't know where he got it. Letter says 50 were bought by the UHP but his and mine are the only two that anyone has apparently seen.

 

[epidoc]

First thanks for the picture of your UHP Rm. I live in Salt Lake City and belong to the Utah Gun Collectors. I've not seen or heard of a UHP RM here in Utah. My gun show table buddy bought a pre-Model 28 with UHP markings at the SL gunshow. Condition was about 99%. The seller had no idea where it came from.
By the wy the pistols in the picture appear to have 6 inch barrels and the one you showed has a 4 or 5 inch barrel. Wonder why?

 

[Sgt 127]

Hi, can I join in?

 

[jphendren]

I believe that they were all shipped with 6" bbls and then were later cut down to 4" for some reason. Nice RM's guys!! Sgt 127's gun has the correct hammer but Saxon's has the correct stocks.

Jared

 

[j38]

Sweet Mags! - both of you. I wish I could add something more than "I wish I had a UHP RM". Thanks & Regards, Jerry

 

[Art Doc]

The UHP bought 50 of them with 6" barrels in 3 shipments spread out over a couple of years. After the war they were returned to S&W for chopping to 4" and refinishing. Apparently they didn't go back all at once as mine has a 1948 rework date and SGT127's is marked 1952 (if I recall correctly).

They remained in service until 1954 or 1955 when they were replaced with 3.5" Post-War Magnums. Driheat has one of these guns and it is also inscribed with UHP label. I think mine may have seen more post-refinishing service than SGT127's and that's why his is nicer.

Like I said, I have no info on my gun's history before it was purchased from Gary Garbrect's estate. I don't know if individual officers kept them, or if they were sold, or returned to S&W in trade on newer guns. One turned up in a Texas shop and the other in the collection of an advanced collector. That's all I know.

Here's another period photo. The RMs were used in competition. Those holsters don't look real smooth by modern standards, do they?

 

[HABU]

Nice revolvers, fellows! Aren't pre war magnas a thing of beauty?!

 

[Art Doc]

I'll just keep adding stuff to this thread until maybe somebody comes along who has additional info.

I reviewed the letter for this gun and noticed it said that the 50 UHPs were sent in 4 shipments. What struck me was that all the guns had consecutive registration numbers. Not a string of 50, but all the guns in each shipment were numbered in order.

Is this routine with departmental purchases of RMs? Or does the fact that Roy felt moved to mention this mean it's unusual?

 

[jphendren]

I just realized that I forgot to ask him if his has the correct hammer.

I can tell from his photo that it does. If you look closely at the side of the hammer spur near the tip, you can see where the transition from concentric grooves to smooth surface takes place. At least on my 22" monitor I can see it.

Jared

 

[Sgt 127]

According to my letter: "This revolver was one of six units ordered for the Utah Highway Patrol. They were stamped on the sideplate "Utah Highway Patrol" and accompanied by a number from 10-15."

So, I would guess there were six guns in this shipment.

 

[Art Doc]

In my letter Roy said that he couldn't find any info on the second shipment (guns marked 10-15) but apparently he found it in time for your letter.

Yes, the first delivery was 9 units, the 2nd was 6 (your #12 was in here), the 3rd was only 3 guns (#16-18) and the 4th and last shipment was for 32 (#19-50 and my #27 was in this batch.

I don't know if they ordered the guns like this or if the order was for 50 and S&W shipped them as they were completed.

Roy also said that the first 9 were sighted with 38 Special ammo and the rest were requested to be sighted with 357 Magnum loads. I guess they were not sure at first if they really wanted to go with the Magnum power? I have read that when the 357 was new the advertising hyped it so much that many shooters were actually afraid of the recoil. Prior to buying the RMs the UHP had been packing 2nd Model 44 Specials so it's not like they weren't accustomed to big guns and heavy calibers.

 

[Lenshappy]

Nice revolvers gents, and, great history lessons. Thanks for all of your input!

 

[BUFF]

Being a native Utahn, and a lawman, I'd love to have a UHP RM, if any of you decide to let one go.

Factory .44 Special ammunition is a *****-cat to shoot, a 246 grain round nose lead bullet at about 700-750 fps from a revolver. The Magnums must have been a totally new experience!

I have one of the UHP .44 Specials.

 

[jphendren]

#12 doesn't look like it has been fired since it was refinished. I would put some pre-war Magnas on it ASAP.