Pictures of a 38/44 HD with strange serial number

[DHENRY]

DW makes a strong point concerning the (seeming) missing 'S'.
That initial '6', as Mike states, is a tad different, but I believe it's just evidence of a harder strike.
Neither supports the polished-off 'S', IMHO.
Can't wait to hear the report back on the gun's other numbers!
Don

 

[handejector]

Guys-
I can't believe no one has caught this- THE NUMBER IS UPSIDE DOWN FOR A POSTWAR! That is, on a post war gun, one has the muzzle pointing LEFT when reading the number! That places the S, when present, on the TOE of the frame, NOT the heel.
Also, there was NEVER an S, in my opinion, because the number is centered. When the number has a prefix, the number on a post war gun is offset toward the heel.

I'm no expert on this but the profile of the butt to the grips does not suggest over buffing so as to remove the "S". If you look closely the butt is even to the grips.
DW

I agree, DW, and you and I know that is the original finish on those grips, so they were not sanded down.

 

[DWFAN]

Lunch pail gun?
DW

 

[chillypepper]

looking at the rounds in the cylinder i notice that the chambers don't look counterbored. wish i had the thing in my hands to check on some of this.

 

[Art Doc]

38 Specials were never counter-bored. It's expected that the gun wouldn't have that feature.

I also wondered about the number facing the wrong way and that number could almost be read backwards, no?

 

[chillypepper]

wasn't sure about that (counter bore), don't know much about hd's. and am trying to study this with one book and not my whole library (rest of the books are at the shop)whenever there is somthing weird i just gotta study into it. at least to find out that i'm still stuborn. and i can't make heads or tails of the #'s but i don't beleave we are seeing them upside down (if i understand what you are saying correctly). and this is gonna dumber than any thing but it almost looks like a 3 stamped over somthing as a first didget. if i had to say that it's not correct. i still lean tward those #'s being correct/unaltered. correct for what? i still don't know. won't till we get some more info/picks/#'s.
# 63068, is what i read.

 

[Art Doc]

Possibly the cylinder stamp is 45068 which matches the butt except for the first digit (to me the butt looks like 65068. This would also be a legitimate HD serial number.

The serial should also be on the underside of the barrel. Have you checked that spot? We need a tie-breaker with the cylinder and butt not in agreement.

 

[mikepriwer]

You can pick up the link to that picture of the butt, and open the picture with
another program that will magnify it.

I did that, and it looks like that first digit could be a 3. Looks that way, but
maybe not. If you turn it upside down, that 5 is wrong, so we are looking at it
properly.

Its possible that this frame may have been serial-numbered at the very beginning
of a run of frames, and that the operator set the first digit wrong. He may have
realized the error, and gone back and restamped the wrong frames. That first digit
sure looks to be overstamped.

Later, Mike Priwer

 

[GLL]

Mike:

That is just what I did in my earlier post. It does not show all that well in the photo I posted but does look like it might be a "3" in the Photoshop moniter image when sharpened. That serial number would be one of the VERY earliest HDs though!

Jerry

 

[Art Doc]

And maybe the gun is stolen property with someone trying to alter the serial at some point.

Many possibilities.

 

[Bekeart]

And maybe the gun is stolen property with someone trying to alter the serial at some point.

What are the odds of the person having a set of numeral stamps that were the same style and size as those used at the S&W factory.

Yes it is possible, but unlikely.

Bekeart

 

[1Aspenhill]

Another thing that could help solve the mystery is to remove the sideplate and see if the hammer block is there. Also the hammer will have a notch cut in it to accomodate the hammer block. Don't you love a mystery!

Bill

 

[mikepriwer]

Jerry

Yes - I did notice your earlier comment. Indeed, it does look like a 3, under
magnification. The serial number on the barrel, assuming there is one, should be
interesting, because presumably the refinishing would not have disturbed it.

Bill

First things first - we have to get dk to respond !

Later, Mike Priwer

 

[1Aspenhill]

Mike,
I checked all the N Frame databases in all calibers and there is not a hit for 35068 or S 65068. We will have to wait on DK as you say.
Bill

 

[dkbutler1958]

Gents,

I appreciate your efforts here. I am supplying additional photos to Mike who I have ask to post so you might gain additional insight. There was no 3-4 digit rework stamp under the left grip. Only what looks like a small "H" stamped on the lower left corner. The gun was refinished about 10 years ago from sitting in a leather holster for a couple of decades. Small pitting and some slight rust. The right grip panel has what looks like the same 65068 S/N stamped into it. It doesn't show very well in the photo, so I also took a rubbing to see if that helps. The face of the yoke facing the cylinder has 45068 stamped into it as does the recess where the extractor rod sits. The hammer is stamped REG. U.S. PAT. OFF. Let me know if you need anything else.

Thanks again,

DK

 

[Art Doc]

Either the first number was badly stamped by S&W when they made it or someone over-stamped the first digit. The correct serial clearly seems to be 45068.

Not too many reasons for over-stamping one digit that I can think of.

Except one.

But since people get upset at me when I mention that possibility I won't.

 

[mikepriwer]

Here are two of the latest pictures - showing the serial number in the
extractor housing, and on the rear face of the cylinder.

For whatever reason, that first digit on the butt is an overstamp. This does seem a bit strange, to me.
The grips appear to be 65xxx . Maybe the frame was originally 65xxx, in error. A 4 was over-stamped on the
6, but when the grips were fit, the fitter thought it was 6xxxx, and stamped the grips that way .

DK sent two other pictures, but these two are the better ones.

Later, Mike Priwer

 

[dkbutler1958]

If it is 45068 for the S/N, then what would be the approximate age?

 

[chillypepper]

Originally posted by Bekeart:

And maybe the gun is stolen property with someone trying to alter the serial at some point.

What are the odds of the person having a set of numeral stamps that were the same style and size as those used at the S&W factory.

Yes it is possible, but unlikely.

Bekeart

odds are pretty good. the only one in my set thats not s&w correct is the "&" stamp. and i havn't found an iron cross stamp yet. but then i havn't looked for one.

 

[Art Doc]

Probably late 1934 or early 1935.