Pre-1899 Hand Ejector Classification

[Elite Armory]

I'm sorry if this question has been asked before but I haven't seen it... I have read that all 1st Model Hand Ejectors are pre-1899 but I have also read that they were in production or being sold until 1903. If this is true then how are all 1st models pre-1899?

Also, is it accurate to say that you can definately tell that it is a 1st model if it has Smith and Wesson and the patent dates on the cylinder?

 

[H. M. Pope]

You may be thinking of the 1896 H E like the one below, it has the patent dates on the cylinder.
Regards
H. M. Pope

 

[deadin]

The answer is that even though they were being cataloged up until 1903, all manufacturing of frames was pre-1899.
The large frame DA top-breaks (44 Russian, 44/40, etc.) were still being offered in the catalogs up until around 1913, but are all considered as antiques. (pre-1899)

S&W just had a lot of them in the vault......

 

[Elite Armory]

I thought the ATF was going off of shipped date. Is this wrong?

Also what are the things to look for to make sure it is a 1st model? Is it only the markings on the cylinder or is there something else?

 

[Hondo44]

I thought the ATF was going off of shipped date. Is this wrong?

Also what are the things to look for to make sure it is a 1st model? Is it only the markings on the cylinder or is there something else?

1st Model (Model of 1896) Hand Ejectors to be clear are .32 caliber. Although the Smith and Wesson and the patent dates on the cylinder clearly indicate 1st models, yes there are many other different things to look for. They are mechanically different in operation and aren't even shaped the same as the 2nd model and all subsequent HEs . Look closely at H. M. Pope's pictures.

The cylinder stop is on top of the cylinder, the sideplate and frame are shaped differently, there is no thumbpiece to open the cylinder, the extractor rod is not locked by a lug under the barrel, the hammer is shaped differently, it has a barrel rib, the barrel is not pinned, etc.

 

[twaits]

ATF goes off ship dates for the 1896s. One shipped in 1898 is considered an antique but one shipped in 1900 would be considered modern or C&R.
They really should call all of them antiques since the frames were all made pre 1899 like they did with the large fram DA topbreaks but they have not at this point. (If anyone knows about how to go about petitioning them to do this it would be a great service to collectors!) Also the serial numbers are all over the place on these so the serial numbers themselves tell you nothing about when the gun was shipped. The only way to know for sure if one is considered an antique in the eyes of the ATF is to have it lettered.

 

[JSR III]

The ATF considers a gun as having been manufactured when the serial number is applied. Unfortunately, S&W did not keep records of manufacture dates (or so we are told) and merely kept records of when guns shipped. Since the second date is later than the first, the ATF has come to accept the shipping date for their purposes when dealing with S&W's.

If however, it is a known fact that all of these frames were manufactured before the antique/modern date cut off, I would think that the ATF would accept them as antiques. If S&W was able to supply records that showed other firearms with frames serial stamped before the cut off date, then I would expect them to be acceptable as antiques as well. Finding such proof or documentation may be the problem.

 

[Elite Armory]

ATF goes off ship dates for the 1896s.

Sorry but I'm a newbie with antiques and am confused by this. What are 1896's?

 

[JSR III]

Twaits is referring to the specific S&W model being discussed in this thread. The model of 1896 is a .32 S&W long caliber revolver that was the first S&W solid frame revolver with a swing out cylinder. There is no thumb latch and the cylinder is released by pulling forward on the extractor rod. The gun was produced from 1896 to 1903, however, it is understood that all of the frames were manufactured and serialized during 1896, hence making them antiques and not subject to modern firearm laws.

Even those that were shipped after the antique/modern date can still be acquired as curio and relics if one has the FFL 03 C&R license. Any firearm, except some military arms, that was shipped before September 23, 1961 is now C&R elligible.

Welcome to the forum.

 

[Elite Armory]

Thanks for everyones help and answers. This is confusing!

What I was hoping was that if I saw a model 1 Hand Ejector for sale, I could safely assume that ATF would look at it as an antique/pre-1899.

However, if I'm reading your responses correctly, this is not the case since even though the frame was made in 1896, ATF basis it on ship date so there really is no way to tell by looking at it. Or is there a way to tell?

 

[mikepriwer]

James

If you've been following the two threads about the first combat
magnum, it seems clear that, around 1955, there were records about
when the gun was completed. I don't know how much earlier, or
later, these records exist, but that is the essence of the argument
that K260003 is the first combat magnum. I'm not disputing that it
was completed first ; the point is that apparently there are records
about when these guns were completed.

On the other hand, I seriously doubt that records exist as to when
the frames were serial numbered. We all know that this is early
in the process; they probably did keep track of the stamping of the
serial numbers, but only for a short period of time, as it was not
important to them.

Regards, Mike Priwer

 

[Hondo44]

Thanks for everyones help and answers. This is confusing!

What I was hoping was that if I saw a model 1 Hand Ejector for sale, I could safely assume that ATF would look at it as an antique/pre-1899.

However, if I'm reading your responses correctly, this is not the case since even though the frame was made in 1896, ATF bases it on ship date so there really is no way to tell by looking at it. Or is there a way to tell?

The only way to tell is to get the shipping date from Roy Jinks, S&W Historian. You can do that with a phone call or forum post if you become a member of the S&W Collectors Assoc.

Although it may be a moot point because it will depend on what the owner, if a private sale, or FFL dealer you're buying it from or shipping it through requires in his opinion or comfort level to cover his butt. If he considers it an antique or not, based on the shipping date (if you have it AND he believes it), will determine how he handles the transaction or the transfer. Some private sellers and/or dealers are so gunshy they will register everything so they can sleep at nite and not worry about the ATF coming down on them.

 

[Elite Armory]

The only way to tell is to get the shipping date from Roy Jinks, S&W Historian. You can do that with a phone call or forum post if you become a member of the S&W Collectors Assoc.

Although it may be a moot point because it will depend on what the owner, if a private sale, or FFL dealer you're buying it from or shipping it through requires in his opinion or comfort level to cover his butt. If he considers it an antique or not, based on the shipping date (if you have it AND he believes it), will determine how he handles the transaction or the transfer. Some private sellers and/or dealers are so gunshy they will register everything so they can sleep at nite and not worry about the ATF coming down on them.

Thank you, that clears it up for me but is not what I wanted to hear. Now it's coming together. So basically they are all technically antiques/pre-1899 BUT ATF does not look at it this way and does not consider some Model One Hand Ejectors antiques because of when they were shipped. That sure does make finding/buying pre-1899 HE's a lot more difficult.

 

[JSR III]

Mike, I have heard about "day" books for years but I have never seen or read one. I understand the shipping date
controversy and know that we have all come to understand that Roy's shipping dates are gospel.

It would seem to me that for production purposes, the factory floor would have to know how many guns were being produced in any given day and the easiest way would be by recording a list of serial numbers or at least a block of serial numbers. Perhaps that information is contained in the day books. Perhaps that information was discarded or not in the records that Roy bought from the Wesson family many years ago. Whatever the answer, it is above my pay grade.

 

[deadin]

FFL dealer you're buying it from or shipping it through requires in his opinion or comfort level to cover his butt.

A number of years ago I picked up a 1st Model American (oil hole) that the dealer insisted I fill out the paperwork on.
I really didn't argue as the asking price was $450.00

 

[glowe]

So basically they are all technically antiques/pre-1899 BUT ATF does not look at it this way and does not consider some Model One Hand Ejectors antiques because of when they were shipped.

I would disagree with that statement in general. I think the BATF does look at the antique issue the same way most collectors do, but S&W has not uncovered information on when frames were manufactured for the Model 1896. The common definition has been stated above and many collectors use the information compiled by Rawles, The Pre-1899 Antique Guns FAQ, by James Wesley, Rawles, Copyright 1992-2009 as the best source out there. His list clearly states that all Model 1896s are considered antiques.

The inclusion of the 1896 is possible because it is known that all frames were manufactured before 1899, but what we do not know is when the frames were serialized. The accepted BATF definition of antiques include the fact that guns are antique if the frame was manufactured and stamped with a serial number before 1899. The problem is that there are no found records that indicate the dates when the Model 1896 frames were stamped with serial numbers, so the debate goes on.

 

[DWalt]

"ATF goes off ship dates for the 1896s. One shipped in 1898 is considered an antique but one shipped in 1900 would be considered modern or C&R."

How can that be the case, as GCA-68 states the following making it very clear that antique status is based upon manufacturing date?

"(16) The term 'antique firearm' means—
" ( A ) any firearm (including any firearm with a matchlock, flintlock, percussion cap, or similar type of ignition system) manufactured in or before 1898..."

Maybe I have missed it, but I don't see anything defining "manufacturing" as necessarily including serial numbering. In fact, I see no definition of "manufacturing" provided at all. Is there any BATFE documentation covering that point? In general, unless a statute specifically provides an inclusive definition of an important word or term, it's up to a court to more precisely define a meaning should the need arise to do so. BATFE cannot arbitrarily say that "manufacturing" means whatever we want it to mean. One other point - there was not even a legal requirement for the application of a SN on any gun back when the Model of 1896 was made.

 

[twaits]

"ATF goes off ship dates for the 1896s. One shipped in 1898 is considered an antique but one shipped in 1900 would be considered modern or C&R."

How can that be the case, as GCA-68 states the following making it very clear that antique status is based upon manufacturing date?

"(16) The term 'antique firearm' means—
" ( A ) any firearm (including any firearm with a matchlock, flintlock, percussion cap, or similar type of ignition system) manufactured in or before 1898..."

Maybe I have missed it, but I don't see anything defining "manufacturing" as necessarily including serial numbering. In fact, I see no definition of "manufacturing" provided at all. Is there any BATFE documentation covering that point? In general, unless a statute specifically provides an inclusive definition of an important word or term, it's up to a court to more precisely define a meaning should the need arise to do so. BATFE cannot arbitrarily say that "manufacturing" means whatever we want it to mean. One other point - there was not even a legal requirement for the application of a SN on any gun back when the Model of 1896 was made.

You may just be right. This posting I made three years ago and I figured that nothing had changed. I based my beliefs on what a lot of respected members here had said in the past that some 1896s were considered antiques because they shipped before 1899 but those that shipped after 1899 were considered modern. But perhaps that is not right. I can't find anything at atf.gov that specifically talks about the M1896, but it is not on the C&R list so it definitely appears that they consider all of them to be pre 1899.
So the bottom line is, this is good news to me and others here as well I'm sure.
Hopefully this is how the atf stands. I'd like to see it specifically in writing somewhere.
Thanks for bringing this up again.

 

[opoefc]

The ATF's rules are written to deal with all firearms, not just S&Ws. Some years ago Roy Jinks sent letters to the ATF to certify that Model 1896s & NM#3 DAs frames were all made before the 1898 cutoff date used by the ATF. Notwithstanding comments above, S&W frames were made by drop forging steel billets and the serial numbers were added to the frames as they were polished to size. The pay system was by piece rate, so a method of counting gun manufactured was required in order to pay the Floor Foremen, who inturn then paid their crews. The Foremen kept daily records in a Day Book, by date and serial number and model of gun manufactured by their crews. S&W factory does not have these Day Books, they are either missing or in the hands of a few collectors. Roy Jinks does not have easy access to them to include the manufacture date and the shipping dates in factory letters, he only has the shipping records, and the ATF relies on those to calculate dates for determination of Antique, C&R, or FFL needs, except for the models that Roy has certified that the frames were made earlier than Dec 31,1898 . Ship dates are the evidence used in Courts as evidence of whether a gun is an antique, or not, as in most cases that's the evidence submitted by the ATF, however should a case depend entirely on a ship date is the compelling evidence, and the manufacture date from a S&W Floor Foremen's Day Book was entered as preceding a ship date, the Day Book entry would trump the ship date. That would have to be provided by testimony of an Expert Witness, providing the Day Book as evidence and certifying thereto. As a side issue, an FFL holder who insists they paper an antique, for a fee, has no defense to a letter to the ATF alleging fraud for monetary reward, and it could get them a black mark for their next audit. Ed.

 

[twaits]

The ATF's rules are written to deal with all firearms, not just S&Ws. Some years ago Roy Jinks sent letters to the ATF to certify that Model 1896s & NM#3 DAs frames were all made before the 1898 cutoff date used by the ATF. Notwithstanding comments above, S&W frames were made by drop forging steel billets and the serial numbers were added to the frames as they were polished to size. The pay system was by piece rate, so a method of counting gun manufactured was required in order to pay the Floor Foremen, who inturn then paid their crews. The Foremen kept daily records in a Day Book, by date and serial number and model of gun manufactured by their crews. S&W factory does not have these Day Books, they are either missing or in the hands of a few collectors. Roy Jinks does not have easy access to them to include the manufacture date and the shipping dates in factory letters, he only has the shipping records, and the ATF relies on those to calculate dates for determination of Antique, C&R, or FFL needs, except for the models that Roy has certified that the frames were made earlier than Dec 31,1898 . Ship dates are the evidence used in Courts as evidence of whether a gun is an antique, or not, as in most cases that's the evidence submitted by the ATF, however should a case depend entirely on a ship date is the compelling evidence, and the manufacture date from a S&W Floor Foremen's Day Book was entered as preceding a ship date, the Day Book entry would trump the ship date. That would have to be provided by testimony of an Expert Witness, providing the Day Book as evidence and certifying thereto. As a side issue, an FFL holder who insists they paper an antique, for a fee, has no defense to a letter to the ATF alleging fraud for monetary reward, and it could get them a black mark for their next audit. Ed.

Well, that said it sounds like it is still best to treat 1896s as modern guns unless you have an archive letter showing it shipped Dec. 31, 1898 or before.