Pre Model 10

[matrsnot]

I acquired a S&W .38 revolver. 5" barrel. No model number on it. Looks like a Model 10.
Serial Number C1999XX
not sure what it is worth. Not sure when it was manufactured. Fantastic condition. Was told it belonged to a Constable here in Missouri many years abo.

 

[Absalom]

I acquired a S&W .38 revolver. 5" barrel. No model number on it. Looks like a Model 10.
Serial Number C1999XX
not sure what it is worth. Not sure when it was manufactured...

Likely 1952. Indeed a true pre-Model 10 M&P.

Is the front sight ramped or half-moon?

For value, you need to post some photos.

 

[Muley Gil]

I really like 5" revolvers.

 

[Baltimoreed11754]

Have a couple Pre Model 10s. Like the bigger square butt frame over the round butt. Like the 2 inch Official Police over a Detective Special too. Here’s a project bbl change from a longy to a shorty. Haven't gotten around to sending it off yet.

 

[deadin]

Pre Model 10?? Does that make an actual Model 10 a "Post M&P"??

 

[Baltimoreed11754]

In 1957 S&W dropped the M&P designation and switched to a numeric designation so before 1957 it’s a M&P or pre Model 10 but after 1957 it’s a Model 10 or a ‘post M&P’. Don’t think that nomenclature will catch on though.

 

[deadin]

Pre Model 10?? Does that make an actual Model 10 a "Post M&P"??

Sorry, I forgot the ""

 

[Absalom]

Pre Model 10?? Does that make an actual Model 10 a "Post M&P"??

Simply, no.

The Model 10 retained the Military & Police label after getting the model number.

No eye roll warranted

 

[Baltimoreed11754]

Now I’m really confused.

 

[JP@AK]

matrsnot

Your revolver is a .38 Military & Police model. At that serial number, the best guess we can make regarding the ship date is late 1951 or sometime in 1952. They were not shipped in serial order, so a letter from Dr. Jinks is needed for precision.

Absalom is correct. In 1957, model numbers were assigned to each of the lines in the S&W catalog. The .38 M&P was given the Model 10 designation. But the names remained. So, the M&P became the M&P Model 10, as shown in his picture of the accompanying paper. Here's another example, in this case the K-38 Masterpiece.

Model numbered guns started leaving the factory in 1958.

 

[Absalom]

As for the “pre-Model 10” term, collectors generally apply that to those M&Ps which are technically identically to the Model 10, but were manufactured before the MOD 10 model number started to be stamped.

So the starting point is the last prior major engineering change, the adoption of the short-action hammer in 1948. M&Ps manufactured during the following decade until 1958 are considered pre-models.

It needs to be kept in mind that this is purely collector speak after the fact, for quick reference, nothing official. If you peruse the auction sites, you can find revolvers back to the first Model 1899 offered as pre-Model 10s. That‘s not “wrong”, just unhelpful.

 

[JP@AK]

As for the “pre-Model 10” term, collectors generally apply that to those M&Ps which are technically identically to the Model 10, but were manufactured before the MOD 10 model number started to be stamped.

I have always found this to be a little bit humorous. In fact, they are not "identical." From 1948 until 1956, they still had five screws in the frame. By the time the Model 10 appeared, they only have four.

However, using the advent of the "high speed" hammer, in March, 1948, is an appropriate cutoff, if we must use the term "pre-model 10." Personally, I prefer to not use it, but I don't criticize those who do. I'm just not a big fan of anachronisms, that's all.

 

[Absalom]

I have always found this to be a little bit humorous. In fact, they are not "identical." From 1948 until 1956, they still had five screws in the frame. By the time the Model 10 appeared, they only have four.

Definitely. There is also the change to the shape of the front sight.

But those are cosmetics. Note that I said “major engineering change”. I’ve gotten in trouble before for disrespecting the screw count, but I still think it’s less significant than even the ramped front sight

 

[JP@AK]

But those are cosmetics.

Note that I said “major engineering change”

I don't think I'd agree that the sight and the screw are merely "cosmetic" changes. They are actually functional, at least at some level. Eliminating the screw did involve a manufacturing change order (actually everything did). Obviously, it isn't as significant as the new hammer design - on that we would be in perfect agreement. But after a hundred years, it was a notable change in the design of the hand ejector revolvers.

I’ve gotten in trouble before for disrespecting the screw count, but I still think it’s less significant than even the ramped front sight.

The front sight change, of course, involved an improvement in the visual sight picture. Hence, that one is clearly functional, not merely for the sake of appearance.

Of course, all of this is just chatter - comparing notes and expressing opinions about various points. It's part of what I love about the SWCA and this Forum. Thanks for the interaction, my friend.

Edit:

after a hundred years

Should have written, "half a hundred years."

 

[Baltimoreed11754]

I may be odd but the earlier rounded front sights of the Colt and Smith revolvers make all the difference in the world to me. I understand that they are not as conducive to accurate shooting but boy do they look good. I also have never cared much for the horns of the later Smith grips preferring the checkered medallion grips with rounded tops. Guess I’m a 1940s gumshoe trapped in 2021 with a broke down time machine. But I’ve got the falcon.