- Joined
- Oct 9, 2010
- Messages
- 1,082
- Reaction score
- 1,605
Registered Magnum Value
- Thread starter Nframe29
- Start date
It would be nice to get the exact measurement of the barrel from the OP; 5.8” as stated in post #1 would make sense if the original 6” barrel was shortened to about the end of the original rib length.
Last edited:
My RM was owned by the New Hampshire State Police. The department sent it and a few others back to the factory to repair and reblue. Mine has a post war barrel that was checkered by the factory to match the frame.
I mentioned "5.8" because a certain "know it all" told me they were 5.8 back then exactly. I generally use rounded off numbers to explain a gun. I may say 6" in a quick description and not 6.5. My original point was being made as it wasnt a short desired barrel. Barrel is exactly 5.9975 with digital mitutoyo calipers. Cut for a pre war rod. I have two extras laying around. Both nickel. I may take brownells nickel stripper and put a pre war rod on it if the letter doesnt mention it. It was sent back twice. May of 52 and June of 60. Sight modification looks factory. No tool marks or anything. Id bet all modifications were done there.
Last edited:
- Joined
- Oct 9, 2010
- Messages
- 1,082
- Reaction score
- 1,605
I looked in the records and I don't see any service invoices for this gun on those dates, but that's not surprising as our repair records are pretty incomplete.
Mike
Comparison with OPs REG 4923 with REG 1530 (a 6"er in my collection)
... and for reference, this is the side profile of a King Reflector Ramp (from another RM):
Nframe29:
First of all - CONGRATS!!! What a fun gun and for the money, it would be in my safe if I had come across it.
Consistent with comments above, my observations after looking at 100's and perhaps more than 1000 pre-war magnums:
1. Post war parts for sure include the rear sight, grips, and extractor rod.
2. The barrel appears to be a post war barrel as well- no large knob cut out (that I can see from the photo), post war large front ramp, and no rebated front sight (that I can see from the photo) i.e. the front of the sight base looks to be flush with the crown of the barrel (not rebated 1/16" - 1/8" like the pre-war front sight bases).
3. Well-used and a super fun shooter!!!
I LOVE THESE KINDS OF GUNS - lots of fun anomalies to investigate and sleuth out.
You have some of the best resources available weighing in on your gun:
Mike (first-model) is a trained historian with a passion for all things S&W, and as a leader in the S&W Historical Foundation, he has access to all of the scanned S&W document archives. He is a great resource to all of us collectors.
Terry (lester357) is the keeper of the SWCA pre-war Magnum and Transitional Magnum databases. He is passionate about collecting and cataloging the current condition of as many of these great guns as possible and he too is a great resource to us collectors.
That both of them have weighed in on this gun, would indicate that your RM (although not a pure specimen) is AN INTERESTING GUN!
Although not in the same league as Mike and Terry, I have a passion for the pre-war and early post war 357 Magnums and have a collection of quite a few of them. In addition, I have collected many photos of these guns over the years and refer to that photo database regularly. Here are some of my observations to Mike and Terry's dialogue above:
Mike:
From the one photo that I see, that barrel does NOT have the cut out for the pre-war large knob. And the front sight ramp base is consistent with a Post War barrel (longer base) and most pre-war ramp bases were King bases. The pre-war Patridge sighted barrels typically had the square base, rather than a ramped base (unless it was a King ramped base). I see this as an early post war replacement barrel (some of which still have the Large knob cut out in the shroud). I would love to see photos of the shroud, and the frame with the grips off.
Terry:
The roll marks on that barrel are more consistent with pre-war roll marks, but not unknown on post war barrels (as noted by some of the ones that we have recently discussed). Roll marks are not even 100% consistent with the magnums of the same era, with slight variances front or back observed regularly.
Lots of rambling from me, that I'll probably edit when I have time to read it again.
Once again - FUN GUN! And Thanks to all for Sharing,
... and for reference, this is the side profile of a King Reflector Ramp (from another RM):
Nframe29:
First of all - CONGRATS!!! What a fun gun and for the money, it would be in my safe if I had come across it.
Consistent with comments above, my observations after looking at 100's and perhaps more than 1000 pre-war magnums:
1. Post war parts for sure include the rear sight, grips, and extractor rod.
2. The barrel appears to be a post war barrel as well- no large knob cut out (that I can see from the photo), post war large front ramp, and no rebated front sight (that I can see from the photo) i.e. the front of the sight base looks to be flush with the crown of the barrel (not rebated 1/16" - 1/8" like the pre-war front sight bases).
3. Well-used and a super fun shooter!!!
I LOVE THESE KINDS OF GUNS - lots of fun anomalies to investigate and sleuth out.
You have some of the best resources available weighing in on your gun:Mike (first-model) is a trained historian with a passion for all things S&W, and as a leader in the S&W Historical Foundation, he has access to all of the scanned S&W document archives. He is a great resource to all of us collectors.
Terry (lester357) is the keeper of the SWCA pre-war Magnum and Transitional Magnum databases. He is passionate about collecting and cataloging the current condition of as many of these great guns as possible and he too is a great resource to us collectors.
That both of them have weighed in on this gun, would indicate that your RM (although not a pure specimen) is AN INTERESTING GUN!
Although not in the same league as Mike and Terry, I have a passion for the pre-war and early post war 357 Magnums and have a collection of quite a few of them. In addition, I have collected many photos of these guns over the years and refer to that photo database regularly. Here are some of my observations to Mike and Terry's dialogue above:
Mike:
From the one photo that I see, that barrel does NOT have the cut out for the pre-war large knob. And the front sight ramp base is consistent with a Post War barrel (longer base) and most pre-war ramp bases were King bases. The pre-war Patridge sighted barrels typically had the square base, rather than a ramped base (unless it was a King ramped base). I see this as an early post war replacement barrel (some of which still have the Large knob cut out in the shroud). I would love to see photos of the shroud, and the frame with the grips off.
Terry:
The roll marks on that barrel are more consistent with pre-war roll marks, but not unknown on post war barrels (as noted by some of the ones that we have recently discussed). Roll marks are not even 100% consistent with the magnums of the same era, with slight variances front or back observed regularly.
Lots of rambling from me, that I'll probably edit when I have time to read it again.
Once again - FUN GUN! And Thanks to all for Sharing,
Last edited:
- Joined
- Oct 9, 2010
- Messages
- 1,082
- Reaction score
- 1,605
I went back through the Historical Foundation stuff that we have digitized, and the only thing I could find for this gun is the original five pages of paperwork from when it was ordered. It was one of nine guns ordered, and the only Registered Magnum in the lot. As I mentioned before, it was ordered with a 6" barrel and a King red post ramp reflector up front and a King #112 bringing up the rear.
There's unfortunately nothing in our records about the factory repairs / rework that was done, but I know from having wandered through the records that the factory was called on to do all sorts of things, and they would generally oblige if people were willing to pay. That said, I'm not the expert on Registered Magnums and defer to some of the others here.
In any event, I think it was an absolute steal at that price. I recently invested a lot more than that for RM 880, which is mint enough to make me very reluctant to take it to the range. It's fun to have a safe queen, but a gun like this could be run pretty hard without any feelings of guilt. There's a lot of enjoyment to be had in that.
If it was me, I'd letter it because I think any RM deserves to be lettered. I don't think the original factory paperwork is going to reveal much more than I've already said, but sometimes a second pair of eyes can spot something that I missed.
Mike
There's unfortunately nothing in our records about the factory repairs / rework that was done, but I know from having wandered through the records that the factory was called on to do all sorts of things, and they would generally oblige if people were willing to pay. That said, I'm not the expert on Registered Magnums and defer to some of the others here.
In any event, I think it was an absolute steal at that price. I recently invested a lot more than that for RM 880, which is mint enough to make me very reluctant to take it to the range. It's fun to have a safe queen, but a gun like this could be run pretty hard without any feelings of guilt. There's a lot of enjoyment to be had in that.
If it was me, I'd letter it because I think any RM deserves to be lettered. I don't think the original factory paperwork is going to reveal much more than I've already said, but sometimes a second pair of eyes can spot something that I missed.
Mike
Last edited:
Thanks Mike. I could not agree more. Every RM needs a letter.
The letter is a significant tangible piece of the history of that specific gun, and something that can be transferred owner to owner, keeping the history alive with any future caretaker. In addition, I believe that each RM needs all the other Historical Records that the S&W Historical Foundation can provide (through a separate request and a small fee).
Last edited:
As you may have noticed, Mike, I letter a lot of guns that some might consider less than as important as an RM...But if I ever score an RM, I may letter it twice just to be sure!...
...BenKyleeMarks
Member
- Joined
- May 8, 2024
- Messages
- 18
- Reaction score
- 16
Even if it's not in pristine condition, if the lockup and endshake are solid and there's no rust or damage, $1,500 sounds like a decent deal, tbh. As for the original grips and finish, those can always be swapped or restored down the line if it's a piece you've been dreaming of adding to your collection.
