S&W Schofield Second Model Civilian Nickel

[BMur]

35 Commercial Model 1 Schofields?

Ed,
Is it possible that the 35 Military inspected and "rejected" model 1 guns were sold to the Commercial market after being inspected at the factory and rejected by the inspector? Awful coincidental that 35 guns rejected "match" the 35 commercial gun number? Spot on!!! See attached Army reference.

Fits like a glove.... Notice also that the Army records list that they actually inspected 3035 frames and rejected 35 of them.

Murph

 

[1891SingleShot]

And here is the rest of the numbered parts. The rear screw on the latch/cylinder retainer is buggered up enough that I didn't attempt to remove it, so you can only see a part of the 8 along with the 349 stamping on the barrel.

 

[1891SingleShot]

The only number that doesn't match is the screw nearest the latch. It appears to be 6786, however if you look at it backwards, you could almost make yourself believe it is 8349 as shown on the last picture.

 

[BMur]

Proof fired and condemned

BMur,

Here's a picture of the rest of the markings you were talking about. The frame, cylinder and bottom of the barrel have these markings. I did not find any on the frame under the grips.

Single shot. Thank You for participating and posting photo's of your Schofield. My research shows a very steady documented pattern of the U.S. inspected Schofields. I'm convinced that your gun was not only inspected by a Military inspector but subsequently rejected for whatever reason. See previous post to Ed with Military records of first models.

This does not in any way detract from it's value. In my opinion it adds to its historical significance as being one of the very few guns that didn't get drafted!

It was then sold to the Commercial Market.

Murph

 

[opoefc]

Murph, Yes, It's quite probable that the 35 rejected frames were used by the factory to fill the gift & special dealer requests for Schofields, as S&W was getting heat from Schofield himself and their dealers for Schofields, so, why not complete 35 guns using the rejected frames for those requests ? As we know, S&W never threw away anything they could reuse somewhere. Those 35 frames were probably rejected before being given serial numbers, and that fits the theory that those gift guns had their own serial range of 1 to 35, as indicated by the two guns, # 6 & #13, currently known to be 1st model civilian guns. ( I notice the rejection of the frames was for "materials" reason, which probably refers to a defect in the forging, which would be before serial numbers were stamped ) We do know that only 3000 1st models were shipped to the Army, not 3035. Also, the A & P stamps on the poster's gun are inspector stamps. Ed

 

[rct269]

On the one hand, this is all very fascinating.

On the other hand, I have great difficulty imagining how a serious collector could reach a conclusion which would support pulling a big wad of money out of his pocket, and putting it down on the table.

I guess I'm really glad I collected stuff with more answers and fewer questions.

Ralph Tremaine

 

[opoefc]

Ralph, I'm glad you're glad but that's how "serious collectors" wind up with rare S&Ws, by research that connects the dots. We pay 5 figures for rare S&Ws that are investments that increase in value over time. Finding answers to the questions adds to the fun of collecting, right ? Ed

 

[BMur]

Research!!!!

You tell um Ed!!


Murph

 

[1891SingleShot]

Thanks all for the education on the Schofield model. I always wanted to own a Schofield and when I saw this one, I felt it was priced fairly. Then when I started looking it over and everything appeared correct and I saw the factory letter verifying the configuration, I was really starting to get interested. Finally, when the owner came down more on his price, that was the deal maker. I'm real glad I purchased it and feel it was a good investment. Thanks again for all the information.

 

[SchofieldKid]

Just finished reading the entire post and learned several interesting things as usual. One question though, did all the Schofields made have the serial number on the cylinder catch screws? I took the screws out on my 2nd model but neither had a number on it. Does this mean they were replaced at some time? Thanks.

 

[BMur]

Serial numbered screws?

I suppose you could say that part or screw in this case was at some point replaced? Or perhaps it was never numbered?
The OP's 2nd model Commercial Schofield is a late serial number so one can assume that they were numbered from early production until late?
However, I don't see a value impact either way. Nor do I personally see a reason to conduct a survey for numbered screws.
Some parts honestly have little impact on value and often there is no way to prove that any of those parts are factory original or replaced at some point.
You can literally repair/ assemble an antique Smith and Wesson with spare parts and there would be no way to tell that they aren't original.
If you started with just a matching frame, cylinder, and barrel with matching latch. I've done it myself only because years ago parts were dirt cheap and there is no way you can tell. So I feel the value is the same if functional and if someone asked me to check the screws for a matching number prior to purchase? I would kindly say, " Thats not gonna happen".
But that's just my opinion.

Murph

 

[SchofieldKid]

Murph- Thanks for the reply, honestly I am not at all worried about the impact of a screw affecting the value of my Schofield,( I'm gonna take it with me!) but just had never heard about serialized screws in a S&W before now. I have heard of this on some European firearms but not an American production gun. An interesting read nonetheless. Thanks.

Steve

 

[captsnapshot]

Very interesting read in deed. I probably will newer be able to get an original like this, it is out of my league. I did however get one of the performance center 2000 ones produced year 2000 in 45 Schofield. Only 2 or 3 of these did find their way to Norway.