Some 1902 'M&P' Questions

[Oyeboteb]

Hi everyone!

Recently got a 1902 in Nickel, had to soak for three days in Kerosene to safely get the Stocks off and Side Plate walked out, I expect it had sat without use for a very long time, old Lube was gummy as rosin or had turned to hard Wax and all in all was dry as a Bone inside. I cleaned and Lubed and Mechanically it seems about as new...super smooth in SA or DA, fairly stout DA pull, and perfect lock up.

Was mine was made toward the end of the production of the '02s? - Serial Number is 36082

I would like to know more about the '02s, so I have a few questions -

1 ) What serial Number range all told, did the 1902s occupy?

2 ) Were any 1902s made with the Square Butt?

3 ) Does anyone have a link to a Parts schematic for the 1902 ( or the 1899 ) which would have the names of the parts, since some of the parts of course were changed with the advent of the 1905 Mechanism.

Thanks!

Hosted on Fotki

Hosted on Fotki

Hosted on Fotki

 

[jebstuart]

According to SCSW 4th,
1902 serial range: 20976 - 33803 (1902 - 1903)
1902 1st change: 33804 - 62449 (1903 - 1904)

I have a 1902 1st change, target, square butt, pic attached. Some will call it a 1905 because its a SB but many, including me, disagree.

 

[Oyeboteb]

Thank you Jeb!

Nice to see your '02 Target AND to see an '02 with the Square Butt..!

As my big S & W Book is on the other side of the Country, can you tell me what the 1902 "first change" was about?

What was changed?

 

[jebstuart]

Thank you Jeb!

I do not see any picture though, of your '02 Target with the Square Butt...so picture maybe did not post.

Thanks for letting me know. I think I fixed it.

 

[handejector]

I have a 1902 1st change, target, square butt, pic attached. Some will call it a 1905 because its a SB but many, including me, disagree.

You better be gone when Mike P gets here!


Kidding. I stick with the old Neal & Jinks classes also because they tell me what the gun is mechanically. I can say RB or SB before they can get their protests typed. They can scratch 1905 on their desk or wall if it makes em feel better.

 

[jebstuart]

You better be gone when Mike P gets here!

I know - I'm looking for a place to hide right now!
Seriously, I do understand his opinion and respect it. I learn from him every time I read one of his posts. Whew - now, after I find a good hiding spot, I'll wash my nose.

 

[gordonrick]

Nice find!
I've got my eye on a 5" 1902 RB with close serial number from early 1904 (best guess). Someone posted a bunch of pictures in the "Inside a 1902" thread (notable threads index) but the links are broken.

Jeb - I was checking out those "smooth" stocks thinking, "Wow those look great". Looking closer I can see the checkering. They have certainly seen some wear. The one I'm looking at has a set of later square butt 50' or 60's era magnas that were cut and sanded to fit. The shape is a bit too square-ish, but at least they did a decent job on them.

 

[Oyeboteb]

Am I wrong to suppose that the absence of the famed "5th Screw", being the one we find directly in front of the Trigger Guard on the underside of the Frame, would easily distinguish an '1902', from the subsequent '1905'?

Or, are there "Five Screw" examples of what otherwise is technically ( somehow or other ) a '1902'?

I am not up to speed on the controversy.

Or I am surprised there would even be any, regarding what is an '02, vis a vie, an '05.

I want to get this figured out..!

 

[PALADIN85020]

My paternal grandfather owned this Model 1902 - it shows a lot of use and a probable re-nickel job. As a dry goods store owner in northern Kentucky, he carried it in a shoulder holster under his jacket on his trips to make deposits in a nearby bank. When he died, my grandmother kept it as a house gun. When she passed in 1975, I inherited it.

It's worth noting that this model has no effective hammer block, so if it's dropped with a round under the hammer, it can definitely go off if the gun lands on the hammer. Here is a photo of the internals on my grandfather's example, which differ quite a bit from most later revolvers. Note the flat-faced "rubbing studs" on the hammer and trigger which served to reduce friction. That's a nicety that no longer exists in modern guns.

John

 

[DWalt]

It appears to be chambered in .38 Special. 36082 would date its shipment to probably around early 1904 - 353xx shipped in 1/04 and 375xx shipped in 2/04. The Models of 1902 and 1905 continued to be called that until around 1915. After that they were both called M&Ps by S&W - either square butt or round butt. Just how many M1902s were made is difficult to say, but probably the majority of K-frames made in 1905 and later were M1905s (with the square butt). Someone may know the answer, but I do not. There were no square butt M1902s. As should be well recognized by now, S&W considered all M1902s to have a round butt, and all M1905s to have a square butt - until S&W started calling all of them M&Ps (round or square) only in around 1915, dropping the "Model of 19xx" nomenclature. Note that both M1902s and M1905s were chambered in .32-20 and .38 Special, but in different serial series.

The dual-caliber barrel stamp for .38 Special revolvers continued until around SN 12xxxx-13xxxx, ca. 1908.

 

[Oyeboteb]

Thank you DWalt,

Indeed, Barrel Legend says "38 S & W Special & U S Service Ctg's"

Sorry I forgot to mention this..!

So....how does the famed "5th Screw" figure in to distinguishing a 1902, from a 1905?

Are there 1902s which have the "5th Screw"?

So that a "4 Screw" example, if having a Square Butt, would be said to be a '1905' by virtue of it's Square Butt?

Or..?

 

[Muley Gil]

Thank you Jeb!

Nice to see your '02 Target AND to see an '02 with the Square Butt..!

As my big S & W Book is on the other side of the Country, can you tell me what the 1902 "first change" was about?

What was changed?

According to the SCSW 3rd, the barrel thread of the 1st change was increased in diameter and the yoke and yoke cut were changed as well.

 

[Oyeboteb]

According to SCSW 4th,
1902 serial range: 20976 - 33803 (1902 - 1903)
1902 1st change: 33804 - 62449 (1903 - 1904)

I have a 1902 1st change, target, square butt, pic attached. Some will call it a 1905 because its a SB but many, including me, disagree.

So, does your Revolver then have the "5th Screw" as they say? Or...not?

 

[handejector]

So, how does one positively distinguish the 1902, from the 1905 Revolvers?

Is the "4th Screw" THE deciding factor?

Or..?

In the N&J system, the answer is yes, the addition of the triggerguard screw is good enough.


The 1902/1905 Contraires insist that anything with a RB is a 1902, and anything with a SB is a 1905, and they'll stake themselves to the ground and die on the spot before they'll say anything else!

 

[handejector]

According to the SCSW 3rd, the barrel thread of the 1st change was increased in diameter and the yoke and yoke cut were changed as well.

It is easy to tell a 1902 and a 1902-1st Change apart.
The 02 barrel does not flare where it meets the frame.
The 02-1st barrel is the first one with the flare at the rear of the barrel.

 

[Oyeboteb]

According to the SCSW 3rd, the barrel thread of the 1st change was increased in diameter and the yoke and yoke cut were changed as well.

Thank you Muley Gil..!

I notice also, that between my example, and PALADIN85020's example, mine has the Bolster or enlarged aspect to the rear of the Barrel where it meets the Frame, and his example does not, so obviously a change occurred at some point between our Serial Numbers for that aspect...but that may not have qualified as a change of note for the nomenclature or enumerated changes.

 

[Oyeboteb]

In the N&J system, the answer is yes, the addition of the triggerguard screw is good enough.


The 1902/1905 Contraires insist that anything with a RB is a 1902, and anything with a SB is a 1905, and they'll stake themselves to the ground and die on the spot before they'll say anything else!

Ohhhhhhhhkay, now it is coming back to me!

Lol..

Been a while since I was on the Forum here, but now I am starting to remember some of this!

 

[Oyeboteb]

It is easy to tell a 1902 and a 1902-1st Change apart.
The 02 barrel does not flare where it meets the frame.
The 02-1st barrel is the first one with the flare at the rear of the barrel.

Very nice!

Thank you handejector!

This is a very good Thread for me, and my interest to understand this Model better.

 

[Muley Gil]

It is easy to tell a 1902 and a 1902-1st Change apart.
The 02 barrel does not flare where it meets the frame.
The 02-1st barrel is the first one with the flare at the rear of the barrel.

Lee, would you believe I knew that?

Back in the late '90s, I worked part time in a gun/pawn shop. It was part of the Birmingham Pistol Parlor, when they had several stores. We had several 1899s, both .38 special and .32-20, in stock. At that time, I turned my nose up at them, because I KNEW they couldn't have been as good as the newer S&Ws with the barrel lug.

 

[Oyeboteb]

My paternal grandfather owned this Model 1902 - it shows a lot of use and a probable re-nickel job. As a dry goods store owner in northern Kentucky, he carried it in a shoulder holster under his jacket on his trips to make deposits in a nearby bank. When he died, my grandmother kept it as a house gun. When she passed in 1975, I inherited it.

It's worth noting that this model has no effective hammer block, so if it's dropped with a round under the hammer, it can definitely go off if the gun lands on the hammer. Here is a photo of the internals on my grandfather's example, which differ quite a bit from most later revolvers. Note the flat-faced "rubbing studs" on the hammer and trigger which served to reduce friction. That's a nicety that no longer exists in modern guns.

John

That is so nice to have such meaningful History!

Does yours have the tiny little Patent dates on the bottom rounded outside edge of the left Hard Rubber Stock?

( Mine does...I'll post a picture further down, I was surprised it has them. )

Thank you for the reminder about the no Hammer Block on these.

I had forgotten that, and I appreciate being reminded.

Mid 1980s I CCW'd a different '02 for some years ( which I still have ), .38 Special, and I always had Six Loaded, never gave it a thought...and I likely did not even know that.

Oh well, "Don't drop 'em" regardless, but especially don't drop the '99s and '02s..!

 

[DWalt]

The standard references say that the 1902-first change began at SN 33804. So yours should be a first change.

 

[jebstuart]

So, does your Revolver then have the "5th Screw" as they say? Or...not?

No, my SB 1902 has no 5th screw (cylinder bolt stop screw) at the trigger guard. That's what the folks on our team (there are SB 1902's team) use to distinguish the 1905. The TG screw was an engineering change that created the 1905, to us. The other team uses the butt shape relying on S&W sales department nomenclature. I believe those are the two teams differing positions. The 1902 1st change includes the barrel shape or enlargement at the frame.

 

[Oyeboteb]

The standard references say that the 1902-first change began at SN 33804. So yours should be a first change.

Indeed it is..!

Has the Barrel Bolster...

Thank you DWalt!

 

[Absalom]

No, my SB 1902 has no 5th screw (cylinder bolt stop screw) at the trigger guard. That's what the folks on our team (there are SB 1902's team) use to distinguish the 1905. The TG screw was an engineering change that created the 1905, to us. The other team uses the butt shape relying on S&W sales department nomenclature. I believe those are the two teams differing positions. The 1902 1st change includes the barrel shape or enlargement at the frame.

I don't see this as much of a team thing, as if this were a competition.

Using anachronistic collector terminology based on technicalities can have certain advantages in specific circumstances. That's why the whole "change" thing was invented in the first place, long after the fact.

But calling the guns what they were called by the people who made them, sold them, and bought and used them is more practical in most situations. Reducing this to the "sales dept." to give it less weight is a sleigh of hand unsupported by any record.

Absent proof to the contrary, the company, not just the sales department, used the butt shape to distinguish the 1902 from the 1905, until the end of WW I, when it all went away. So did the retailers who sold the guns. And therefore most likely the customers. In other words, pretty much everybody who mattered. And that's what matters most.

 

[DWalt]

This sort of discussion comes up with great frequency. It just won't die. I think using S&W's own well-documented terminology makes a great deal more sense than using an arbitrary and artificial nomenclature system developed by some early collectors which came into being 20 years after the last M1902s and M1905s came off the assembly line. But this is America - and everyone is entitled to use whatever identification system they are more comfortable with.

 

[Oyeboteb]

I don't see this as much of a team thing, as if this were a competition.

Using anachronistic collector terminology based on technicalities can have certain advantages in specific circumstances. That's why the whole "change" thing was invented in the first place, long after the fact.

But calling the guns what they were called by the people who made them, sold them, and bought and used them is more practical in most situations. Reducing this to the "sales dept." to give it less weight is a sleigh of hand unsupported by any record.

Absent proof to the contrary, the company, not just the sales department, used the butt shape to distinguish the 1902 from the 1905, until the end of WW I, when it all went away. So did the retailers who sold the guns. And therefore most likely the customers. In other words, pretty much everybody who mattered. And that's what matters most.

Thanks Absalom for these further in depth elaborations..!

What an interesting conflict!

I can see both side's orders of reasoning, and, I can not imagine a mutually agreeable solution, or a 'twain shall meet', which would satisfy both sides.

However...to my own mind anyway, if the distinction between 1902 and 1905 were to be based solely on the Round Butt verses Square Butt, I have to wonder - how would one respect and state the 'changes' position or status ( 3rd change, 4th change, 5th change, etc ) represented in an example of a Round Butt K Frame made in 1914, 1921 or 1939?

Eeeeek!

 

[jebstuart]

...Reducing this to the "sales dept." to give it less weight is a sleigh of hand unsupported by any record.

I honestly wasn't using the term "sales department nomenclature" to degrade the butt shape position. But I think we can agree that the two models are not "identical". The 1902 is a pre 5 screw, 4 screw, there are SB 1902's, RB 1905's and your attachments are in fact "sales" advertising literature. But, I respect the RB/SB opinion. Using 1902 SB is just my choice.

 

[DWalt]

Thanks Absalom for these further in depth elaborations..!

What an interesting conflict!

I can see both side's orders of reasoning, and, I can not imagine a mutually agreeable solution, or a 'twain shall meet', which would satisfy both sides.

However...to my own mind anyway, if the distinction between 1902 and 1905 were to be based solely on the Round Butt verses Square Butt, I have to wonder - how would one respect and state the 'changes' position or status ( 3rd change, 4th change, 5th change, etc ) represented in an example of a Round Butt K Frame made in 1914, 1921 or 1939?

Eeeeek!

Very simple. Don't use the "changes" - They are also inventions of collectors done long after the fact, and never used originally by S&W. Go by just the SN. That will date the gun and by reference tell you all you need to know. I detest using "changes" precisely because they are so arbitrary. I am particularly irritated by calling an M&P made in 1921 or 1939 a "Model of 1905, 4th Change" when it is no such thing. It is an M&P made in 1921 or 1939. However, many collectors continue to use the Model of 1905, 4th Change nomenclature in reference to any M&P made from WWI until WWII began. Another of my detestations is the term "Transition" (which I refuse to use) but I won't go into that now.

 

[Bacon]

jebstuart - Have you confirmed what date your square butt '02 shipped? That would help identifying it, or am I missing something.

 

[Oyeboteb]

Very simple. Don't use the "changes" - They are also inventions of collectors done long after the fact, and never used originally by S&W. Go by just the SN. That will date the gun and by reference tell you all you need to know. I detest using "changes" precisely because they are so arbitrary. Another of my detestations is the term "Transition" (which I refuse to use) but I won't go into that now.

Okay...I can understand that, and it makes sense.

Indeed, in any area of collecting, Old Automobiles, Guns, Metallic Wood Working Planes, almost anything where a given basic "model" changed in various ways over it's production Life, among Collectors, there does tend to evolve a vocabulary which endeavors to distinguish various 'changes' throughout a given item's continuity of production, and these terms of course do not always, or necessarily, or even sometimes at all, co-respond to anything the Manufacturer had used term wise, in describing the products.

I myself do not find these collecting terms to in any way ignore or disrespect the original nomenclature of the Manufacturer, I just see them as being a means for collectors to narrowly identify a given example with respect to it's position in the continuity of the evolution from whatever the initial first Model details had been, through whatever that Model evolved in to, over time.

Because the erstwhile K Frame has enjoyed such a long production life, I can not imagine what, by now, the 'change' terminology would be for the offerings of Today. Lol...it's be a mouthfull I bet..!

Thank you!

This has been a really fun Thread for me, and really good for my learning and understanding.