Some I-frame ?'s

[Hondo44]

TACC1

WOW, the mystery only deepens. The letter states it came with "checkered walnut extension square butt grips". That description is most used for the two screw ext 'target' stocks. Regulated Police rebated sq butt stocks with one screw are usually described as just checkered walnut square butt stocks. So I don't think the letter rules out the target stocks which would use a standard round butt configured grip frame like roughly 90% of the Bekeart 22/32 revolvers, the others having the rebated 1 screw sq buttstocks for a period in the early 1020s. And ALL
stamped w/serial # on the front grip strap.

Now I realize the 38 S&W round butt Terrier wasn't introduced until 1936. But the same basic 32 frame with round butt was used for 22, 32 and 38. So as seen on the Bekeart models and RP models supplied with the 2 screw target stocks, the rebated backstrap milling was always deleted. So I don't believe that it's inconceivable for your gun to have been originally supplied w/target stocks and not rebated!

It's obvious that a prior owner of your RP desired a shorter barrel than was available in 1922, perhaps before 1936 when the 2" became available. So why would he not substitute the smaller rd butt grips as well since they fit perfectly! They are also the correct vintage for your gun, no medallions.

I have two requests:
How far apart are the s/ns of the gun and the grips?
And I would love to see a clear close up photo of the grip frame w/o the grips.

The letter is interesting from another angle. It states that your model gun was converted to the J frame in 1956, when the I frame was dropped and the ext sq butt grips were discontinued; this is clearly in error.

The rebated grip frame ended with the introduction of the Model of 1953 New I frame (albeit many rebated sg butt guns still in inventory were shipped after 1953), and it was not built on the J frame until 1960 when the Model 33 also acquired the -1. Roy is very accomodating about correcting his letters at no additional charge when requested.

 

[Hondo44]

David,

I didn't see your post until I came back to this thread. You may be right, and I must be wrong. Although in my post #116 I tried to clarify: "To restate, the serial # is on the forestrap but the grip frame backstrap is not rebated and the round butt stocks are flush with the backstrap." his description: "...the wood sticks out to the rear of the backstrap". Which I guess now, doesn't mean 'flush' but TACCI did not correct that in his very next post.

I also asked to see the grip frame. That would certainly clear this up.

 

[TACC1]

I am embarrassed by the pics I took. Never should I be allowed to handle a loaded camera.
What was so obvious to me here, does not show up in pics.
If there was a line running cross-ways to the vertical diamond
on the stocks, it would be right where the stocks protrude about
1/32" from there to the butt. I've done a lot of mechanic work over
the years, and saw no evidence of grinding on the frame of this gun.
Usually you can tell if a surface has been modified. Then too,
alterations could have taken place an awful long time ago.
There was virtually no finish left on the gun when I got it.
I could find no evidence of any numbers or letters on the
inner side of the grips.
I believe from what I could see that this gun was a round
butt to start with.
TACC1

 

[Hondo44]

I am embarrassed by the pics I took. Never should I be allowed to handle a loaded camera.
What was so obvious to me here, does not show up in pics.
If there was a line running cross-ways to the vertical diamond
on the stocks, it would be right where the stocks protrude about
1/32" from there to the butt. I've done a lot of mechanic work over
the years, and saw no evidence of grinding on the frame of this gun.
Usually you can tell if a surface has been modified. Then too,
alterations could have taken place an awful long time ago.
There was virtually no finish left on the gun when I got it.
I could find no evidence of any numbers or letters on the
inner side of the grips.
I believe from what I could see that this gun was a round
butt to start with.
TACC1

Thx for the photos; they're good enough for me.

If you look at the picture of a rebated grip frame (1st photo in my post #116) you can see the rebate in the backstrap of the grip frame starts with a 1/16" deep NOTCH and it's well above the horizontal centerline of the stock screw diamond. Your gun does not have a rebated grip frame and I don't believe it ever did. The 1/32" overhang or protrusion that you observe of the stocks over the edge of the grip frame is not a rebate. It merely indicates to me that those stocks are not the originals.

You saw the gun with no finish and your trained eye did not detect welding or grinding so to me it's not likely that a rebated grip frame has been filled in or the 'toe' rounded to fit rd butt stocks. And if it was filled in, why wouldn't it be filled in enough to match the rd butt stocks that were going to be used?

I continue to believe it could have been shipped with round butt stocks (just not the current ones) or 2 screw extended targets (therefore the s/n on the front grip strap and no rebate in back strap). We know rd butt grip frames were supplied on Reg Pol models in the '50s. We'll never know for sure about yours but the evidence is in your favor!

All in all a very interesting conversation piece I wouldn't mind having in my collection.

 

[TACC1]

The conversation we've just had, has been an eye-opener for me.
Something that { admire in anyone, is their competency in their
chosen field. I saw plenty of that here, and enjoyed every minute.
TACC1

 

[GCSO584]

Yep, that's the J-frame that replaced the pre-War "Heavy Frame Target," S&W's reigning 22 target revolver until the advent of the K-22. From what I can make out in your picture it looks like a nice one.

Froggie

So this is actually a J frame?

 

[Green Frog]

So this is actually a J frame?

That would be my opinion. I haven't been able to find any example of a post-War 22 in I-frame size. Also that box makes me think it's later than the I-frames. David or Jim will probably chime in here if they see something I'm missing. All of these little 22 revolvers are becoming more popular by the day, it seems.

Froggie

 

[Hondo44]

So this is actually a J frame?

No as you said, it's a pre Mod 35 (shown in post # 96) which replaced the pre war Heavy Frame Target. It's a Model of 1953 'New' I frame. It has the J frame size trigger guard and J frame sq butt size grip, but it still has the short I frame size main frame and cyl length. I can tell by the shortness of the main frame in front of the trigger guard. These didn't become J frames until Oct 1960 (same as the Kit guns) and were stamped 35-1.

The only earlier 22 J frame is the Model of 1955 Airweigt Kit Gun built on the 38 Spl Airweigt Chiefs Spl J frame. Introduced in 1955 it was never built on any of the three configurations of the I frame, (leaf spring, Improved I or Mod of 1953 New I).

My good friend Froggie would probably correct himself when he takes a closer look at it.

 

[Green Frog]

OOPS!

Froggie

 

[DCWilson]

Actually a Pre-35 would be considered an improved I-frame gun, as would the 35. The first J-frame .22 target would be the Model 35-1, introduced in 1961.

There is a cylinder dimension to help us out here. If the cylinder is 1.32" long, it is an improved I frame. If 1.44" long, the gun is a J-frame gun. So say the fine folks who brought us the Standard Catalog of Smith & Wesson.

This is not at all an easy or obvious observation to make. The Model of 1953 revolvers seem at a glance to be so differently proportioned that it is easy to think the J frame features all appeared there. But it actually took a while for all of the dimensional changes that define a J gun to be introduced. I think we can say that a small frame gun made before 1951 is built on the I frame, that a small frame gun built after 1961 is built on the J frame, and that in between we have a mix of I and J frames depending on the model, and some models that have dimensions that blur the lines between the two.

Is that clear enough?

EDITED TO ADD: Hondo44, who knows all things I and J, got in fast while I was slowly and laboriously typing this reply. His is the crisper way to state what I was trying to get at.

 

[Hondo44]

This is a comparison of a modern Model 63 Kit Gun "J-Frame" (top), and a Kit Gun Model of 1953 "New I-Frame" (bottom). Note the differences in frame length in front of the trigger guard and the cylinder length.

 

[Green Frog]

See, I'm thinking of a little frame with a coil spring in terms of J-frame, even though they are really "Improved I-frames" in the trade. That's why it's better to listen to the experts than an amphibian!

Froggie

 

[Hondo44]

This picture compares, (top) an I frame Kit Gun made postwar with leaf mainspring, no barrel rib. An "Improved I frame" looks identical but with a coil spring and NO tension screw in the bottom of the forestrap*.

Bottom Kit Gun is a Model of 1953 "New I frame" (pre mod 34). I frame size main frame and cyl but full size J frame guard and grip frame length (1/8" longer). Not the amount of uncheckered wood below the checkering field.

*NOTE: none made in 22/32 to my knowledge, only in 32 and 38S&W.

 

[GCSO584]

Very informative! Thanks to you both.

I'm going to measure the cylinder and try to get some better pics up in a day or so. It's definitely one of my favorites and quite a nice shooting little .22.

 

[Hondo44]

Actually a Pre-35 would be considered an improved I-frame gun, as would the 35. The first J-frame .22 target would be the Model 35-1, introduced in 1961.

There is a cylinder dimension to help us out here. If the cylinder is 1.32" long, it is an improved I frame. If 1.44" long, the gun is a J-frame gun. So say the fine folks who brought us the Standard Catalog of Smith & Wesson.

This is not at all an easy or obvious observation to make. The Model of 1953 revolvers seem at a glance to be so differently proportioned that it is easy to think the J frame features all appeared there. But it actually took a while for all of the dimensional changes that define a J gun to be introduced. I think we can say that a small frame gun made before 1951 is built on the I frame, that a small frame gun built after 1961 is built on the J frame, and that in between we have a mix of I and J frames depending on the model, and some models that have dimensions that blur the lines between the two.

Is that clear enough?

EDITED TO ADD: Hondo44, who knows all things I and J, got in fast while I was slowly and laboriously typing this reply. His is the crisper way to state what I was trying to get at.

Thx David. Now I'll illustrate why my friends grow to hate me...

I differentiate between the Improved I frame, 5 screw guns and the Models of 1953, four screw guns for two more reasons:

1. The Mod '53 22's, Kit Guns & Targets, began a new serial range.
2. The Mod '53 22's, Kit Guns & Targets, transistioned to increased cyl dimensions of 1.304” cyl OD, 1.340” vertical window height and 1.390" cyl length; inbetween the nominal 1.25" reported in the SCSW (or David's more accurate actual measurement of 1.32") and the 1.44" of the J frame .22s.

 

[nutsforsmiths]

I have this 38 Reg. Police that is a transitional model from 1953. It has the trigger guard screw, but also contains the coil spring style main spring. This makes it an I Frame/Improved I Frame.

 

[Hondo44]

I have this 38 Reg. Police that is a transitional model from 1953. It has the trigger guard screw, but also contains the coil spring style main spring. This makes it an I Frame/Improved I Frame.

That is just beautiful. It looks like a new gun. Must have spent it's entire life in someone's feather pillow under their head every nite!

And yes it's a perfect Improved I frame with round site example. But because it is an Improved I it can no longer be a transitional. It's been changed.

1. Transitional I frames: 6 screws
---- a) Pre war/post war parts
---- b) Pure post war parts
2. Improved I frames: 5 screws, coil main spring with round site and ramp site
3. Model of 1953 New I Frames; the pre models: 3 & 4 screws
4. Model numbered I frames: 3 screws

 

[Green Frog]

Oooh Jim, I'm starting to get dizzy! How do you keep all of the details straight? Do you use a Tele-Prompter™?

I'm glad you're adopting that "6th screw" designation so folks will know to look at the grip frame and be able to know whether or not it's "improved." It's a handy way to determine the presence of the flat mainspring without the questioner having to remove the grips from a gun he may or may not own.

There must be a significant number of others interested in the little old guns though, this thread has more lives than a cat.

Froggie

PS That's not to belittle your gun, nutsforsmiths. That is an outstanding example of the Improved I-frame. You won't see many examples of a coil spring action with a rebated frame. That's a Rare Bird!

 

[Hondo44]

Froggie,

Yes that is a good idea of yours for quick ID of the Transitional models with leaf spring. And also since the screw count is different anyway on the I frames from the K & N frames based on the different order in which they disappear.

Since the 6th screw on the I frames is the only frame size on which it does disappear and it's the 1st screw to disappear, it certainly fits the logic of the screw numbering system. Now if we could just bring the entire discussion of I frames up to speed in the SCSW, there would be a lot less confusion.....and even more increased demand for these little beauties than we've already seen recently.

 

[Green Frog]

... then by all means keep it secret! There's enough of a demand already. People who can't even spell I-frame are trying to buy one.

Froggie