Speculation time. End of the 38/44s?

[Peter M. Eick]

I noted in a recent article that in 1964 S&W lists in the price sheet the model 23 or 38/44 Outdoorsman. They don't list the model 20, the 38/44 Heavy Duty.

Why did the Outdoorsman survive longer than the Heavy Duty?

My guess would be there was more demand for a target sighted revolver and that post-war there was a many 38/44 Heavy duty's made and the market was saturated.

Other ideas?

 

[DWalt]

I'd say that no one really wanted or needed an N-frame .38 Special with fixed sights anymore after the .357 Magnum was well established in the Model 27 and Model 28 (and predecessors). Those would outdo anything the HD or ODM could do in an N frame. If you wanted power, you bought a 27 or 28.

 

[Peter M. Eick]

So why not cut both of them at once? Why keep the target sighted 38 special when you could get a target sighted 357 magnum in either glossy or matte finish?

It is just interesting to puzzle over.

 

[DWalt]

I think cops were the big market for the HD, and most of those guys probably wanted something lighter in weight to carry around, therefore there may have been a considerable migration to the CM or the Model 19.

 

[Göring's S&W]

I think it could be because there is a maintenance and slight accuracy difference when shooting 38 spl out of a 38 spl vs 38 spl out of a 357 magnum. So for a target shooter, who preferred the N frame over the K frame, he had only one option, the 38/44 Outdoorsman.

When it comes to the heavy duty, you even had the combat magnum to carry by 1964, and the post war M&Ps were much more robust than the pre war M&Ps. The 38/44 heavy duty shined when the 357 didn't exist, and early on when the pre war 357 mags were too much money in comparison. In the post war years everything changed. If you compared the Highway Patrolman, the post war M&P, the combat magnum, and the 38/44 HD, which would you get as a cop, guard, or for personal defense? You would have a hard time rationalizing the choice of the 38/44 HD in the post war years, even if it was cheapest, esp after 1955.

 

[DWalt]

I can't imagine any serious target shooter EVER wanting to use a heavy revolver like the ODM in competition. Those guys all used K38s or Colt Officer Models for centerfire events. And lightly loaded match ammunition. And I have never noticed any difference in grouping capability when firing target .38 Special ammunition in a .357 revolver. In fact I have a Colt .357 which shoots at its peak with .38 wadcutters.

 

[Göring's S&W]

Well what if the 38/44 fit a man's hand better? The 38/44 with target grips feels much different than the K38. I was referring to a frame size preference, which its is a very individual preference.

As for the 38 in a 357. In theory, because there is no jump with 38s in a 38 special, it should enhance accuracy. Try the wadcutters in a K38 and perhaps it would out-shoot the 357. I'm not saying that the 38s in a 357 would not be accurate, but that 38s in a 38 cal revolver are probably better, even if only by a slight margin.

 

[DWalt]

Try going through a 2700-point bullseye match using a boat anchor like the ODM. And of course both K38s and Colts had target stocks. It just didn't happen.

 

[j38]

Maybe they simply had Outdoorsman models still in inventory - but HD's had been sold out by that time???

Jerry

 

[1Aspenhill]

Ok Sports Fans, the factory discontinued both models in 1966. I suspect that the factory created and printed the Mod 23 sheet and never got around to the Heavy Duty. Now, the highest serial number for the Mod 23 that I know of is S177912 which is a MOD 23 marked 5 screw that shipped in Sep 1960. On the other hand, S255888, 4" nickel HD, Marked 20-2, shipped 28 Dec 1964. I have the S&W catalog for 1964 and both guns are listed and both guns were deleted at the same time. I'm quite sure that they are not listed in the 1966 catalog. As you can see, the HD went longer and further than the Outdoorsman. Both guns main competitors were the Mod 19, 27 and 28. All of these had adjustable sights and there wasn't a newer model to really replace the HD and for those departments that like it, they kept buying them. That the HD came in 5, 4 and 3 screw really shows that S&W took the HD into the modern world. Also, properly loaded at 38/44 velocities, a bad guy would not know if he was shot by a 357 or 38/44! If you wanted a 6 or 6.5 inch N frame gun, the 28 and cadalliac 27 in 357 were certainly something it appears that shooters back then went to as opposed to the Outdoorsman. Oh, the article did not give all the facts!

 

[BigBill]

An N frame in 38 special count me in I'm looking soon at the 38/44 HD.

A heavy revolver in 38 caliber should rock.

I wish they had this in 22lr & 22 wmr today.

The only colt revolver that impresses me today is the officers target revolver on the 41 frame in 22lr. The grips and size vs weight is just right.
The colt police positive 22 revolver fell short grip wise. The s&w k22 beats the colt police positive out in a size competition for fit and feel. But the larger colt officers target model is alone size and weight wise.
Come on s&w just offer a larger frame 22 revolver. It's time for a change.

 

[Peter M. Eick]

Thank you Bill for having the facts. I find it fascinating that they kept the model 23 in the price list in 1964 but not the model 20, yet as you point out it was obviously around for a while longer than the Outdoorsman.

Thanks again for the help!

 

[1Aspenhill]

I am not able to look at my catalogs, but I will check when I get back as I expect that both models were in the catalogs until deleted.
Bill

 

[H Richard]

Does anyone think that the factory just happened to have a larger back-stock of Outdoorsman unsold in the vault? I do understand that there have been a couple times in history that S&W did a vault "clean-out" to remove old stock no longer cataloged. They usually offered distributors a bulk purchase price to move them along.

 

[1Aspenhill]

No, I don't think that. If they had a large stock on hand and were not selling, we would see more guns in the S140000-S150000 range ship in the 1960s, which we are not seeing. Nor are we seeing guns in the S200000 range which would indicate a 4 or 3 screw Outdoorsman which to my knowledge none have surfaced. I think the Outdoorsman died much earlier due to the Mod 27, 28 and 19. The HDs were used by PDs that liked them like Austin PD and their last order was Dec 1964.
Bill

 

[linde]

Does anyone think that the factory just happened to have a larger back-stock of Outdoorsman unsold in the vault? . . .

No, I don't think that. If they had a large stock on hand and were not selling, we would see more guns in the S140000-S150000 range ship in the 1960s, which we are not seeing. . .

I have S141007 (a 1955 serial number) that didn't ship until September 1958.

Russ

 

[BigBill]

I'm not sure when the s&w k38 combat masterpiece w/4" barrel was offered but it's a very high quality piece of s&w machinery. I purchased mine online and never seen one or fondled one till mine arrived. I think the s&w k38 combat masterpiece is as good as it gets. But I'm still interested in the S&w 38/44 HD too.

 

[1Aspenhill]

Pete,
I checked my catalogs and both the Heavy duty and Outdoorsman were in the 1966 catalog, so they were there until the end. The latest date on a Heavy duty that I have now is 1965.
I hope this helps,
Bill

 

[H Richard]

Linde: There's another testament to the S&W "not in any order" shipping policy. Your S141007 shipped in 9/58, and my S146272 which shipped 1/57, 4 months earlier, but 5265 numbers later. My feeling is these were both sitting in the vault since 1955.

 

[Peter M. Eick]

Bill,

In the last bulletin, on the 41 mag article, I noted that the model 20 was not listed but the 23 was. I wonder why it was out of the 64 price list but in on the 66 one? Any thoughts?