The Model of 1950 .45 Target

Joined
Dec 26, 2007
Messages
13,066
Reaction score
7,565
Location
Orange County, CA
Only recently did it dawn on me how unusual the design of the Model of 1950 .45 target was in the context of what had preceded it. While Smith & Wesson had been making .45 caliber revolvers in significant numbers since the mid-'teens, with rare exceptions these were fixed-sight guns built for military service. The .455 Hand Ejector, built mostly for Commonwealth countries but sold in small numbers in the United States, along with the Model of 1917 that chambered .45 ACP and .45 Auto Rim, were the most-produced N-frame models before WWII. About 75,000 .455s were produced and nearly 200,000 1917s. All other N-frames produced commercially before WWII totaled barely 60,000 guns.

What is significant about the Model of 1950 is that it introduced to the regular catalog a .45 caliber model with adjustable sights. It was S&W's first production .45 revolver designed for serious precision shooters. It is probably no accident that the model was introduced on the new 1950 short-action design, which featured a reduced lock time that could only have been an attraction to the professional target shooters of the day.

Within five years, experience had shown that the Model of 1950 might benefit in competition from the presence of a heavier untapered barrel. S&W then introduced the Model of 1955, which was simply a 1950 with more steel wrapped around the rifling. Both guns continued in simultaneous production for a while, but the 1955 (which in 1957 became known as Model 25) showed greater commercial potential than the Model of 1950 (which after 1957 was called the Model 26 and continued in production only until 1961). In the decades since, the descendants of the Model 25 have become highly regarded specimens within the company's large-bore revolver line-up.

The Model of 1950 .45 Target can be considered a modified 1917, produced in a configuration that added one inch to the 1917 barrel length, topped it with a barrel rib, and installed adjustable sights on a frame that housed the new short-throw hammer design. The gun also has the standard N-frame ejector rod shroud in place of the exposed ejector rod on the 1917.

Fewer than 2800 Pre-26 and Model 26 revolvers were assembled in the course of the 11 years they were in production. Almost all are non-model-marked. Five screw specimens predominate; four screw or model marked specimens are hard to find.

This is S96906, a five-screw Pre-26 that shipped in July 1953. Condition is about 98% on a standard (not high polish) finish. Target hammer, narrow trigger. The box numbers to the gun. On the gun, all numbers match. I haven't shot it yet, but plan to. Maybe a lot.



The Model 1950 should not be considered a truly rare gun, but you won't see one too often. For comparison, the total number of Pre-26 and Model 26 revolvers is about 800 fewer than the number of K-32 Masterpieces, a common benchmark for scarcity among postwar models. If you come across a Pre-26 and can afford it, you should consider buying it.
 
Last edited:
Register to hide this ad
When I did NRA Bullseye shooting in the late '60's & '70's the "old" guys all shot the 1950 or 1955 S&W revolvers.
Me? A 1911 guy, shot a Colt Gold Cup, but lost out to the "old" guys most of the time...... :(
Some guys could really shoot a .45 ACP revolver even with a shaky hand.....
And that's no easy task one handed in rapid fire.
 
Don't Forget.........

the Model 26-1, Georgia State Patrol Commemorative, circa 1989, 45LC, 5" barrel, smooth Magna's, & a lanyard ring.
SW26-1.jpg

Don't know the numbers. My older book just says there were 40 available over the contract.

Ned
 
Hi:
I shot "Bullseye" matches in the 1960-1970 era. All the "Hotshot" shooters used custom modified .22, .38, .45 autos. (Giles)

I used a Smith and Wesson Model 17 .22, a Model K-38, and a Model 1950 .45acp. Revovers.

Later to give myself a further handicap I changed to a S&W Model 18 .22 4", A S&W Model 15 .38 4", and a S&W Model 25 .45acp 4" (barrel cut back).

I was not in the "Top" but I made the "Hotshots" sweat with my "Wheel Guns".
 
I once owned a pre-26 but sold it after being disgusted at poor accuracy with lead .45 Auto Rim ammo. The rifling is designed for jacketed bullets, and I didn't want to fool with half moon clips.

If I had handloaded with hard-cast lead bullets in Auto-Rim cases, it might have done well. I've seen published loads for those with Keith bullets that'd make the 26 a very effective revolver.

Frankly, I think the M-1950 .44 Spcl. is a more versatile gun, and the bulk of a .44 Magnum isn't really a whole lot more, in the right holster.
 
Great Thread

David:

Well researched, well written, well photographed, very informative...Life as usual in this part of the forum.:) Thanks for taking the time to share with the rest of us.
 
I once owned a pre-26 but sold it after being disgusted at poor accuracy with lead .45 Auto Rim ammo. The rifling is designed for jacketed bullets, and I didn't want to fool with half moon clips.

If I had handloaded with hard-cast lead bullets in Auto-Rim cases, it might have done well. I've seen published loads for those with Keith bullets that'd make the 26 a very effective revolver.

Frankly, I think the M-1950 .44 Spcl. is a more versatile gun, and the bulk of a .44 Magnum isn't really a whole lot more, in the right holster.

I agree about the versatility of the Pre-24 in .44 Special. The Pre-26 and Pre-25 have seemed to me niche guns whose appeal expanded in later decades as shorter barrels were introduced that allowed their adoption as personal defense handguns or trail guns. But the Pre-25 and in particular the Pre-26 strike me as pretty much single-purpose models: they were competition revolvers.

Baseball is a game of inches, and competition shooting is a game of thousandths of an inch. A hole .454" in diameter will kiss the next ring more often than a hole that is .429" in diameter, and each time it happens it means one more point. The extra .025" in diameter has a small but quantifiable advantage, and over time scores will be higher with the larger round.

I don't mind moon or half-moon clips, and I imagine I would shoot whatever ammo I had to in order to produce the requisite accuracy. Jacketed? Harder cast bullets? Whatever works.

I have to admit I am not completely dispassionate about the question. I have a crush on the M1950 .45 Target as a fine example of firearm design. I'm willing to put some time into working with it in order to be able to use it effectively.
 
Just to add to the conversation, the 25-2 had a real resurgence after its use for Bullseye shooting waned. Jovino's gun shop in NYC bought 25-2s direct from the factory and turned them into round butt snubbies. These guns still trade in the aftermarket and have a 'cult' following. I've always wondered if the popularity of Jovino snubbies encouraged Lew Horton to commission all those N-frame snubs made in the 80s.

The 25-2 also sees some use by USPSA revolver shooters such as Carmoney and Sweeney but 625s tend to dominate.

When pin shooting was in its heyday, some people ran 25-2s.
 
Great write up and revolver David. I like your comparison to the k-32 for scarcity. Puts it in a different outlook. They are seldom seen. Thanks
 
The Model of 1950 .45 Target can be considered a modified 1917, produced in a configuration that added one inch to the 1917 barrel length, topped it with a barrel rib, and installed adjustable sights on a frame that housed the new short-throw hammer design. The gun also has the standard N-frame ejector rod shroud in place of the exposed ejector rod on the 1917.

Wonderful post, thanks David!

A question regarding the lineage: why consider it a descendant of the 1917 with the various external modification; why not consider it a descendant of the Registered Magnum with just the one main modification, that being the caliber?
 
Great post. I too have the older mdl 22 fixed sights 1950 with box & Jinks letter.
Also a 38/44 Bowen converted 45 ACP....a fine shooter.
Beruisis
 
Last edited:
....Five screw specimens predominate; four screw or model marked specimens are hard to find.

This is S96906, a five-screw Pre-26 that shipped in July 1953. Condition is about 98% on a standard (not high polish) finish. Target hammer, narrow trigger. The box numbers to the gun. On the gun, all numbers match. I haven't shot it yet, but plan to. Maybe a lot.



The Model 1950 should not be considered a truly rare gun, but you won't see one too often. For comparison, the number of produced Pre-26 and Model 26 revolvers is about 800 fewer than the number of K-32 Masterpieces, a common benchmark for scarcity among postwar models. If you come across a Pre-26 and can afford it, buy it.

Dave, thanks, very interesting and informative, as always... You have shown an example of one I seek as a "birthdate" revolver, one from 1953. I'm still looking:)
Jim
 
A question regarding the lineage: why consider it a descendant of the 1917 with the various external modification; why not consider it a descendant of the Registered Magnum with just the one main modification, that being the caliber?

That's a good question, and I knew when I made the assertion that you could claim a different origin for the .45 Target if you started with a different frame of reference. I suppose you could consider any short-action (Model of 1950) N-frame target revolver in any caliber a descendant of the Registered Magnum, but I just wasn't looking at the question that way. I think I was stuck on the bore diameter as the defining characteristic of the relevant predecessor models. S&W was the .44 caliber company, and Colt was making its name with .45s. Yet in the first 42 years of the N-frame Smiths, the company made over four times the number of .45 revolvers as it made of all other calibers combined -- .44, .38, .357 and the few oddballs. And if you leave out the .455 as a "foreign" chambering, the number of 1917s will still outpace the non-.45 production by more than three to one. If you suddenly see a target .45 in the product line-up, it just feels right to view it as a development from the non-target .45 that the company had made for years.

But that's just me. I take your point, and I certainly don't object if anyone wants to assert a different basis of development for any S&W model. In my first post in this thread I just wanted to pound on how unusual a model the 1950 .45 Target was in the context of what had gone before.
 
Back
Top