Chastisement taken, post deleted
The Really Old Chief's Special Thread
- Thread starter bmcgilvray
- Start date
I apologize for my ingracious post
Wow, I have thought about this all day. I screwed up.
I am very sorry for posting my criticism of raljr!'s post.
I offer no justifications or rationalizations for my words, but I was wrong.
No lives were threatened.
I'll make every attempt in the future to behave. I've sent my most heartfelt apologies to raljr1, and I'll make every attempt in the future to avoid the need for such apologies.
With all due respect,
Bob
Wow, I have thought about this all day. I screwed up.
I am very sorry for posting my criticism of raljr!'s post.
I offer no justifications or rationalizations for my words, but I was wrong.
No lives were threatened.
I'll make every attempt in the future to behave. I've sent my most heartfelt apologies to raljr1, and I'll make every attempt in the future to avoid the need for such apologies.
With all due respect,
Bob
Bob and I are fine...no offense was taken and I intended my reply to be somewhat tongue in cheek. My first post was in fact off topic.
Early Red Box Chief - lots-o-pics
My Dad had this Smith for as long as I can remember. He always thought it was "something odd" but never really figured out why. He seemed to think it was a Chief on an 'I' frame.
....And the front sight is different than I see on the pics on-line. Any help would .... help!
My Dad had this Smith for as long as I can remember. He always thought it was "something odd" but never really figured out why. He seemed to think it was a Chief on an 'I' frame.
....And the front sight is different than I see on the pics on-line. Any help would .... help!
My Dad had this Smith for as long as I can remember. He always thought it was "something odd" but never really figured out why. He seemed to think it was a Chief on an 'I' frame.
....And the front sight is different than I see on the pics on-line. Any help would .... help!
That's a sweet one. I think it is worth a letter from Roy Jinks. It's probably about 1952 (or near there) manufacture.
This is what became known as the "baby chief" that if I remember correctly is an "improved I-frame" or very early " J " frame and not yet quite a " J " frame as we know it now.
The manner that the front sight is trimmed seems to be what used to be called a USRA type front sight pattern, odd as it is on a non target sighted gun is a very nice touch. It would be nice to know if the front sight was done at the factory or not. A wonderful keepsake.
Last edited:
Longstreet,
Very interesting gun (front sight) that does deserve a letter.
Excellent photography!
Bob
Very interesting gun (front sight) that does deserve a letter.
Excellent photography!
Bob
Thanks for the info. I am sorry but ... Roy Jinks is ...?
I remember Dad having this as far back as ... 1970 (?) before we moved from Philly to Tulsa.
I do not remember him ever firing it in my presence.
Dad passed last year and I'm suddenly a S&W and Ruger collector
10 Smiths and 23 Rugers!! And a few other things .... Might have to thin some of the herd.
Thank you.
Can't quite tell if it's factory .... looks like it is 'blued' a little differently.
You have what's known by collectors as a "Baby J frame". It was introduced in 1950 with a 1/2 round front sight. They have the smaller grip frame size of the I frame of the time, but it's longer cyl window for the 38 Spl makes it a J frame.
Yours is the 2nd variation with barrel rib and ramp front sight. The ramp has been reshaped. That's the only difference from a standard Baby J frame. Based on its serial #6795 it's from the last half of 1952. It's in beautiful condition although the modified sight hurts the value but as an heirloom from your dad, it's priceless anyway!
You can read much more detail about early Chiefs in my commentary here:
http://smith-wessonforum.com/blog.php?b=104
Yours is the 2nd variation with barrel rib and ramp front sight. The ramp has been reshaped. That's the only difference from a standard Baby J frame. Based on its serial #6795 it's from the last half of 1952. It's in beautiful condition although the modified sight hurts the value but as an heirloom from your dad, it's priceless anyway!
You can read much more detail about early Chiefs in my commentary here:
http://smith-wessonforum.com/blog.php?b=104
Last edited:
Thanks for the info and the link.
So we are assuming it has been 'modified' sometime after it left S&W. I know Dad wasn't the type to do that to a firearm. "If you can't return it to stock, don't do it." ....... to guns or cars! Must have been done by the previous owner.
policerevolvercollector
Member
Keeping the thread alive, here is #71xxx from 1955:
Could the MOP stocks be "factory"?
Best,
Charles
Could the MOP stocks be "factory"?
Best,
Charles
Last edited:
Charles, that's a beauty.
Have you checked the back of the right side grip panel for a matching # to the gun? They could be factory. Factory premium grips did not have S&W monogram medallions after the war.
It's now the latest Model of 1953 Chiefs Special with old style hammer and 4 screw side plate in my database.
Have you checked the back of the right side grip panel for a matching # to the gun? They could be factory. Factory premium grips did not have S&W monogram medallions after the war.
It's now the latest Model of 1953 Chiefs Special with old style hammer and 4 screw side plate in my database.
OP
bmcgilvray
Member
My Dad had this Smith for as long as I can remember. He always thought it was "something odd" but never really figured out why. He seemed to think it was a Chief on an 'I' frame.
....And the front sight is different than I see on the pics on-line. Any help would .... help!
I kind of like just looking at that front sight. It may not be factory, but perhaps it should have been. Sleek and elegant it is.
Resembles a mini Colt New Service "shark fin" front sight, but with a ramp.
pre-model 36 with serial number 39503...
Last edited:
LOBO,
That's a sweetheart, love those India Sambar Stag grips! I think I see a small little red sight insert, very tasteful.
You have a 2nd variation Baby J Frame Chiefs, 5 screw. It actually pre-dates the Pre model 36 which is the Model of 1953 with 4 or 3 screws. You could say you have a Pre Model 1953 though.
I would put your #39503 as shipping in the last half of 1954.
That's a sweetheart, love those India Sambar Stag grips! I think I see a small little red sight insert, very tasteful.
You have a 2nd variation Baby J Frame Chiefs, 5 screw. It actually pre-dates the Pre model 36 which is the Model of 1953 with 4 or 3 screws. You could say you have a Pre Model 1953 though.
I would put your #39503 as shipping in the last half of 1954.
Thank you for all of that great info! I really do appreciate it.
Good eye! It's a little bit of red paint that was put on there by a previous owner. It works just as good as an insert though
I've often wondered how old the stags are?
Those stags are as old as that gun. I can't see the other side. But the dull stag could be from a left handed shooter or was holstered next to the body and absorbed a lot of sweat.
Either way they'll shine like new with a little polishing. Sand with 1000 grit paper, 1500, and end up with 2000 grit. A light buffing after that and they'll gleam like they were new; like porcelain.
Either way they'll shine like new with a little polishing. Sand with 1000 grit paper, 1500, and end up with 2000 grit. A light buffing after that and they'll gleam like they were new; like porcelain.
Last edited:
What Jim said about cleaning your grips is very well true, but I would caution you to pause and give it some thought before you move forward. Much of the beauty (and value) of old stag, ivory, or bone grips is in the age patina that they gain from use as the years stretch into decades and centuries.
Your grips are beautiful and their color is a part of their history just as the finish on the revolver is.
Bob
Your grips are beautiful and their color is a part of their history just as the finish on the revolver is.
Bob
I really like the used/aged look to the grips. It just adds to the gun I believe. I wondered about the left hand shooter aspect too since the left side is decidedly more aged than the right.
Here is a set of pics showing both sides,
Here is a set of pics showing both sides,
Raydog
Member
I agree, especially on a gun with a little honest ware on it.
Interesting about the amount of difference in the color between the left and right side.
Sweet little piece.
It is hard to reconcile the difference in color of the two halves. The difference is greater than I would expect from simply carrying on one side. Perhaps the gun has laid on one side exposed to the sun or the dark side was lying on an oily rag. Another possibility is that one side has already been cleaned. A look at the inner surface of both grips might give us a better guess.
I do note that the picture of the right side seems to be more overexposed (based on the background) than the left side picture is.
Bob
I do note that the picture of the right side seems to be more overexposed (based on the background) than the left side picture is.
Bob
Here some new pics. They are untouched except for cropping,
Actually the right side looks sanded!
I agree with Jim. The right grip seems to have a matte finish indicating that it has been lightly sanded and the left side has a shiney finish. I see no difference on the insides of the grips which also lends credibility to the "sanding" theory.
Bob
Bob
Raydog
Member
Sanding sounds like a reasonable explanation . Really to bad, IMO the honey coloring really adds to the over all look of this gun.
Not that the White looks bad by any means, just a matter of degree of beauty and personal tastes.
Not that the White looks bad by any means, just a matter of degree of beauty and personal tastes.
Last edited:
I like 'em regardless as they came with the gun I appreciate the info all!
I appreciate the info all!
Stags are making a come back it seems. Either you love them or you don't. Same with pearls.
policerevolvercollector
Member
Add these two to the mix:
1) Model 36 no dash #183xxx
2) Model 37 no dash #218xxx
Best,
Charles
1) Model 36 no dash #183xxx
2) Model 37 no dash #218xxx
Best,
Charles
Top gun is 1960-61.
Airweight is 1961, clearly before 1967 because the flat latch was phased out in 1966.
Airweight is 1961, clearly before 1967 because the flat latch was phased out in 1966.
Similar threads
- Locked
